My same-sex marriage speech

I was asked to do this by quite a few people actually. So theoretically, if I were to stand up in the House of Commons or House of Lords, this is what I would say;

I have always maintained that the best way to resolve an argument is to talk through both sides of it and make a decision, and that’s what I intend to do here.
I’m strongly in favour of passing the legislation that makes same-sex marriage legal but in truth, that’s irrelevant. In the next few moments, I won’t be speaking as a Liberal. I will simply be pleading my case as a human being.

The reasons for favouring this legislation are less in volume but no less in importance than those opposing it. Gay men and women across the country simply want the right to be able to stand before their loved ones and celebrate their relationship. It’s really that simple. To those, that say this right is already afforded to the gay community through means of a civil partnership, hear this; separate but equal is never equal, separate but equal is an inequality disguised as compromise.  The LGBT community of this country simply want to know that their inter-personal relationships are just as valued as any other.

They are the few but valid arguments supporting this legislation. The arguments opposing them are more numerous but dismissible. Many of these arguments are strongly linked to religion. Some theists out there are worried that the inclusion of gay couples will threaten God’s idea of marriage. Those advocates seem to have ignored much of what God said was acceptable in marriage. In fact, concubines, prostitutes, incest, rape and even kitchen condiments are all feasible in a Bible-based marriage but a relationship between two committed women for example is classified as immoral. This is not me taking a bash at religion; this is me taking a bash at religion trying to impose its views on government. Politics is a secular matter and theists have no right to assert their religious laws on the entire nation. Others claim that if this legislation passes in to law then those of a religious disposition will be forced to offer a double bed to gay couples at a bed & breakfast or to make a cake for a gay wedding, those worried about this possibility should probably find themselves another career because if you’re unable to cater for all cross-sections of society, no matter their gender, race or sexuality then public service really isn’t the place for you.
Away from religion, others are worried that this legislation will destroy the sanctity of their marriage and threaten their union. These people can be assured that allowing others the same union they have will not threaten theirs, these couples will still bicker about who gets the remote control and what to have for tea. This inclusion of gay people in to marriage will threaten heterosexual marriage much less than say Kim Kardashian’s 72-hour, just-for-fun marriage.
Some parents are also fearful of explaining to their children that two people of the same gender can be in love. Children are not naturally bigoted; if you tell them something they will accept it, these are people that believe in Santa, the tooth fairy and the Easter bunny. As a matter of fact, just this week I saw a mother post on to Twitter how she told her kids about their uncle who happened to be gay and her story went like this;
“I’ve been forced to explain homosexuality to my kids (aged 3 and 4) because their uncle is gay. This incredibly difficult and traumatic experience went as follows:

Child: Why does Uncle Bob go everywhere with Pete?
Me: Because they’re in love, just like Mummy and Daddy are.
Child: Oh. Can I have a biscuit?”

Every child is different obviously but this just isn’t an argument. A child is a parent’s responsibility. How can you ask a portion of the population to omit their human rights just to save you a potentially awkward conversation?

Then there are those who take it a step further and consider homosexuality unclean or unnatural, to those people I say this; homosexuality is commonly observed behaviour in tens of thousands of species, homophobia is only commonly observed in one. You tell me, which is unnatural.

Progressing down the line of opposition, parties like UKIP claim this isn’t the right time. Funnily enough, I agree. This legislation should have been passed sooner. How can we wait on human rights? Imagine if Rosa Parks had decided to sit at the back of the bus because it wasn’t a convenient time to make her stand that day, somebody. When will the time be? There will always be issues in this country, meaning there will always be an excuse for parties such as UKIP to set this policy aside.

My favourite argument against this legislation is that this policy of equal marriage will lead to incestuous marriages, marriages with animals etc. Simply put, that is nonsense. When women were granted the right to vote, it didn’t go to dogs afterwards. A goldfish can’t sign a marriage licence. This is no slope and it isn’t slippery.

Those opposed to this legislation, and this may be controversial, needn’t be considered anything else but homophobes. If you want to deny someone equal rights because of their sexuality under any of the aforementioned sub-arguments then that is homophobia. That is hate against love. This legislation isn’t about gay rights; it’s about human rights that have been denied to people of a certain predisposition for too long.

We hear frequently in this country of gay teenagers taking their own lives because they are treated like second-class citizens for being who they are. They hate themselves that much because they’re being brought up in a world, where there love is less important than their families’ or their friend’s. If we don’t allow this legislation to pass then more and more generations will grow up thinking their sexual preference means they’re worth less than everybody else. This law will change social norms and literally save lives. Change is coming, whether people like it or not. And those who oppose same-sex marriage today will forever be mocked on the wrong side of history.

