What’s The Difference Between Me and You?

By Lin Tan

Some dream of one day getting married, others hope that they will be allowed to, and then there are those who loathe the idea entirely.

For same-sex couples dreaming is one thing, reality is another.

To date, same-sex marriage is banned in Australia. You would think that the word, ‘ban’ commonly prescribes to criminal acts that undermine the moral integrity of a nation, or is at least harmful to its people. I, like many others, fail to see how the union of two people who love each other can possibly have a detrimental effect on society. On the contrary, rendering gay marriage as illegal has a more negative effect on our nation than it does a positive one.

Mathematically speaking, I see no reason as to why it is illegal. A recent study conducted by the University of Queensland in their Not So Private Lives study, shows that 80% of GLBT Australians believe marriage should be an option to them. As for our nation’s same-sex couples, 54.1% want the choice to wed to their partners. Furthermore, a Galaxy poll administered in June revealed that 60% of the overall population supports gay marriage. In the wise words of this year’s Equal Love march, “this is what democracy sounds like.”

And yet the prolonged debate is still very much alive despite the lack of any feasible or rational arguments against it. Proponents of anti-gay marriage often cite religion and tradition as being their main arguments against its legalisation. Yet there are plenty of married couples out there who aren’t religious and don’t need to be in order to wed. Not to mention, the Marriage Act is a secular institution. Citing tradition is even more meaningless, unless you still hold on to the traditional view that sex outside of wedlock is wrong. In that case, what would you recommend? Nether regions locked up with chastity belts?

It seems as if anti-gay marriage supporters are trying to hold on to something, and whatever that something is, it sure isn’t a least bit altruistic, nor does it strive for the greater good in our society. Your lives will not in the least bit be affected nor hurt by gay marriage, and due to this, I fail to understand what you’re fighting for. Perhaps it has to do with your own subjective discomfort of the issue, and for that I suggest picking out your wedgy because that kind of irrationalism holds no validity in the debate.

Albeit the recent same-sex law reforms have provided some positive changes. The amendment sees gay couples as equal to straight couples in areas like Medicare, taxation, child support and others – but no marriage. The reform is at best a half-arsed ‘compromise’; the other cheek is still very much a discriminatory fool. It’s like saying, “you may lick the chocolate but you may not bite it – hey, at least you got a taste!” – not good enough.

The illegalisation of gay marriage only invites the notion of viewing some members of our society as being ‘second-class citizens’. And no matter the Government’s claims of supporting the integrity of same-sex couples, their statements are merely euphemistic, in truth, downright prejudicial. On the one hand, the law insists that everyone should be treated equally, but in its eyes it still perceives particular groups as being unequal, which isn’t fair nor is it right.

Strip away the romantic connotations of marriage and what you have is a legal status, one that not only protects couples and their families with its corresponding laws, but also offers the union with invaluable social recognition and acceptance.

Even though a de facto or civil union may (one day) be intrinsically identical to a marriage in terms of laws and rights, the former refers to the union of same sex couples, whilst the latter refers to straight couples – an evident segregation between the two. By legalising gay marriage, there would be no confusion: “mummy is married to mummy”, “daddy is married to daddy”, “she is my wife”, “he is my husband” – not just in the eyes of the couple and their loved ones, but in the eyes of society as well. Why create separate ‘genres’ or classify the official union of two lovebirds differently when that only entrenches stigma?

In so many monumental moments in history, nations developed and moved forward by recognising and embracing the multi-faceted voices of its people. Women were given the right to vote, the barriers of racial segregation torn down, and slavery abolished. In order to fully embrace same sex couples, there is a need to shape society’s way of thinking by explicitly proclaiming that marriage is a union between two people who love each other, as opposed to a union exclusively shared between two straight people who love each other.

And it doesn’t matter if you’re a lesbian, gay, straight, bisexual or transgender, this is a human rights issue that affects us personally on the grounds of social equality, though it may not effect us personally. We all deserve to be treated equal irrespective of our race, sexual preference, age, gender, what-have-you – but most of us already know this. So bigots, get off our tram, you’re blackening our sun with your views.

On the 28^th of November, demonstrations will occur around the country in support of marriage equality.  For more details visit: equallove.info/nov28