Right: Gay activist Rodney Croome: " ... to deny us such an important path to the fulfillment of these hopes and dreams is to deny our very humanity."
Arguments in favour of legalising gay marriage
1. Not allowing gay couples to marry is discriminatory
It has been claimed that denying same-sex couples the same opportunity as heterosexual couples to formalise their relationship denies them equality and grows out of prejudice.
'The Potential Wedding Album' is an Internet site established to build support for the legalisation of same-sex marriage in Australia. On its home page the following statement is made, 'There are many couples who share the good, the bad, the hopes, the fears and the trivialities of life in Australia. But some of them cannot get married because the Marriage Act 1961 defines marriage as a union between a man and a woman. This limitation discriminates against the many same-sex couples in Australia who would just like to have the same means of expressing their love and commitment as heterosexual couples.'
Rodney Croome, an author and gay rights activist, stated in an article published in The Age on August 12, 2010, 'We are people too, with the same dreams and hopes as everyone else, and to deny us such an important path to the fulfillment of these hopes and dreams is to deny our very humanity.'
Relatedly it has been claimed that disallowing same-sex marriage adversely affects individual homosexuals and lesbians. It has been argued that marriage is not simply an institution intended to supply a stable environment for the conception and rearing of children. It supplies social recognition of the legitimacy of a couple's union. Without that, they will feel their union is seen as inferior.
On November 5, 2010, The Age published an opinion piece by Jacqueline Tomlins, a Melbourne writer and member of the Rainbow Families Council. Ms Tomlins argued, 'The introduction of gay marriage in Canada shifted the overriding social mores to our side. Quite simply, it said that being gay was OK, and that you should not expect to be treated any differently because of it. It said that you are valued equally as a member of this society.'
Ms Tomlin went on to explain the negative self-perception that societal prohibitions and hostility impose on lesbians and homosexuals. 'Many people still quietly struggle with their sexuality and the horribly negative views that are blithely espoused by certain sections of the community. The message that comes with the legalisation of same-sex marriage is important for the entire gay community, but is critical for our more vulnerable members, particularly gay teenagers.'
2. Allowing gay marriage will not undermine the institution of marriage
It has been claimed that allowing gay marriage would actually strengthen the institution. It has been suggested that in a period of accelerating divorce rates, any substantial group of people who wish to commit to each other formally via marriage are serving to add to the social legitimacy of the institution.
In an article published in The Punch on July 16, 2009, Rob Mills wrote, 'I mean if more people get married isn't that good for marriage, doesn't it make it more relevant? In a world were 50% of marriages end in divorce, it doesn't make sense to turn people away who want to tie the knot.'
Chris Berg, writing in The Age on November 21, 2010, has made a very similar claim. 'Straight people have been undermining the sanctity of marriage for decades. This is a bad thing ... So extending the marital franchise to gay and lesbian couples would multiply the number of Australians who can join this crucial social institution, spreading the positive impact of marriage on society.'
Supporters of same-sex marriage also argue that marriage is not and should not be an unchanging institution and that its capacity to alter to accommodate changing social realities is one of its strengths.
In an opinion piece published in The Age on June 30, 2010, Senthorun Raj noted, 'It was not long ago that women were transacted as property in marriage, moving from their father to their husbands. We no longer restrict marriage between different racial or religious groups, as we did previously for indigenous Australians or interfaith couples. Gender, race and religion have been pivotal sites for the regulation of marriage in Australia, but they have changed over time with progressive shifts in social attitudes.'
3. Same-sex couples can meet all the criteria usually associated with marriage
It has been argued that all the features usually considered to typify a marriage union can be displayed by same sex couples. Author and gay rights advocate, Rodney Croome, has had his views on this issue placed on the ABC Religion and Ethics site. Mr Croome has stated, 'The Marriage Act ... does not require marrying partners to be able or willing to conceive children. As a result, heterosexuals are not prevented from marrying if they are infertile or have no intention of having children. It follows that we should also not prevent same-sex couples from marrying just because they cannot conceive.'
However, Mr Croome goes on to note that to the extent that marriage is an institution supportive of the rearing of children, then child-rearing is something often performed by same-sex couples.
Rodney Croome states, 'It is currently estimated as many as 30% of same-sex couples are raising children, which in Australia means we talking about the equal protection and recognition of tens of thousands of children.'
Rodney Croome also indicates that research indicates that same-sex couples make equally good parents and therefore should not be denied the sanction of marriage on the basis that they rear children poorly. Mr Croome observes, 'After reviewing the available studies, the American and Australian Psychological Associations have both concluded children raised by same-sex couples are just as well adjusted, emotionally, intellectually, socially and sexually, as their peers.'
It has also been claimed that same-sex couples are less inclined to monogamy and so should not be allowed access to an institutions which promotes monogamy. Rodney Croome states that such claims are based on prejudice. 'A large-scale Australian study of sexual behaviour conducted by the University of New South Wales has found 93% of men in same-sex relationships are monogamous, a higher level, according to similar studies, than for men in heterosexual relationships.'
