Presbyterian Group Opposes Same-Sex Marriage Bill
Presbyterian Group Opposes
Same-Sex Marriage Bill
Presbyterian AFFIRM, a widely-supported conservative network within the Presbyterian denomination, is speaking out against the Bill which would allow same-sex couples to marry, declaring its views in a “Statement on Marriage” (see below). Presbyterian AFFIRM believes that “marriage is a unique human institution and treasure” which has “always been about the pairing of a man and a woman”, and that re-defining marriage to include same-sex couples would unhelpfully confuse the meaning of marriage.
A spokesman for Presbyterian AFFIRM, Dr. Stuart Lange, said: “We believe, that despite some isolated voices to the contrary, the great majority of active Presbyterians in this country want the definition of marriage to be retained as the union of a man and a woman, and that (as Helen Clark and Tim Barnett said in 2004) ‘marriage is only for heterosexuals’ and ‘Civil Unions are an acceptable alternative’.”
STATEMENT ON MARRIAGE
Marriage is a unique human institution
and treasure, universally recognised as the union of a man
and a woman as husband and wife.
Marriage has
always been about the pairing of a man and a woman, and it
is a deeply-embedded human pattern. It is inherently related
to the natural male-female capacity for procreation, and to
the responsibility for raising children. Marriage is thus
unique in its very nature, intrinsically different from any
other type of human relationship which society may
recognise. The concept of same-sex “marriage” is a
contradiction in terms. To change that would in effect
re-define marriage itself, and would demean the
understanding and practice of marriage held by the vast
majority of New Zealanders. It is not a “human right”
for a small minority to re-invent marriage for everyone
else. Parliament should not agree to such a radical social
innovation.
Traditional marriage and family
is very good for society.
Marriage is greatly
beneficial to the stability and well-being of society.
Stable families with a loving father and mother still
generally offer the optimum context in which to raise
children. In a country with so many social problems,
Parliament must be careful not to allow a further
undermining of marriage by confusing its meaning.
The claim that the current
Parliamentary Bill is about removing “discrimination” is
unconvincing.
Marriage is freely available, but
it is not a right which individual citizens are always able
to exercise. Because of the inherent nature of marriage,
society rightly licenses couples to marry only if they meet
certain conditions: if they are adults, if they both agree,
if they are not already married, if they are not closely
related, and if they are of opposite genders. That is what
marriage is about. Nobody is required to be married. There
are also existing alternatives, of equivalent legal
status.
Society has already
made generous provision for same-sex relationships to be
recognised in law as effectively equivalent to marriage.
If the issue is about
“equality”, then Civil Unions should be sufficient,
given that they are of equivalent legal status to
marriage, with partners in Civil Unions having the same
protection under law as married couples (and similar rights
except for adoption). Those entering Civil Unions have often
regarded them as equivalent to marriage, in effect a
“civil” marriage. If in fact there are any inappropriate
inequities between Civil Unions and Marriage, Parliament
should amend the Civil Union legislation, not
the Marriage legislation.
The intent of this
Bill appears to be a political move to further increase the
societal normalisation of homosexual
relationships.
To proceed, Parliament would need
to be sure that advancing such an agenda would be for the
good of society as a whole.
This Bill may be a strategy to help
same-sex couples gain the right to adopt
children.
Access to full adoption rights by
same-sex couples needs to be discussed directly and openly,
separately from this Bill, and with primary consideration
for the welfare of children.
For Christians
and many others marriage is sacred, the God-ordained bond of
a man and a woman.
The Christian ideal of
marriage lies behind all New Zealand’s marriage
legislation, and is part of our national heritage that
should not be abandoned lightly. Christians believe that
marriage is the gift of God, defined by God, and approved by
God. On the basis of the teaching of the Bible, Christians
believe that God’s intended context for sex, reproduction
and family is loving, faithful marriage between a man and a
woman. Marriage is not just a social custom or a legal
contract which can be drastically re-defined to suit human
thinking. Marriage is recognized by the State but does not
belong to it. Marriage as given by God reflects the
essential complementary role of male and female as created
in the image of God. It is grounded in nature, and in basic
male-female physiology. The concept of same-sex
“marriage” is spiritually offensive to many Christian
people, who still constitute a very significant proportion
of this country’s population and its voters. It is also
objectionable to many cultural minorities and non-Christian
faiths. The Church does not seek to impose its convictions
on everyone else, but can and must speak up for what it
believes is right and true, and for the good of families and
society as a whole.
Presbyterian AFFIRM,
August 2012
The Presbyterian Church of Aotearoa New Zealand, one of New Zealand’s largest mainstream church denominations, does not currently have a specific policy on same-sex marriage, but since 2006 it has ruled that people who are in relationships outside of faithful marriage between a man and a woman should not become ministers or leaders in the church.