Plebiscite a ‘waste of money’: Kerr weighs in on marriage equality debate
MARRIAGE EQUALITY
Warren Entsch’s summation of the white-hot marriage equality issue is spot on when he says if the proposed plebiscite is not resolved on February 11, many people will feel they have given it their best shot, and walk away to focus on other issues.
But to further highlight the issue and express the point that it must be resolved, the Federal Member for Leichhardt said you only need to look at the poll figures to see where support for marriage equality lies: 62 per cent in favour and only 32 per cent against.
And in a passionate plea, he says: “We must put aside partisan objections and focus on what we want to achieve.
“This is the best possible chance we have had in a decade, but if the plebiscite legislation fails to get through parliament in the coming weeks, I will be one of millions of Australians who will be profoundly frustrated and disappointed. Let's not allow this opportunity to be squandered.”
This has, without question, become a proverbial hot potato in modern times, not to mention the $160 million cost; money that could be put to better use according to Port Douglas resident Michael Kerr, who is gay and “married” his partner Jason in 2011.
“I hate the plebiscite idea. It is a waste of money and there are numerous areas where the money could be better spent,” he told Newsport.
Kerr shares the view of many advocates of same-sex marriage, who argue the debate over the merits of allowing same-sex couples to marry will be full of vitriol and will denigrate their relationships.
“I am not fearful of the result of the plebiscite if it proceeds. I fear the damage it will cause in the lead up,” says Kerr.
“When you consider that countless countries have legalised same-sex marriage and we are, afterall, living in the 21st century, it is hard to accept the divisiveness surrounding the issue.
“This is a personal issue and people should be free to decide how they wish to lead their lives. We should not be bound by politics,” says Kerr.
Entsch used an excellent example by referring to the vote in Ireland. Same-sex marriage has been legal in Ireland since November last year. A referendum in May 2015 amended the Constitution of Ireland to provide that marriage is recognised irrespective of the sex of the partners.
“After the Irish referendum, no one argued that the Irish people did not feel good about themselves and subsequently no one moved to overturn it.
“It would be exactly the same in Australia, with an outcome proudly owned by the Australian people. If it was rammed through Parliament by the politicians, a large proportion of the public would never accept it and the outcome either way would continue to be challenged,” said Entsch.
Entsch adds that this is a battle that's been going on for decades now.
“And while I'm not challenging the intentions of some individuals across politics in championing this cause, or those within the marriage equality movement, I'm concerned that people are losing sight of the end game - for them, it's more about the battle than the outcome.”
In the late 20th Century, religious rites of marriage without legal recognition became increasingly common. The first law providing for marriage of people of the same sex in modern times was enacted in 2001 in the Netherlands.
As of July 22 2016, same-sex marriage is legally allowed (nationwide or in some parts) in the following countries: Argentina, Belgium, Brazil, Canada, Colombia, Denmark, France, Iceland, Ireland, Mexico, Luxembourg, the Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway, Portugal, South Africa, Spain, Sweden, the United Kingdom, the United States, and Uruguay.
A similar law in Finland is not yet in force. Polls show rising support for legally recognising same-sex marriage in the Americas and most of Europe.
However, as of 2016 South Africa is the only African country where same-sex marriage is recognized, and no country in Asia allows same-sex marriage ceremonies, although Israel accepts same-sex marriages performed overseas.