Letters to the editor - July 14

Updated July 14 2017 - 4:11pm, first published 4:00pm
Letters to the Editor – July 14
Letters to the Editor – July 14

Marriage equality support

I write in response to Alec Witham (The Standard, July 8). While I would have liked to have challenged a number of his assertions, I will, however, limit myself to his assertion of traditional, natural and societal definition of marriage. Firstly, I believe Alec has confused the legal recognition of a union of two people in a marriage within a secular legal framework with theologically based marriage rituals. Regardless whether a couple has participated in a theologically based marriage ritual (faith or religious ceremony) or not, in Australia, a marriage is only legally recognized if it has been registered with the appropriate legally binding authorities. Many hope that in the near future this legal recognition will include people of the same sex. Secondly, Alec seems to assert that marriage is both inherently ‘natural’ and monogamous within nature and societal norms. This may be a nice theory, however, history and contemporary evidence debunks this theory as a fantasy of theological dogma or idealism. Only extremely repressive and suppressive closed societies have unilaterally imposed such dogma or idealism. Australia is not such a society. Thirdly, while, I agree that procreation is best (unless cloning is an option) undertaken by people of different sexes. However, the ability to procreate does not make one a good parent, it only ensures the transfer of the DNA of two individuals. Our evolutionary ability to procreate does not specifically include a natural or societal predisposition to be suitable parents. Parenting in humans is, generally, a skill to be both taught and learnt within a whole of societal cultural framework. As such, good parenting is not based on the gender composition of the primary parental carer(s). Good parenting is, however, based on the ability and skillset of parents, regardless of gender. Alec, and many others, seem to have imbued marriage with a ideological fantasy of theological, cultural and societal mysticism. However, traditionally, marriage has been, and is, nothing more than a legally binding contract involving two people for the security and/or acquisition of assets and the transfer (commonly) of such assets to a designated heir(s). I applaud Warrnambool City Council for taking a leading role on behalf of our community on marriage equality, and hope that all peoples come to realise this is not a theological, parenting, ‘natural’, societal, or even ‘human rights’ issue. Marriage equality is, in reality, a legal recognition of the union of two people and all the legal responsibilities that this imposes and entails, the rest is just fluff and nonsense we, ourselves, imbue a marriage contract with.

Subscribe now for unlimited access.

$0/

(min cost $0)

or signup to continue reading

See subscription options

Get the latest Warrnambool news in your inbox

Sign up for our newsletter to stay up to date.

We care about the protection of your data. Read our Privacy Policy.