Marc My Words - 'The Un-Civil Union Bill'
Marc My Words.
By Marc Alexander MP
The Un-Civil Union Bill
Never underestimate the power of people to be stupid. Take David Benson-Pope for example. How is it that the debate about civil unions has suddenly descended to a puerile level of name calling? It has now apparently become a combat zone between Neanderthal homophobes trying desperately to stem the tide of progress in one corner, facing off against 'pink show-tune whistling dandies' in the other. It is an excess of misdirected machismo versus defacto girl power trying to turn some men into women without the benefit of surgery (and some women into testosterone laden feminists). It is ridiculous.
Mr Benson-Pope has not only accused critics of the Civil Union Bill of 'rank homophobia' but has gone on to ask the jaw-dropping PC question "are we saying that some people deserve to have fewer rights than others?"
The answer is quite simple Mr Benson-Pope: yes!
The problem for those of Benson-Pope's ilk is that they become so swept up with the notion that everybody, irrespective of their attributes and contribution, must forever be considered of equivalent value: in other words, having no value at all. They seem to think that every idea.every rumination, no matter how inane, deserves equal airtime. This, for the politically correct left, is what ultimately passes for intellectually correct thinking. In truth, their vacuous contemplations are exempt from the rigours of the reality the rest of us mere mortals inhabit. They are slaves to slothful thinking.
That is how these self-anointed social tinkerers can promulgate nonsense when they put the vaunted Bill of Rights on a pedestal to enable criminals to have more advantages than the innocent. Or the Privacy Act which protects those who owe reparations for their offences thereby denying victims their rightful dues. It is also why someone can claim that it's a good idea to allow pimps to be legitimised businesspeople living off prostitutes like parasites, all the while holding to the view 'of course I wouldn't want that for my child'. (They say that with a straight face despite many who are pushing hardest for the law change don't happen to have children, which begs the question, whose child then?).
But I digress. Some people do not deserve the same rights Mr Benson-Pope. My seven year old son does not have the same rights as others with respect to driving a car, buying liquor or even voting. Men don't have the right to breast cancer screening, playing netball as a Silver Fern, or being a bridesmaid. The point is that we don't get rights just because we want them.
It is worth reminding ourselves that Marriage is a civil institution that does not in itself confer rights, but privileges based on the special benefits afforded to society; benefits backed in law. The heterosexuality of marriage stems from the biological fact that it takes a man and woman to conceive and bear children. It is for this reason that the Marriage Act stipulates about twenty types of relationships that are specifically excluded. And the exclusions are all based on the prohibition of possible offspring.
In our lives we love many people, and we have many different types of relationships. Some gay couples are proud of relationships as enduring as marriages, but that is not in itself an adequate rationale. While gay couples often do have children in their care, the children are not a direct consequence of such relationships.
If only the Benson-Popes of this world realised that you don't have to be a quivering homophobic anti-gay to oppose civil unions. Their own ideological blindness does not allow them to acknowledge that there are sound reasons for such opposition. A little less of his attempted wit and 'wisdom' would certainly be valued in Mr. Benson-Pope, just as we would be pleased with only a few words well-spoken by a well trained parrot. The sole purpose of some people is to serve as a warning to others.