|
Frequently Asked Questions
What are the benefits of same-sex marriage?
Will same-sex marriage result in the demise of
heterosexual marriage?
Will allowing same-sex marriage spoil the character
of the institution of marriage?
Isn’t marriage traditionally about love between a man and a
woman?
Shouldn’t marriage be about procreation?
What
about the impact on children?
Q. What are the benefits of same-sex marriage?
Community
Providing same-sex couples with the same legal and social
recognition of their relationships in no way infringes upon the
rights of others. Allowing same-sex marriage is about extending the
privileges already enjoyed by the majority to an excluded minority
who differ simply in terms of the sex of the person with whom they
are in a committed relationship. Further, and very importantly,
lifting the ban on same-sex marriage is not only about addressing
the rights of this minority group; it is about protecting the rights
of people in general. If we say exclusion to certain basic
privileges is okay for some, then we are opening up the doors to
introducing laws as we see fit to exclude others. In a different
space and time, it may be your rights or those of your loved ones
that are affected. Equality, respect, dignity, and a sense of
belonging are ideals and values endorsed by Australian society.
When these values are not upheld for some, it has the potential to
affect us all.
Family
The lack of opportunity for the gay
and lesbian
community to legally and socially validate their committed
relationships not only affects the couples involved but also their
families. Same-sex attracted individuals do not exist on the fringe
of society or in isolation. They are someone’s son, daughter,
mother, father, brother, sister, aunt, uncle, niece, nephew,
grandparent, or grandchild. Having a family member treated
differently by the community at large can negatively impact the
family as a whole. Those who argue against same-sex marriage in the
name of ‘the family’ seem to overlook the many heterosexual family
members that are adversely affected by the social exclusion of one
of their own.
Individual
The lack of opportunity for same-sex couples to formalise their
relationships, as do different-sex couples, sends the message that
their relationships are not of equivalent standard and that they are
second class citizens. As same-sex sexuality is no more a choice
than heterosexuality, restricting marriage to different-sex couples
will not stop committed relationships between members of the same
sex. What it will do is continue to promote prejudice and
intolerance towards a select group of individuals who nonetheless
pay the same taxes, fight the same wars, and abide by all other
citizenry responsibilities as an Australian.
return to top
Responding to Arguments against Same-Sex Marriage Rights
Q. Will same-sex marriage result in the demise of heterosexual
marriage?
Several arguments have been put forward in favour of retaining
marriage as an exclusively heterosexual institution. One of these
is that providing equal marriage rights to same-sex couples will
somehow undermine heterosexual marriage. This view seems to
overlook recent evidence from several European countries which
provide marriage or marriage-like rights to couples of the
same-sex. For example, research providing data from the
Netherlands, Norway, Denmark, Sweden, and Iceland (which are the
countries where such rights have been in existence the longest)
reveal no decline in the rate of different-sex marriage rates or
non-marital birth rates, since the introduction of rights to
same-sex couples (Badgett, 2004). In fact, more recent data from
the department of statistics from within these countries suggests
that heterosexual marriage rates are, if anything, on the increase (Eskridge
& Spedale, 2006).
return to top
Q. Will allowing same-sex marriage spoil the character of the
institution of marriage?
Some people are of the opinion that by allowing same-sex marriage
the institution will be ‘watered down’. For example, ex-Prime
Minister John Howard stated “It is a question of preserving as an
institution in our society, marriage as having a special character”.
Statements such as this are particularly offensive. It suggests
that the inclusion of same-sex couples into the institution of
marriage will somehow tarnish or spoil its image. To the contrary,
we believe that elevating the status of same-sex relationships to
those of different-sex relationships will, if anything, strengthen
marriage as a social norm. As such, people who are concerned about
the preservation of marriage may do best to focus on ways to
increase its appeal amongst the current population, rather than
direct their energies towards the exclusion of a select group of
individuals from its privileges.
return to top
Q.
Isn’t marriage traditionally about love between a man and a
woman?
According to historians, the one thing that is consistent about
marriage over time is that it has never been consistent. On the
issue of traditional marriage, American historian Stephanie Coontz
states that “if we can learn anything from the past, it is how few
precedents are now relevant in the changed marital landscape in
which we operate today” (p. 11, Coontz, 2005). Therefore, if
marriage is to survive as an institution it needs to keep abreast
with the social conditions of its time. If we look at Western
civilisation
alone, few would argue that marriage would have
survived this long if people were still denied the right to marry
for love (i.e., arranged marriages),
needed to divorce if they couldn’t bear children, could only marry
someone of their own race, and wives continued to be denied all
rights to property.
Yet, all of these conditions at different stages in history were
argued for in the name of tradition.
return to top
Q. Shouldn’t marriage be about procreation?
It has been suggested that the purpose of marriage is to establish
an appropriate family environment in which children will be
conceived and raised, and that as such there is no place for
same-sex relationships in marriage. This view conflicts with the
fact that different-sex couples who choose not to have children, or
who form relationships in non-childbearing years, are still entitled
to marry or re-marry. Further, and very importantly, it discounts
the substantial number of children who are currently being raised in
a same-sex couple family.
return to top
Q. If same-sex marriage was to promote same-sex parenting, then
what about the impact on children?
Another argument relates to the impact of same-sex parenting on
raising children and how the effects of this are still unknown.
This clearly dismisses the number of same-sex couples who have
raised or who are currently raising their children successfully
relative to their heterosexual counterparts. A
summary of findings from empirical research conducted over the
last few decades, shows that data “comparing gay and lesbian
parents to heterosexual parents and children of gay and lesbian
parents to children of heterosexual parents are quite uniform:
common stereotypes are not supported by the data” (American
Psychological Association, 2005). More specifically, it shows
that “studies comparing groups of children raised by homosexual
and by heterosexual parents find no developmental differences
between the two groups of children in their intelligence,
psychological adjustment, social adjustment, popularity with
friends, development of social sex role identity or development
of sexual orientation” (APA, 2005). It therefore seems
quite ironic that those purporting that the rights of children
are paramount, are those denying access by the parents to the
one institution that would ensure their children’s rights.
In
addition, opposition to same-sex marriage based on issues of
parenting send a negative and very hurtful message to the number
of children who are currently being raised in a same-sex couple
household. If people who argue against same-sex marriage do
this on the premise of the well-being of children, then they
need to stop and consider the negative impact of such an
argument on these children. It may well pay to ask ourselves
how we would feel if the people we relied on for love and
protection were depicted by society as somehow being less than
capable of delivering such.
return to top
|