Advertisements

8 comments

  1. This country was built on christianity and most of the morals we uphold are down to this. We are a christian country (not that i’m a christian myself) however even I understand what this country stands for under the monarchy who even herself is head of the church of England, why should people who hold good values and morals and believe in the institution of marriage have the definition of marriage changed, to incorporate same sex couples? If you want to get married make your own religion? That’s the simple answer, that is if you believe in equality and that everyone has the right to believe what they want? Don’t try and persecute members of a faith that has just over 2 billion people in the world. If we let this legislation through then it’s the start of degradation of our society and our core principles as a christian country. Another major factor being that I feel cheated as part of the electorate that this issue was not even in the manifesto in which I voted for under the Conservatives and suddenly it’s being rushed through the Commons and Lords like it’s a critical matter to our country, when in fact they should be dealing with the major thing people are more concerned about which is the problem with the EU, why isn’t that being pushed through and why don’t the electorate get a say in that, but they can drop everything and push through legislation for gays? It’s because they are scared of being branded ‘homophobic’ which is pathetic as if you are educated like myself you know that ‘phobe’ means to have a phobia or to be scared of something, you can be opposed to gay marriage and not be scared of them? I’ve never been scared by any gays that I have met. Another thing, you wouldn’t ever hear of this issue in a muslim country and if they spoke out no one would say anything, in this country if you speak out like myself then you are looked on as bigoted and outdated/old fashioned, I just don’t believe that you should impose yourself on a church and expect to be married in the eyes of god, if in the holy book that you are married under it is a sin to be homosexual? Yet another argument for a gay religion, I could literally go on for hours but I feel have made my point enough and I’m sorry for taking up so much room but there are people in this country that aren’t religious and are opposed to same sex marriage, thank you for your time.

    1. Not everyone in this country is Christian. Why should a traditional belief dictate what certain people cannot do because a predisposition? Marriage never had a clear definition until modern times. Same-sex marriages were commonly carried out in Ancient Rome and Ancient Greece. Marriage is not a right granted by the church, it is a right granted by the state. Christianity does not own marriage. Some churches such as Quakers, want to allow same-sex marriages in their church, shouldn’t they be able to? The bill is in the Lib Dems manifesto and they are part of the coalition government. Human rights shouldn’t be set aside to be corrected later. Back to Christian beliefs and morals, many of these are not followed today, this argument is just used to equivocate for personal intolerance. Homophobia is defined as an intense fear OR hatred of homosexuals and/or homosexuality. You say homosexuals shouldn’t impose themselves upon churches to get married, why should Christianity, a religion many in this country don’t even follow be allowed to impose itself on the law?

      1. Like I said before, this country was built on christianity and we still are a christian country to this day even if not everyone follows it, look up the statistics, only 5% of the public are gay and 71% of the public are (practicising) christians and 15% no religion (I include myself in this demographic) numbers don’t lie my friend.

      2. And many Christian principles are rightly disregarded for being outdated or simply ludicrous. What point are you making? Many people listed as Christian are not actually Christian. The stats for both the Christian and gay populations are sketchy to the say the least. What is the relevance of these numbers when the majority of the country support the bill? Like you said, numbers don’t lie.

      3. what survey has been done to show the numbers of people who support the bill? Just because the commons and lords passed both doesn’t mean it’s what the public want? My point being that anyone who has the view of being against it is made out to be a homophobe and shouted down and I think is wrong in this day in age, everyone has the right to think what they want and if you don’t agree with the bill then speak up (like I do) I will not fear these people who preach equality but as soon as someone stands against them they say they are homophobic, if you were truly equal then you would say fair enough you oppose equal marriage. The fact is why should the government change the meaning/definition of an institution of which millions of people in this country have committed to? If would be outraged if I was married and they suddenly changed what it meant to be married, that’s not what I would have signed up for! why can’t LGBT people just make their own word/institution rather than hi-jacking ours? IF you did you could make it how you wanted it and mean what you want, start from scratch, wouldn’t you prefer that?

      4. http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/2012/dec/26/voters-back-gay-marriage-poll
        Here’s but one example outlining the general public’s support for the bill.

        Quite simply, denying gay people a right for being gay is homophobic. You have adopted an attitude in which gay people are not equal or worthy of equal treatment. You can try and gloss it over any which way but it is still homophobia.

        You’re preaching about the rules of equality yet can’t seem to find the irony in your approach. Separate but equal IS NOT EQUAL! Why should there be a separate institution? Marriage will not change for the heterosexual couples of this country, their marriage will remain intact and the same, to say you’d be outraged is simply spiteful. If we’re on a bouncy castle and only people of a certain group are allowed in, if I open it up to more people, I haven’t redefined the bouncy castle, it’s still the same, it’s just that more people can use it.

        I would hesitate from this messy game of making it us against you. I’m sorry, this isn’t what you want to hear, you should be allowed to have your opinion and I should be allowed to tell you that yours is archaic, fundamentally wrong, poorly supported and homophobic. That is the end of the matter.

      5. At the end of the day, it doesn’t matter what I say the shambles that is this coalition government have forced it through regardless when they should be pursuing the key issues that face the nation e.g immigration, referendum of the EU and the economy (things that were all key points in the manifesto), if they would concentrate on them in the fashion they have over this wasteful subject they would get so much done! That is the end of that matter.

Leave a Reply

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

WordPress.com Logo

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

Twitter picture

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

Facebook photo

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

Google+ photo

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

Connecting to %s