in the US at the moment defies reason. It’s easy to criticise the American
circus but consider one important issue in Australian politics and we look a
little weird too.
marriage seems inevitable in Australia but politically the whole debate is
compromise to the conservatives in his party the Federal Coalition under the
leadership of Malcolm Turnbull has promised and championed a plebiscite. The PM
deep down does not want this but is stuck with his party’s policy. It is
disingenuous that the chief proponent of the plebiscite would much rather have
a conscious vote in parliament. A plebiscite is clearly a conservative tool
which a more liberal PM champions – weird!
churches and christian lobby are obsessively committed to the same plebiscite
which ironically will almost certainly (given the polls and internationally
experience) support same sex marriage. The church has squandered any historical
authority by scandal and abuse and has little strength, resources or skill for
marshaling a political fight. Yet the church and the self-appointed and
unrepresentative Australian Christian Lobby pin their hopes on a vote they will
most likely loose. This does not make sense.
sex marriage lobby fears a plebiscite; in spite of the fact it will almost
certainly support their cause. Their understandable concern is the confusion
and judgement that will flow from opposition. However surely the emotional,
political and popular support of an inevitable plebiscite victory is worth the
price of a little short term pain. It is weird that the group with the most to
gain fear being part of a debate they are almost certain to win.
has committed with the cross benches to oppose a plebiscite. Defeat in the
Senate will kill the plebiscite. Labor will move a private members bill but it
will be defeated by the government who have the numbers in the lower
house.So the ALP who is committed to
same sex marriage is blocking the only path which politically, at the present,
can deliver the change.
In an era
when men and women have never been less keen on marriage, slower to take it up
and more willing to abandon it – men and men, and women and women want entry
into the same institution. The
determination to define the issue entirely as a civil rights issue while
politically understandable leaves little room for people of good faith to use
the language of morality.
past Australia decided issues like this based on a common belief system.That no longer exists.
sure how a post Christian Australian democracy will decide these sorts of
issues. But the current game of party politics, point scoring, name calling, ignorance
of what the past has produced and unwillingness to accept the zeitgeist of
today is at best weird and at worst incredibly unhelpful.