From the Australian website, this summing up of the cases for and against, featuring Penny Wong, Adam Bandt; Jim Wallace and Kevin Andrews.
In essence, the division is between the adult-centred and the child-centred views.
"Equality" is an issue for both positions - one the equal right of adults to access the social status of 'marriage'; the other, the equal rights of all children to enter the world with the natural heritage of both a mother and a father.
Note the attempt by Penny Wong to rebut the claim that the social institution of marriage is fundamentally about children, because otherwise we would not allow marriage for infertile couples. Wrong. Even such a couple has the inherent capacity to provide a child with both a mother and a father figure - by adoption for instance - and therefore they fit the pattern of natural marriage. She should recall the old atheist philosopher Bertrand Russell who wrote in 'Marriage & Morals' in 1929 that "it is through children alone that sexual relations become of importance to society and worthy to be taken cognisance of by a legal institution".
Follow us
