James' Blog

Dear Committee Secretary,

As an Australian who believes same-sex couples should be able to marry, I strongly support the Marriage Equality Amendment Bill 2010.

The Bill is an important step towards providing legal equality for same-sex partners and removing discrimination against them.

The Bill will strengthen relationships, families and marriage, and will make Australia a fairer and more inclusive nation.

I support provisions of the Bill which will allow a celebrant who is a minister of religion to refuse to marry same-sex partners.

I oppose civil unions as a substitute for full equality in marriage for same-sex partners.

All of my life, I felt “different” and 15 years ago I realised, that my “difference” was that I was attracted to other people of the same sex. I was alone. I spent many months agonising about whether I was wrong or perhaps even broken and then whether to tell anyone. Some years after I first realised I was “different” I learned that my “difference” was called “gay” and there were other people just like me. Although I cannot tell you which day I found out, I vividly remember what it meant to me – I was not alone.

Over the following years, I told my friends of my “difference” and eventually I told my family. Some of my friends told me that they knew already, two or three of my very closest friends even turned out to be gay themselves. My family were very supportive and I spent a great deal of time getting to know myself.

My family are predominantly Christians and I consider myself to be a Christian. I was taught to love and accept those who are different, that all people are equal. I came up against some devastating moments while getting to know myself – I realised that some of those who preached acceptance and equality don’t actually want to extend that acceptance and equality to me and those like me and that this attitude was and is being passed on from generation to generation. Unfortunately, it seemed to me that our society was not only allowing but encouraging the continued discrimination of those who are different, like me.

On Friday 13 August 2004, The Australian Labor Party joined with the then Howard, Liberal and National Party, Coalition government to pass the Marriage Amendment Bill through the Senate. The passing of the Bill introduced a piece of federal legislation which sort to further clarify the discrimination against gay and lesbian Australians, ensuring they be denied the ability to marry in Australia and denied the recognition of their marriages solemnised in countries which allow same-sex marriages.

On Friday 13 August 2004, I felt alone for the first time since finding out that there were other people just like me. I felt that my government, a government elected by me and my peers had abandoned me and those who are “different”, just like me.

From what I can see, there are three key arguments which the movement against same-sex marriage use; those are family, nature and religion.

Family
In regards to family, some believe gay marriage weakens families. However, foster parenting organisations around Australia, even some of the religious-based organisations, have said that same-sex parents offer homes which are as good if not better than many heterosexual parents. The NSW Foster Care Association president Mary Jane Beach has said that same-sex couples are able to provide emotionally stable and financially secure home environments, at a time when financial concerns mean fewer people are willing or able to take on foster children.

With the growing number of children being born into or adopted by families with same-sex parents, the need to legally define their relationship is become more and more important. Telling those children that their parents’ relationship is “similar” but different to the relationship of their friends parents’ relationship is just another form of discrimination – “the same but different” has been used throughout history to justify marginalising minority groups.

Nature
In regards to nature, a study called “Biological Exuberance: Animal Homosexuality and Natural Diversity” by Bruce Bagemihl has shown that homosexual behaviour in the animal kingdom has been observed in close to 1,500 species and is well documented for more than 500 of them. Animal sexual behaviour takes many different forms, even within the same species. According to Bagemihl, “the animal kingdom has much greater sexual diversity — including homosexual, bisexual and non-reproductive sex — than the scientific community and society at large have previously been willing to accept”.

Around the world, in independent populations, researchers have found a substantially consistent percentage to be same-sex oriented (one in ten). Over time, homosexuals have been among those who have had the most profound impact on humanity from Socrates and Alexander the Great to Shakespeare. I would encourage you to remember that the next time you read or see Romeo and Juliet or use the Socratic Method. Opposing equal rights for homosexuality based on nature is like opposing the wind or the sun. You can put up walls but you would be better off putting up wind turbines and solar panels!

Religion
And in regards to religion, although I believe that religion should not even be considered as a valid argument against equality under Australian law – we have specific allowances in our constitution to prevent the parliament from legislating a particular religion.

However, as I am a Christian, I think there are a few passages which warrant a moment of your time; the Bible says that to touch pig skin makes one unclean, that a father may sell his daughter into slavery and that a person should be put to death for working on the Sabbath (Sabbath is literally translated as “Saturday”). If you have ever eaten crackling, touched a pig on a farm, or watched American football ask yourself if, on moral grounds, you or they should be put to death (Leviticus 11:8). If you’re someone’s daughter or sister or if you have a daughter or sister, next time you think to oppose homosexuals based on religion, please, ask yourself, “what would a fair price for you, your daughter, your sister or mother to be sold into slavery?” (Exodus 21:7). If you answer a work-related email on your Blackberry or iPhone on the Sabbath (Saturday), ask yourself if law enforcement officials should be legally obligated to stone you to death (Leviticus 23:3).

With all respect to my mother and father, who I love very much, over my short 28 years of life they have, between them, put six signatures on four separate marriage certificates, twice to each other. If marriage is a religious institution, why were they allowed to divorce when many religions don’t recognise divorce? Why were they allowed to marry a second, third and fourth time when many religions don’t recognise that?

The uniting of two people in the form of marriage has a history almost longer than time itself, certainly longer than most modern religions have existed. Marriage in Australia is a societal and legal institution which (by virtue of our constitution) is administered by the Federal Government and not by any particular religion or church. Churches, religious organisations and non-religious organisations are free to conduct and recognise (or not conduct and recognise) marriages between anyone, regardless of their sexuality, this should continue.

If marriage is an institution of the church and should be protected (as is argued by some people), which church is it an institute of? Should Jewish people be allowed to marry if we are a Christian society? Should Muslims, Buddhists, Russian Orthodox or Greek Orthodox? What about atheists, people who do not subscribe to a specific religion?

Discrimination is deadly. On 13 February 2008, a 15 year old in California USA, Lawrence King, was shot twice in the head as he sat in his middle school classroom. He was killed by a 14 year old boy. According to students, he had recently asked the classmate that shot him to be his valentine. This heinous crime was committed by a young boy, who could have only formed his discriminatory opinions from his elders.

There have been many other cases of young boys and girls causing self-harm or even successfully suiciding from the bullying they have been put through because of their sexuality (or even their perceived sexuality). The views of young people are widely influence by the actions of their elders. As a society we should be ashamed that 45% of all suicides in the 17-24 age group are by young men who identify as same-sex attracted (over represented in that category by 900%!) – many of the words which have been used during the debate against marriage equality are those same words that are used against these young men in playgrounds, on streets, at home, in social gatherings and in classrooms. The intimidation and isolation felt by them can become unbearable.

To all Senators involved in this Inquiry, I ask you to see discrimination for what it is; “unfair treatment of a person or group on the basis of prejudice”, a prejudice that we will pass down through generations. If you intend to vote against marriage equality, I implore you to speak out and change your vote. You may stand apart from those who would traditional support you but you are not alone in your thinking, others will be with you when you stand on the right side of history!

I believe the Marriage Act should be amended to ensure same-sex couples have equal rights to marry in Australia. It’s time to ensure that discrimination against same-sex couples in Australian legislation is removed.

Kind Regards,

James Fiander