There has been a fair amount of debate lately around whether the plebiscite for same sex marriage should happen and if it is a waste of money.
Some friends I’ve spoken with have said it’s too expensive and isn’t binding on government and that government should just make a decision and put it too rest. The thing is, government has at least on one occasion that I can think of, has dealt with the issue of same sex marriage on one occasion, and it has not passed. Therefore, the Liberal Party has said that they will, if re-elected, have a plebiscite so that the people can have have voice.
I can then see other scenarios occurring – the majority of people say ‘yes’ – so where does that leave the politicians?
And these are some of my thoughts:-
- They are allowed a conscious vote
- They choose to abstain
- Do they accept the will of the majority of the nation
- Do they choose the majority of their electorate (this could be tricky if their electorate is not in favour)
If the plebiscite has a resounding yes, but it doesn’t happen, then those in favour will cry fowl, and vice-versa. In the long run, there are people that are going to be unhappy about the results.
Whether the plebiscite gets a majority ‘yes’ or ‘no’ will depend on the question(s) posed.
Personally, and taking religion out of the equation, the concept of marriage throughout time has been a union between a man and a woman which is these two people proclaiming their intent to live together as partners for the rest of their lives and to procreate. Yes, it is not that common now for a married couple to stay married, and yes for medical reasons, some cannot conceive off-spring, but that was the precept.
Can, we as an evolving civilisation grow – I believe so, but I also believe the precept of marriage (and it’s definition) cannot. I believe that legally, same sex unions needs to be recognised nationally, and it needs to be that, a union. It can be done as a civil union. As soon as you change legislation to say that it is a marriage, then there is another mine field that you are opening up, and this is where religion does come in. If it is legally called marriage, and those that want a religious ceremony, then it opens up the whole discrimination debate where same sex marriage goes against the religious beliefs, and by law, you are forcing them to go against their beliefs. This is where it becomes ludicrous and discriminatory against someone’s beliefs because a certain section of the community have forced law makers to safe guard what they want above all others.