Some obvious responses to Bill “Canute” Muehlenberg:
So Who Actually Wants Same-Sex Marriage?
Ooh! Ooh! I know! Anyone who believes in equality and believes that secular governments should not discriminate on the grounds of gender without a very good reason; and recognises that “certain religious groups like their arbitrary definition” is not such a reason. Anyone who can see why it’s a bad idea for governments to start picking certain religious beliefs and imposing them on people who don’t share them. Anyone who’s followed the gay marriage debate at all and actually considered the pissweak arguments that opponents have put forward against it.
For example, Muehlenberg’s lame “but this particular homosexual person doesn’t want to marry!” line in this piece, which he appears to think somehow proves something. Bill, mate, I can find you plenty of heterosexual people who don’t want to marry, either. Do you think that’s an argument against heterosexual marriage?
Anyone who dares to question this agenda is treated as a heretic or worse.
Since none of these critics have managed to come up with a single decent reason for the discrimination continuing, you’re treated as prejudiced buffoons, yes. But not because of the side you’re taking – because of your inability to sensibly justify your position. (I understand why, since I doubt very much there are any good justifications for it; but surely a sensible person would, on constantly finding their “arguments” demolished, reconsider their position.)
…a major reason why they want marriage is not so much to be like heterosexuals, or because they want to abandon their more free and promiscuous lifestyle, but because of its symbolic value.
That the government will not treat them like second-class citizens any more? Well, duh.
In other news, the victims of every other form of discrimination in history also wanted it to end because they were sick of being seen and treated as second-class citizens. Surprisingly, they didn’t realise that the fact that they didn’t want second-class status any more was actually somehow an argument that they must endure it forever.
(I did like Bill chucking in that “free and promiscuous lifestyle” bit, as though those gay people who want to get married and commit to one person are exactly the same as the gay people who don’t want to get married and formed his example earlier.)
Elsewhere, Piers Akerman is reduced to clumsy metaphors to explain his “truth and definition” of marriage:
At the simplest, a marriage is reflected in the relationship between a nut and bolt. A single nut is not much use. Neither is a bolt, but the two used in tandem as they are designed to be used, form an effective fastener. Two nuts don’t make it, nor two bolts. Try to put them together and they don’t marry.
Sorry, what was that about Piers’ relationship with Andrew? Oh, I see, he means the hardware “nut” and “bolt”.
Unfortunately, he precedes that limited example by explaining how “marry” in English also means the joining of two things inseparably even when they’re the same (like timber) and thereby undoes his entire definition argument.
(While we’re there, you’ve got to admire someone who commences a definition debate by claiming it’s not about “semantics“.)
And mate? It’s not a “small but heart-broken homosexual lobby” who think the government should remove the discrimination – it’s a clear majority of Australians. Nor is it just homosexuals who are “outraged” by the injustice and protested last weekend.
Man, that was easy. Pity it’s the best they can do. And it’s a pity that the present Prime Minister continues to side with these cretins and their indefensibly weak “arguments” for bigotry, condemning gays and lesbians to a few more years of unnecessary suffering until the pointless, stupid discrimination ends and their equality is finally recognised.
But it will be. No-one can hold back that tide – not Muehlenberg, not Akerman, not even Rudd. And if their screeds look idiotic and cruel now – imagine how appalling they’ll look to history.
UPDATE: Added a retort to his “we’re treated as heretics” silliness.