SAME - SEX MARRIAGE - AN EXPERIMENT WE WILL LIVE TO REGRET
Editors note: This article was written some 3 years ago. We have edited out dated comments but left the principal arguments of the author untouched. We use it as our feature article this month on the day that the Federal ALP will decide whether same-sex marriage will become part of its policy platform.
If same-sex marriage is ever approved in Australian let me make a prediction. In about 30 years, we will be shaking our heads at yet another failed social experiment.
All the hallmarks are there. Like many other failed social experiments before it, the same-sex marriage agenda is driven by a blinding rush of idealism filled with the best of intentions. Under the guise of multiculturalism, we allowed a laudable desire for tolerance to morph into Balkanisation, separatism and contempt for Western values. Seduced by slogans, we verge on beginning another disastrous social experiment with same-sex marriage.
As always, the rhetoric is first-rate. Inclusion, tolerance and equality of minorities are proffered as the philosophical reasons for gay marriage laws. Ergo, those who question gay marriage must be intolerant types who eschew these basic human rights. When the federal Government indicated it would move against proposed ACT civil unions law, critics were quick to conjure up a gay version of the White Australia Policy.
Advocates of same-sex marriage say marriage is a private affair between two consenting adults, regardless of gender. Therefore, gay marriage is all about ending discrimination. It's a sweet idea, this notion that marriage is just private love sealed by the state. But it ignores our learned wisdom from human experience. The state has a long history of defending traditional marriage not because it likes to put its stamp of approval on love affairs but because of its institutional value: marriage has withstood the test of time as the best way to rear the next generation.
Circumstances and human fault sometimes get in the way of children being reared by a mother and a father. But to suggest that marriage is just about love between two adults ignores the fact marriage is a social compact between a mother, a father, children and the state. The state has always protected marriage because, in a nutshell, it guarantees society's future. The discrimination divas and dons will twitch at this, but treating homosexual unions differently from marriage is not discrimination.
Are same-sex relationships different from traditional marriages? Of course they are. The procreation and nurturing of children in a marriage is a central building block of society. Which is why the state has an interest in keeping married couples together rather than allowing parties to end the relationship in a huffy moment by shooting off a letter to a bureaucrat.
If the philosophical case for gay marriage is messy, the practical consequences are downright scary. Once you say that gay marriage and traditional marriage are legally the same, certain things follow. School children are taught that there is no difference between same-sex marriage and traditional marriage". From the self-centric vantage point of adults, that giant leap may seem cosy and inclusive. But children are likely to be the biggest losers. Because, let's face it, the push for gay marriage is proving to be the precursor to gay adoption.
In Spain, where gay marriage and gay adoption have been sanctioned by the state, the idea of a child having a mother and a father is about to be relegated to the past. As religious scholar George Weigel notes in Commentary magazine, the Government has announced that the words mother and father will be removed from Spanish birth certificates. Instead, a child's parents will be listed as Progenitor A and Progenitor B.
A society that so readily disregards the role of mother and father is embarking on a dangerous social experiment that clashes with biology and human nature. It is an experiment premised on the rights of adults to have a child, not those of a child to have a father and a mother. Once again, there is much sweet talk about love. Children in same-sex marriages may be surrounded by love. But deprived of a mother or father, we simply don't know enough about the outcomes for those children reared in gay marriages.
And, as with other social experiments pursued in the name of tolerance, the agenda for same-sex marriage and same-sex adoption has introduced an aggressive and intolerant secularism. One of the oldest adoption agencies in the US, the Catholic Charities of Boston, is being forced by state discrimination laws to stop arranging adoptions because it opposes gay adoption. So in Massachusetts it is, in this respect at least, illegal to act on your religious beliefs.
These are early hints of where we are headed if we rush down the road of same-sex marriage. They all point to an experiment that, once again, will end in tears.
Source: by Australian Journalist Janet Albrechtsen