Same- Sex Marriage and Marriage Equality

P1080835 text signed-001 border

The following observations and ideas are intended for the Australian public and politicians who now find themselves in some kind of stalemate as to how to go about legalising same-sex marriage. The Turnbull government has promised a plebiscite, but the motion will most probably be defeated in parliament by those who oppose it, fearing the silent majority will not yield the result they want, as is claimed by pro-plebiscite punters.

There’s a simple way out of this conundrum. It’s a question of using the right words and keep everyone happy.

So, if we use initials LGBTIQ for rainbow people, why not call same-sex marriage “S-S marriage”? Problem solved. No need for a plebiscite. I’m sure no one would object. This is how I see it:

~ Same-sex couples get the word “marriage”, which they so desperately want, while heterosexual couples retain their four- thousand- years-plus right to the unadulterated meaning of “marriage”, which is a union between a male and a female of the human species.
~ The term “S-S marriage” describes clearly that it is a union between two people of the same sex. Before the law both institutions are equal, but they can never be equal biologically for the simple fact of nature that an “S-S marriage” cannot produce a baby without the help of an individual of the opposite sex to theirs. This is crystal clear to anyone with even a modest amount of common sense.
~ A marriage certificate should therefore reflect this reality. Nothing changes for heterosexual couples. The certificate for traditional marriage is just as before, a Marriage Certificate, whereas the other one should bear the title “S-S Marriage Certificate”.
~ No minister of religion, rabbi or imam should be forced by law to marry S-S couples. There are plenty of marriage celebrants happy to conduct a civil marriage ceremony.

To my mind this seems to be a simple solution which embraces diversity without upsetting the apple cart.

PS., I feel like I’d chosen the wrong career – I should have been a politician. I would have created a new party, the Common Sense Party. But, as I am now a senior of advanced age, I can only live in the hope that someone in the political arena, someone endowed with common sense, of course, will read this post and see some merit in my ideas. Let us never give up hope in human ingenuity and goodwill!


Copyright© September 2016 Irina Dimitric

About irinadim

Kookaburra sweet, you neither chirp nor tweet. Your laughter is much like mine, my cackle is much like thine. We are two sister souls, one clad in feathers, the other in clothes. ~ Irina ~ I’m a budding blogger. Poetry and photography are my newest passions, living in perfect harmony inspiring each other. I like both free verse and form poetry and am quite proud to let you know that I am the creator of a new form named ‘tercetonine’. Blog Name: Irina's Poetry Corner Blog URL:
This entry was posted in Essay, Humour and tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

10 Responses to Same- Sex Marriage and Marriage Equality

  1. Elizabeth says:

    Hi Irina, for sure you would be a great politician. Sometimes the solution is so simple that people can’t see it. Have a great day!

  2. MK says:

    Not sure what the legal benefits of marriage are in Australia, but here in the USA the benefits are numerous & extremely valuable – tax benefits, immigration benefits, retirement benefits, health insurance benefits, automatic protection of joint assets without the need to pay an attorney to create a document for this protection, … the list goes one.
    My partner and I have been together for 34 years, and have had the privilege of marriage only for the past 8 years. It isn’t the word marriage which we “desparately wanted”. It’s the protections & benefits which formerly made a marriage of one day more valued than the union of decades..

    • irinadim says:

      Hallo MK! I’m glad you and your partner finally got the protections through marriage. The situation in Australia is different. Same-sex unions in Australia have the same rights as de facto unions. The Rudd government 2008/09 introduced reforms granting them basic human rights and protections.
      Rudd Government 2008/09 reforms[edit]
      Following the Australian Human Rights Commission’s 2007 report Same-Sex: Same Entitlements[11] and an audit of Commonwealth (i.e.: federal) legislation, in 2009 the Rudd Government introduced several reforms designed to equalise treatment for same-sex couples and same-sex couple families. The reforms amended 85 Commonwealth laws to eliminate discrimination against same-sex couples and their children in a wide range of areas. The reforms came in the form of two pieces of legislation, the Same-Sex Relationships (Equal Treatment in Commonwealth Laws—General Law Reform) Act 2008 and the Same-Sex Relationships (Equal Treatment in Commonwealth Laws—Superannuation) Act 2008.[12][13] These laws, which passed the Parliament in November 2008, amended several other existing Commonwealth acts to equalise treatment for same-sex couples and any children that such couples may be raising, with respect to the following areas:[14]
      • Taxation
      • Superannuation
      • Health Insurance
      • Social Security
      • Aged care and child support
      • Immigration
      • Citizenship
      • Veterans’ Affairs

      Here’s a link if you want to know more:

      Cheers 🙂 Irina

      • MK says:

        Thanks Irina for educating me on details of same-sex unions as it is there today. What you enumerate are protections & privileges which are automatic benefits of marriage, which is exactly the point of wanting marriage instead of piecemeal fixes. In my case, we had limited protection as domestic partners. When my state legalized same sex marriages, we gained more protections, but only state protections, not federal benefits or protections — and only in similar states, not adjoining states. All of these issues evaporated when our federal government legalized same-sex marriages. From what I read on the Wikipedia link you gave, the differences between territories is an issue in Australia also.

        Here’s an interesting hypothetical that makes it a bit more immediate: before federal recognition of same sex marriage, I was married in my state of California, but not in the next state of Arizona where my family lives. Suppose we drove to see my family, and were in a car accident just as we crossed into Arizona. Suppose my partner was gravely injured. Would I have the privilege of being at her hospital bedside as a spouse? Would I have the right to make health care decisions? If she died in the next state instead of my state, would I own our joint assets or would I have to fight her family in court for the property we acquired over the last 30+ years?

        Now consider the same car accident, but with an opposite sex couple who were married in California and drove to Arizona the next day.

        That’s why marriage matters. I care nothing for anyone’s approval. I only care about 100% equal treatment.

        Thanks for your time.

      • irinadim says:

        That was my point, MK, too: same-sex marriage and opposite-sex marriage should both enjoy the same rights before the law, which translates as marriage equality. The thing is that here the opposition to same-sex marriage objects to the word ‘marriage’, while same-sex couples insist on calling their legal union ‘marriage’. So I had this idea to offer a model that both parties would be able to accept. Well, most probably, same-sex marriage will be legalised in Australia next year, unless the opposition to a plebiscite defeats the motion in parliament. The opposition insists on a parliamentary vote, while the government wants the public to have a say, arguing that this being a sensitive issue the public should have a direct public vote.
        Have a nice weekend!

  3. milliethom says:

    You would certainly have made a wonderful politician, Irina, because you always demonstrate a lot of common sense – something so often forgotten by some politicians today. I agree that all marriages should have the same benefits, protections and privileges, whether they are same sex or otherwise. As far as I know, without looking more deeply into things, I believe they do in the UK. ( I’ll have to go and look this up now, Irina. I confess, it isn’t something I’ve needed to delve into, despite knowing a few same sex couples. Most aren’t married, though. Marriage between individuals of the same sex has been legal here since – 2013, I think.)
    Very interesting and thought provoking, as your posts so often are.

    • irinadim says:

      Thank you for your input, Millie, concerning the question of same-sex marriage. It’s a hot topic in our parliament at the moment. But I think I’m going to quit politics. LOL! 🙂

  4. Inese Poga Art plus Life says:

    Politicians only promise everything, but you come up with solutions, so that’s already way better than a politician.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s