‘Can I thee wed?’ Same-sex marriage in Australia

Research reveals that, since 2001, a growing number of countries have legislated in favor of same-sex marriage. These states include the Netherlands, Spain, Canada, South Africa, Norway, Portugal Mexico, Sweden, Belgium, Iceland and Argentina, and now some seven American states. In other places such as Israel and Tasmania, governments recognise same-sex marriage but do not perform them.

While some argue that such growing numbers do not automatically make it right nevertheless some democracies are able to recognise and accept differences in sexual preference and are prepared to use political will to protect the rights of all its members.

When it comes to sexual preference some people feel decidedly uncomfortable. They manifest an unwillingness to be involved in the discussion and refuse to engage in any decision-making about it. They baulk at what seems such radical and risky change. On what is their fear based?

Surely we have gone beyond the AIDS threat, pedophilia and a sense of moral repugnance. If some find it hard to believe that two gay people can love each other with as much passion, sacrifice and generosity as married couples, then I can understand their reluctance. Surely advocacy, testimonies, familiarisation and self-education will help us support those gay people who have a deep desire for marriage equality.

Not all gay couples are advocating same-sex marriage so what drives those who desperately seek marriage equality under the law? Already they enjoy legal protection and a sense of financial security. The U.K. Civil Partnership Act 2004, for instance, provides for recognition of rights relating to property, inheritance, social security and pension benefits, next-of-kin rights and life insurance, amongst other rights.

Are we talking then about more than just a marriage certificate? Is it an issue of personal identity? Is it about having a place in society where people can recognise who you are and be aware of your marital status? Heterosexual couples assume this as a matter of course.

From the highest governing body down to the simplest family barbecue people know where they stand and how they relate: Mr. and Mrs. Citizen receiving official mail; owning and operating joint bank accounts grants a certain authenticity to (or at least a vote of confidence in) the marriage relationship; employers sometimes preferring the seeming stability of a married person; spouses enjoying visitation rights in hospital; recognising the status of parents attending parent/teacher interviews.

These scenarios can represent legal and emotional minefields for gay couples. Two gay partners may very well have their own personal and individual sense of identity and enjoy a strong sense of their healthy relationship as a couple. Society, however, remains ambivalent and would welcome some kind of validation. For all these reasons I am compelled to argue that men and women have the right to marry whomever they choose. It is a matter of justice and basic human rights, under the law.

We have to face this dilemma sooner rather than later. Politicians and political parties in Australia are divided on the issue and the end result is political caution. The Christian lobby was influential in the Howard Government’s tightening of the 1961 Marriage Act, through the Marriage Amendment Act 2004, to specify, “marriage means the union of a man and a woman”.  

Is there a suitable way forward that will satisfy those agitating for change and placate the anxious? The old adage of “politics being the art of the possible” is never more applicable.

France’s custom could well merit our serious consideration. There, all couples are married under civil law by the local Mayor. Couples and families are then free to celebrate their own marriage rituals in their traditional place and manner: culturally, religiously or secularly. The secular reality of marriage is thereby affirmed and religious communities retain responsibility for their own sense of the sacred.

Adapting this model in Australia for same-sex marriages would also clarify boundaries between church and state.