Tuesday, June 22, 2004
Civil Union Bills finally introduced
The government's two Civil Union Bills have finally been introduced to Parliament (the First Reading for the Civil Union Bill is scheduled for Thursday this week, and the companion Relationships (Statutory References) Bill will have its First Reading the following week). The Bills can be seen online at the above links.
Prime Minister Helen Clark said on Radio NZ's "Nine to Noon" programme today that it's all about providing people with choice, and eliminating discrimination.
When a government puts "choice" above a sound understanding of what provides the basis of a sound society, we are in real trouble. In this case, it will be a disaster for children, who will suffer the consequences of adults making "choices" with little consideration for the best interests of the children.
These bills will provide every sexual relationship with the same benefits and privileges as marriage. In other words, marriage will be no different legally from any other relationship. I wonder how married people will feel to realise that any two people who shack up together will be entitled to everything they get. Why bother getting married? is the message. And you can bet young people will take it on board big time.
That's already happening in Holland, where following the introduction of same-sex marriage, marriage rates have started to fall significantly, while out-of-wedlock births have risen sharply.
In the Weekly Standard, Stanley Kurtz, a research fellow at the Hoover Institution, points out that during Holland's decade-long drive to legalize same-sex "marriage," gay advocates openly scorned the idea that marriage ought to be defined by the possibility of
childbearing. Love between two partners -- any two partners -- was the real basis of marriage. Thus, as one gay "marriage" advocate told the Dutch Parliament, "there is absolutely no reason, objectively, to distinguish between heterosexual and homosexual love." Dutch leaders bought this argument.
Then a funny thing happened on the road to redefining marriage: Dutch people simply stopped getting married -- even when they had children. This really ought to come as no surprise. After all, Kurtz writes, "Spend a decade telling people that marriage is not about parenthood, and they just might begin to believe you."
What's happening in the Netherlands gives us clear evidence of what gay "marriage" does: People stop getting married, and children suffer. Marriage between one man and one woman must be protected
and strengthened. If it isn't, then New Zealand families -- already deeply damaged by divorce and illegitimacy -- will be destroyed.
The government's two Civil Union Bills have finally been introduced to Parliament (the First Reading for the Civil Union Bill is scheduled for Thursday this week, and the companion Relationships (Statutory References) Bill will have its First Reading the following week). The Bills can be seen online at the above links.
Prime Minister Helen Clark said on Radio NZ's "Nine to Noon" programme today that it's all about providing people with choice, and eliminating discrimination.
When a government puts "choice" above a sound understanding of what provides the basis of a sound society, we are in real trouble. In this case, it will be a disaster for children, who will suffer the consequences of adults making "choices" with little consideration for the best interests of the children.
These bills will provide every sexual relationship with the same benefits and privileges as marriage. In other words, marriage will be no different legally from any other relationship. I wonder how married people will feel to realise that any two people who shack up together will be entitled to everything they get. Why bother getting married? is the message. And you can bet young people will take it on board big time.
That's already happening in Holland, where following the introduction of same-sex marriage, marriage rates have started to fall significantly, while out-of-wedlock births have risen sharply.
In the Weekly Standard, Stanley Kurtz, a research fellow at the Hoover Institution, points out that during Holland's decade-long drive to legalize same-sex "marriage," gay advocates openly scorned the idea that marriage ought to be defined by the possibility of
childbearing. Love between two partners -- any two partners -- was the real basis of marriage. Thus, as one gay "marriage" advocate told the Dutch Parliament, "there is absolutely no reason, objectively, to distinguish between heterosexual and homosexual love." Dutch leaders bought this argument.
Then a funny thing happened on the road to redefining marriage: Dutch people simply stopped getting married -- even when they had children. This really ought to come as no surprise. After all, Kurtz writes, "Spend a decade telling people that marriage is not about parenthood, and they just might begin to believe you."
What's happening in the Netherlands gives us clear evidence of what gay "marriage" does: People stop getting married, and children suffer. Marriage between one man and one woman must be protected
and strengthened. If it isn't, then New Zealand families -- already deeply damaged by divorce and illegitimacy -- will be destroyed.
