Like what you've read?

On Line Opinion is the only Australian site where you get all sides of the story. We don't
charge, but we need your support. Here�s how you can help.

  • Advertise

    We have a monthly audience of 70,000 and advertising packages from $200 a month.

  • Volunteer

    We always need commissioning editors and sub-editors.

  • Contribute

    Got something to say? Submit an essay.

 The National Forum   Donate   Your Account   On Line Opinion   Forum   Blogs   Polling   About   
On Line Opinion logo ON LINE OPINION - Australia's e-journal of social and political debate


On Line Opinion is a not-for-profit publication and relies on the generosity of its sponsors, editors and contributors. If you would like to help, contact us.


RSS 2.0

Redefine marriage, encourage polygamy

By Ben-Peter Terpstra - posted Friday, 25 February 2011

Redefine marriage and you'll encourage polygamist agendas. At least that's the view of the Australian Christian Lobby (ACL), and one I share.

According to the ACL, "It's important that the definition of marriage remains the union of a man and a woman" not two men or two women – and certainly not four women and one man.

Also, "It's important that marriage is not watered down to include polygamy, such as is being debated in Canada."


The uncomfortable truth: In Canada, where marriage was redefined, Muslim fundamentalists and scripture-twisting cults want their versions of "equality" too.


Canadian multiculturalists are pushing polygamy.

It didn't take long. On July 20, 2005, Canada adopted a politically-correct and therefore divisive "gender-neutral" marriage definition. Today, polygamy is a contentious issue.

Or to quoteThe Globe and Mail Editorial: "Canada's law against polygamy should be upheld." And: "Barring polygamy remains a reasonable limit on religious freedom and a potent reminder that the law must protect the vulnerable and the equality rights and human dignity of women and children."

It's a persuasive argument but one undermined by redefining marriage in the first place. Christians warned this would happen. The result: more divisions, less unity.


Diluting marriage will strengthen inequality.

In slippery slope Canada, Queen's University law professor Beverley Baines advances the position that anti-polygamous laws encourage abuse by isolating religious communities (often code for cults) and has called for Section 293 to be struck from the Criminal Code.

In other words, if it's controversial, go soft, make allowances, and appease multiculturalists.

  1. Pages:
  2. Page 1
  3. 2
  4. All

Discuss in our Forums

See what other readers are saying about this article!

Click here to read & post comments.

77 posts so far.

Share this:
reddit this reddit thisbookmark with Del.icio.usdigg thisseed newsvineSeed NewsvineStumbleUpon StumbleUponsubmit to propellerkwoff it

About the Author

Ben-Peter Terpstra has provided commentary for The Daily Caller (Washington D.C.), NewsReal Blog (Los Angeles), Quadrant (Sydney), and Menzies House (Adelaide).

Other articles by this Author

All articles by Ben-Peter Terpstra

Creative Commons LicenseThis work is licensed under a Creative Commons License.

Article Tools
Comment 77 comments
Print Printable version
Subscribe Subscribe
Email Email a friend

About Us Search Discuss Feedback Legals Privacy