Empowering young Australians to be a clear Christian voice
Under its current definition, marriage serves the community by providing stable and secure homes to children.
Redefining marriage to include same-sex couples shifts the focus of marriage from the welfare of children to the desires of adults.
Former senator Guy Barnett argues that marriage ‘should remain an institution centred on the welfare of children, before the interests of same sex adults’. He gave a compelling speech at an Excellent Marriage seminar recently in Hobart:
“Same-sex marriage says that children have no inherent right to the nurture of their natural mums and dads; that children don’t need a father OR that children don’t need a mother; and finally, that children have no inherent right to have a relationship with their brothers, sisters, cousins and the broader family.”
Research has shown that children fare best on a broad range of well-being factors when raised by their married biological parents. The government wouldn’t have much interest in regulating marriage if not for the interests of children.
“The marriage union is publicly recognised and treated as special and unique, distinguished from other types of relationships because of its unique capacity to generate children and meet children’s needs. …marriage as the union of a man and a woman is an objective natural reality that reflects the biological and complementary nature of motherhood and fatherhood.”
What are some of the consequences of tampering with marriage law? Guy Barnett listed some of the results in society:
“Marriage celebrants may be compelled to authorise homosexual marriage. … Teachers would be required to tell their students that marriage is about love and commitment to meet adult needs rather than what is in the best interests of children. … If we don’t speak now it is possible we could lose the right to speak at all.”
He concluded with four recommendations for reform:
Some questions for discussion and further thought: