Remember how 300 years ago there was a massive debate about how church shouldn’t influence government, and likewise, government shouldn’t influence church? We ask that question now. In 300 years time, our great-great-great-great-great-great-grandchildren will also ask that question.
For those of you living in countries (such as my own) where gay marriage is illegal, you will know that the only remotely logical argument against gay marriage is “tradition”. Ah, tradition. A beautiful yet ridiculous thing. The problem with our ever-changing world is that there are people that still live in the past, where homosexuality was not acknowledged as “normal” or “okay”. This is the one and only backed-up, logical argument against gay marriage: marriage has always been between a man and a woman, therefore it should stay that way. If you believe this, I’m not saying you’re wrong. It’s completely true, that in the Bible, “it’s Adam and Eve, not Adam and Steve.” It’s also true that women – not even women, girls – as young as seven would be married to men as old as 40. This practice is not OK either but I won’t talk about that here.
I think that people must acknowledge that the world is not as it once was. Most, if not all, anti-gay-marriage people are straight. Therefore, what harm will it do them if gay people are allowed to marry? It will not take away any of a straight person’s rights. As this pi graph so accurately puts it:
In Australia, we are unfortunately still having this debate. Frankly, I find it highly embarrassing that the UK, Canada and even the US have legalised gay marriage and we, the “multicultural, accepting, all-loving” nation, are still nervous about what it will do to our economy. In my city, and all over the country, rallies and protests are occurring. I myself have been a part of them. When you support gay marriage in this country, so many people say “oh, you must be gay.” I’m not gay, but my best friend is. I’m not fighting for me. I’m fighting for him.
Marriage is not the only right that is currently under debate for non-straight people. Adoption for gay couples is another issue that has caused great spark in recent months. Again, my question is why? “A child needs both a mother and a father in order to grow.” Oh yes? Some children grow up without one or the other because one died, or walked out, or is deemed unsafe for the children to be around. Some children grow up with their grandmother, or their uncle, or their older sister or male cousin. A parent of each gender is not necessary for a child. What is necessary is food, drink, home, shelter, and a strong example to follow. Can this be given by non-heterosexual couples. Of bloody course it can.
Overall, I think it’s ridiculous how gay people are denied basic rights like marriage and adoption. It shouldn’t even be a debate anymore. Four words for you, Australia: “Pick up your game.”