4. A majority of Australians support gay marriage
A majority of Australians support the legalisation of same-sex marriage according to the latest Nielsen Poll. The national poll of 1,400 respondents, taken from 18-20 November, 2010, found that almost six in ten voters (57%) support legalising marriage between same-sex couples while 37% were opposed. There was clear majority support in every mainland state except Queensland, where 47% supported same-sex marriage and 43% were opposed.
This is becoming a clearly accepted view in Australia. A Galaxy poll commissioned by GetUp in 2007 found that 57 per cent of respondents supported same-sex marriage - up 20 points from when Newspoll tested the issue in 2004. Another Galaxy poll commissioned by Australian Marriage Equality (AME) and released in June 2009, found that support for gay marriage had risen to 60 per cent.
In an opinion piece published in The Age on November 25, 2010, John Kloprogge/Brett Jones noted, 'The [2009]Galaxy Poll also quashed some other myths about supporters of same-sex marriage, namely that it's predominantly inner-urban, white-collar, left-wingers who support reform. In fact, 57 per cent of blue-collar workers support equality, only nine points lower than white-collar workers. Some 59 per cent of rural and regional dwellers support equality, just five points lower than city folk. And there is broad support from left and right. Nearly half of Coalition voters (48 per cent) want the law to change.'
Supporters of same-sex marriage argue that the nation's political leaders are acting unwisely in refusing to alter the Marriage Act so that it reflects the majority opinion in this country.
Rodney Croome, an author and gay rights activist, has written an opinion piece published in The Age on July 2, 2010 which is critical of Julia Galliard for her personal refusal to support same sex marriage. Mr Croome writes, 'Gillard's opposition to marriage equality will be deeply disappointing to the 60 per cent of Australians who believe same-sex couples should be allowed to marry and the 80 per cent of same-sex partners who believe they should have the right to marry.'
5. The religious beliefs of some within the community should not shape Australian law
Supporters of same sex marriage argue that the religious convictions of a certain section of the Australian population should not be allowed to influence the framing of Australian laws.
Australia is a secular democracy with what many argue is a deliberate separation between Church and State. Those who claim Australia has established no particular Church and so is obliged to represent the view of no particular religious denomination cite section 116 of the Australian constitution. Section 116 states, 'The Commonwealth shall not make any law for establishing any religion, or for imposing any religious observance, or for prohibiting the free exercise of any religion, and no religious test shall be required as a qualification for any office or public trust under the Commonwealth.'
Supporters of same-sex marriage stress that this should mean that the beliefs of the various religious denominations in Australia should not play a determining part in the drafting of Australian legislation. Religious groups can obviously express a view, but their attitudes should not be given disproportionate weight.
In an opinion piece published in The Age on June 30, 2010, Senthorun Raj argued, 'While religion may saturate various political dealings, it should not dictate the meaning of legislation. Equality before the law and non-discrimination are fundamental human rights principles. Federal legislation should mimic this by allowing couples to marry regardless of their sexual orientation or gender identity.'
Senthorun Raj has also pointed out that the majority of marriage services are no longer performed within churches. He has noted, 'In 2007, 63 per cent of all marriages were solemnised by a civil celebrant rather than a religious minister.' Were same-sex marriages legalised, as now, religious ministers would not be compelled to officiate at them and the service could be performed by a civil celebrant. Supporters of gay marriage argue that under these circumstances Australia's churches should be able exercise no extraordinary influence on this country's marriage laws.
6. Other countries have allowed gay marriage
An increasing number of states and nations have given legal recognition to same sex marriages. Supporters of gay marriage note that this has been done without any apparent harm to the social fabric of these states and countries.
Rodney Croome, an author and gay rights activist stated in an opinion piece published in The Age on July 2, 2010, that 'In the past few weeks, Portugal, Mexico City and Iceland have joined Holland, Belgium, Spain, Canada, South Africa, Sweden, Norway and six US states in allowing same-sex couples to marry. The number of places where same-sex marriages are either soon to be allowed or are already recognised from elsewhere is even larger and more diverse, ranging from Argentina through Slovenia and Israel to Nepal.'
Thus seven national jurisdictions around the world allow gay marriage. From the point of view of Australia, the legalisation of gay marriage in Canada is seen as particularly significant because Australia and Canada share many cultural and historical similarities.
It has also been noted that heterosexual marriage in Denmark appears to have suffered no ill-effects despite same-sex marriage having been recognised in that country for twenty years.
Sociologists William Eskridge and Darren Spedale have examined the effect that recognition of same-sex relationships - marriage and civil unions - has had on Scandinavia since Denmark introduced registered partnerships in 1989. The authors found that after nearly two decades of registered partnerships in Scandinavia, social indicators, if anything, were getting better. The total divorce rates have got lower and there are higher rates of heterosexual marriage and fewer out-of-wedlock births.