Over the weekend Opposition Leader Bill Shorten expressed his support for marriage equality at the Australian Christian Lobby conference.
“When I see people hiding behind the bible to insult and demonise people on the basis of who they love, I cannot stay silent, I do not agree,” he said. “Whatever our religious views about marriage, and whatever our social views about how best to raise and educate children, we have to change this law which discriminates against adult couples on the basis of who they love.”
The debate on marriage equality in Australia – and worldwide – is a divisive one and one that is too often tinged with religiosity. If we are going to see change, it will take more strong speeches, more support and greater political pressure.
Meet Dan Savage.
He is an American author, sex-advice columnist, podcaster and fierce advocate for same-sex marriage who has been giving love advice for more than two decades in his column “Savage Love” and more recently his podcast, Savage Lovecast.
In the latest episode Dan speaks up about gay marriage and the intersection of rights and religion. It makes a great listen, or you can read an edited version of the transcript below.
Karen Bailey and Nelda Majors have been together for 57 years, they live in Arizona which is where they met. They met in college. They have a home in Scottsdale, where they live. Fifty seven years together. They were the first same-sex couple to marry in Arizona, and so I just want to extend my heartfelt congratulations to Karen and Nelda on the occasion of your marriage. And I would encourage you, if you didn’t see the picture that went out of Karen and Nelda at their wedding, to go find it.
Top Comments
Sounds like another Catholic bashing session. I have nothing at all against gay people but I can also see the other side. An institution that has followed rules for thousands of years is just expected to change their rules? Of course its going to take a long time and im sure it would be hard for them to go against what their book of rules (Bible) says.
After reading your article a couple of weeks ago trying to educate us on the appropriate terms to use when referring to transgendered people (it confused me to no end, but I'm doing my best), I am at a loss as to why you would think it would be appropriate to refer to these ladies as "dykes". Shouldn't this term also be considered inappropriate unless you yourself are a lesbian and refer to yourself only in that manner?
While many of your articles always have a "tongue-in-cheek" moment along the way that I regularly enjoy, I think when it comes to issues like this that have such sensitive histories, that flippancy has no real place. Your use of the word "dyke" says to the reader "it's ok to refer to someone as a dyke", when from what I know, it's completely the opposite.
If someone could shed light on this, I'd appreciate it.
It was the transcript of what Mr Savage had to say. This want written by one of the mamamia team