Robyn J. Whitaker, University of Divinity
Margaret Court is wrong to claim marriage is “a union between a man and a woman as stated in the Bible”, as she did in her open letter to Qantas, or that a “biblical view” of marriage is between one man and one woman, as she did on Channel Ten’s The Project last week. She is even more wrong to suggest she is being persecuted for her views.
Here is why.
Reading the Bible to determine the shape of contemporary marriage is not an easy task. It is an ancient collection of 66 books, written in three different languages (Hebrew, Greek and Aramaic), and spanning over 1,000 years of human history. Much of the Bible was written 2,500 years ago, when family life was very different.
In the Hebrew scriptures, Abraham fathered children with his concubine as well as his wife, and Moses likely had two wives (one of whom is presented as problematic because she was a foreigner). Famous biblical kings, like David and Solomon, had entire palaces full of often dubiously acquired wives and concubines that served as symbols of their power and status.
Top Comments
Everyone should just stop bullying this woman for having her own opinions. So much for all the anti bullying rhetoric that is spouted these days!
How exactly is she being bullied?
You realise that people disagreeing with her public remarks doesn't count as bullying, don't you? Nor is boycotting the arena named for her or suggesting it the name be changed after her comments, given she first published an open letter stating she would be boycotting Qantas.
She's free to have her opinions, as are those who disagree with her. She's not immune to criticism, and if she chooses to make her views public, then public discussion will result from that. If you have an unpopular point of view you should be prepared to back that up with some solid reasoning so people can understand why you hold it, and Margaret simply hasn't done that.
As the writer of the article said, she didn't have to make her views public, she could have written privately. Yes she's entitled to her opinion and to state it but she should have reasonably expected some backlash. This is an issue that the majority of the public supports and polarises the groups that do support it against those who do not. It could be said that effectively she's attempting to bully the community and a company into reversing their stance based upon a religious position (which is seemingly not as correct as it may seem as based on the above article).
Well said. The old bible excuse is tired, and can be so easily rebutted. Wish more people had this knowledge so these excuses could be quickly shut down.