If you’re one of the 72 percent who support same sex marriage, it’s time to start making some noise.
When Richard and Mildred Loving (yes, their real names) got married in 1962, they had to choose their location carefully. In fact they had to leave Virginia, the state where they lived.
You see, Richard was white and Mildred was black and in America in the 1960s, this made their marriage illegal in 16 states including their own. Returning home after their honeymoon, police broke into their bedroom in the middle of the night and arrested them.
Top Comments
I think that marriage is a public thing rather than a private one so I disagree with Mia saying that men beating their wives or other women cheating doesn't affect her marriage.
Firstly, another woman cheating (with my husband, let's say) affects me enormously, and if it isn't my husband or partner, it may well be someone else's. It then affects their children, their grandparents and extended families. So other people's marriages and break ups do affect mine.
Secondly, a society that increasingly accepts as inevitable that cheating will happen, a society who glamourises affairs and then normalises them (H&A, Neighbours.....) contributes to the problem. If it is just the norm then there is nothing to complain or be upset about, it becomes just "one of those things".
The same goes for men who beat their wives - children tend to replicate what they see at home. One of my children might end up married to someone who struggles to rise above what they saw in their family home.
It is simplistic and individualistic to say that the marriages of others don't affect me.
I kind of get where you're coming from. I'm fiercely monogamous and absolutely hate cheating. I hate seeing it glamourised, and I don't particularly like even hearing about it. But, at the end of the day, it doesn't cheapen me and my partner's relationship. People's inability to remain faithful doesn't affect my ability to stay faithful to my partner, or vice versa. I do think its sad when people think it's inevitable, or bound to happen, or they accept that their partner will stray - but then again, I'm only responsible for the boundaries I put on my own relationship. I don't care if every man and his dog trots out the 'it's only human to be tempted by other people' line, I will not accept that kind of behaviour in my relationships, and that's that. In that sense, it matters very little to my relationship.
In the same way, allowing same sex marriage will not affect most relationships - unless its by creating a society in which same sex relationships are recognised equally, normalised, and seen as valid, which, unlike cheating and infidelity,is a good thing, imo.
I can see where you are coming from too, and I understand you. I commend your commitment to monogamy. I still think though that the big picture of marriage as a public social good is underestimated. Marriage as an individualistic idea is a western thing that you just don't see in non-western countries and the social differences are very confronting. It will be hard to pass onto your children an attitude that they don't see reflected in society and all the more so the further away they are in time from when monogamy was an accepted norm.
My argument is that over time the attitude of society in general actually does affect the overall institutions in that society. Like the way things have gone since the 1960s no fault divorce. Divorce used to be a mega-scandal, and now it's almost passe.
This has nothing to do with legalities - same sex couples are already recognised by law (the same as defacto couples).
The problem lies in that 2% of the population want something - and to get it means that people with differing opinions / beliefs will be forced to into the position of doing something they don't believe in.
Now most will fire back a reply telling me that I'm an idiot and this is about equality - this is the reason I post as a guest. Apparently having an opposing position can't be tolerated by those demanding tolerance.
HOWEVER, do some research into countries that have had same sex marriage legalised and see the impact it has had, find out for yourselves the divorce rates, how religious groups have been discriminated against. Then come back with a newer model that works for ALL Australians...
A voice of reason. You are right, issue is not about diversion of 'equal rights', it is about Democracy and Democratic process. Last time I looked I was in Australia, not Communist Russia!
What will you be forced into doing that you don't want to do exactly? I'm confused. If you're talking about religious people that run businesses having to cater to gay weddings - well yeah. If you run a business, you shouldn't be given free reign discriminate based on race, religion, gender, or sexuality, and if you do, you're going to cop it. This isn't 'forcing' people to do anything, more than these same people are 'forced' to serve people of color, etc, regardless of their personal opinions. Is it not a good thing to prevent discrimination?
Also, yeah, same sex couples are recognised by law - except in regards to marriage. So pretending they have equal rights, when we both know they are excluded from marriage and at the moment do not have that right, is foolish. A lot of straight couples can be defacto for life and still have the rights that come with being married - but they still get married, and for many reasons.
Gee, monty, how many times you gonna pull out the communist Russia comparison?!