Treat all with equality

30/Nov/2010

Stuart Buss, Cloverdale

Comments: 4 readers have left a comment

STEVE Irons was quoted in your paper as saying that “gay marriage supporters want us to rewrite the Bible”.

Wrong: as a secular nation, Australians do not licence MPs to base decisions on religious texts of any denomination, Christian or otherwise. We know where that can lead.

MPs are, however, expected to uphold Australian values of a fair go and equality for all.

Opponents of continued discrimination expect that MPs serve their communities by treating all taxpayers and citizens with equality, and not deny access to social institutions on the basis of race, gender, age or sexual preference.

Some people may wish to keep marriage as an exclusive club. This sort of snobbery (for that is what it is, after all) has no place in an egalitarian, secular Australia.

As it is possible that there will be a conscience vote in Parliament, I trust that Steve will contemplate this matter carefully, rather than making ill-considered and inaccurate comments such as were reported.

What everyone else is thinking

Tex O'Ryan

10/08/2012

Just quietly Scott, judeo-christian values were not what build Australia, they are what built 'white' australia. There was a whole belief system, society with social structure and culture here before that. And there's more to life than money (tax purposes - PAH!), it's about an individuals self esteem in being treated with absolute equality, the lack of humanity in inequality and the fact that is doesn't matter to do so. Speaking of marriage, the unconventional one between church and state should not exist either but because of "your" secularism Shirley it does, (your words Shirley; because apparently secularism, doesn't include a genuine belief that there is no god based in the clearly evidentially correct knowledge of the serendipitous circumstances that evolved us), so same sex couples should be afforded the same rights as religion and politics. Marriage. You and Steve Irons are wrong, wrong and wrong

Nick Vernon

11/06/2012

Marriage is only religious should it happen to be performed in a specific religious context. That's why two Roman Catholics wouldn't be married by a protestant church. Thus if the definition of marriage was changed by the Commonwealth it wouldn't be rewriting the Bible (it's ridiculous to call marriage solely Christian anyway as that would prevent people of certain religions from getting married). Gay people wouldn't technically married in the eyes of certain religious institutions, but in the eyes of the State they would be.
Also, on the note of what exactly is equality between heterosexual and homosexual couples, that does not just mean tax. It means that every aspect of their recognition is the same. Since marriage is a way of recognising commitment and love by the government same-sex couples should have access to it if heterosexual couples do.
There is a lot that is in the Bible that is left out of discussion these days, if you're using it as evidence please don't pick and choose

Shirley Catter

30/11/2010

Hear, Hear Scott!

Further to Scott's points, if Stuart is banging on about Australia being a secular state (which I agree it is) why does he want the state to have influence over religion? Isn't that contrary to secularism? Isn't that what you are arguing for Stuart? You want legislation passed that would see the religious meaning of marriage denigrated, which would effectively be discrimatory towards people who are in a man-woman real marriage.

I pray the Australian parliament does what is right and value the current form of marriage for what it is- the foundation of society. Don't change for the vocal minority.

Scott Santi

30/11/2010

Just quietly, Mr Buss, from the 1st of July 2009, all couples and families are treated the same way for tax purposes, regardless of gender.

Changes to definitions of ‘spouse’, ‘defacto relationship’, ‘relationship’ and ‘child’ have seen all will be treated the same way for tax purposes regardless of your partner's gender.

So now if a homosexual relationship is equal to a heterosexual relationship in the eyes of the taxman you are effectively equal in the eyes of the state. This is unquestionable.

So now if both types of relationships are equal in the secular state of Australia, why are you so determined to destroy the religious meaning of marriage? Mr Buss, you cannot tell the Catholic Church to re-write the meaning of marriage. Mr Irons has it spot on!

You might find this quote interesting... "The worst form of inequality is to try to make unequal things equal."

Oh and by the way, Australia is built on Judeo-Christian values, you don't have to admit it for it to be tru

Share your thoughts in 60 seconds!

Members : login to comment

Your name:

Your email:

Your thoughts:

I have read and agree with the terms and conditions for submitting a comment

Latest Competitions