They did it guys! High fives all round. Bill Shorten's approval rating has surged, particularly among non-voting teenagers, who went out of their way to 'like' him on Facebook. Labor stood up for what is right (the left?) and protected the mental stability of a vulnerable group of people who the majority of Australians have treated with disdain. But it isn't just Labor politicians who feared backlash, and I agree with the valid concerns of the opponents of the plebiscite that the debate was going to be damaging to (particularly) young homosexuals, who are consistently over-represented in suicide statistics. So, this is good.
I'm happy to show my cards here - I support gay marriage. Or as it will be referred to by the majority in a small amount of time, marriage. I like marriage, but that isn't why I support marriage equality. It's not because I think there is room for it (or homosexuality at all) in the Bible, because I don't have a degree in theology, and I've seen plenty of historical examples where scriptures have been used to justify any political desire you can think of. Instead, it's because of a double conviction.
Firstly, the Government should do Government things. A certificate of marriage is a government document. Marriage is a government institution, and the government grants Pastors the permission to play registry official if he (or she, because we let women be clergy these days, in spite of some of Paul's teachings) passes the appropriate government mandated tests. If you still can't grasp the idea of marriage not being a church institution, try filling your divorce papers with a priest sometime. I'm not talking about the past. I'm not talking about the historical origins of marriage, and I'm not qualified to. I'm talking about now, because 'now' should be the most relevant discussion point.
The second reason is even easier to explain. I believe in the separation of Church and State. I don't want the church to mandate what the government should do, and I don't want the government to control how the church operates. The powers that be have been pretty good about keeping up their end of the bargain (charity status, freedom of religion, power to perform marriages etc) and I think we should respect their position and do the same. The proposed legislation includes legal protection for pastors who don't wish to wed same-sex couples. I think it's almost impossible to be against marriage equality without acknowledging that you are controlling how someone else decides to live, which is something that God elected not to do when he gave us free choice. So take it up with him.
There will be a time for the debate within individual churches regarding whether or not those ceremonies will be performed in that individual church. I don't have an answer for that either way, and I think it's going to incredibly divisive.
Anyway.
What prompted me to write this was an advert for Sportsbet, which had a bonus offer on betting on the US election. "Take a bet on democracy" was the tagline, and I thought it was hilarious for a couple of reasons. For one, I thought it could have been extended. "Take a bet on democracy; unlike Labor." I was a little disappointed that the pro-plebiscite camp didn't really take their argument to the natural conclusion. Which is support the plebiscite, because if you don't, you're a democracy hating fascist who should move to China. I'm even more put out that the anti-plebs (definitely a thing) didn't pursue the natural conclusion. Instead of stopping at "Australia can't be trusted to have a debate on sensitive topics", why not go to "representative democracy is a stupid idea which allows candidates like Pauline Hanson, Donald Trump, and Derryn Hinch to attain power on the basis of one-liners". See, I would have been completely on board with that! Never mind T. Abbott running an entire (and entirely successful) campaign by shouting STOP THE BOATS every time a reporter touched his elbow, or that K.Rudd won an election by his willingness to have smarmy conversations with Rove McManus.
Every argument made against the plebiscite can be made against our current democratic structure. We all "take a bet on democracy" every four years, and when 49% of Australians think that muslim immigration should be stopped, (tragically, results for the follow-up poll of "how many Bali-dollars does a Bintang cost on Kuta Beach" seem to have been lost) you have to start to wonder if that's the best idea.
I guess the whole "anti-democratic" thing being an insult only works in America. I think we could've had McCarthyism here, but where the US had Walter Cronkite, we had Molly Meldrum. (I'm aware my timelines are out. I don't care. I studied International Relations, not Historical Television Journalism)
Maybe that's why so many people are in favour of the plebiscite being trashed. It's not because everyone believes in representative democracy (please explain) but because we're less concerned by political decisions that don't really concern us (like whether or not someone attended a Communist meeting once, or if the guy from Savage Garden can marry his partner) and more concerned with The Bachelor. Now, that's fine. I can acknowledge that many people don't want to talk about Syria, and most people are accepting that I don't have an opinion on Richie, or that bacon chick. But every four years, politicians gather support because of a stance on Syria, national debt, immigration, refugee intake, or 1,000 other subjects that require a lot of studying to understand properly. When Donald Drumpf says "I'm gonna build a wall", or K.Rudd "I'll put the blowtorch on OPEC", people will nod, and vote for them on the day. The voices highlighting that there isn't enough concrete (let alone finance) in the US for the wall, or asking who the hell Kevin Rudd is (in Arabic, of course) go unheard.
The truth, or at least reality, doesn't matter.
So, you hate the plebiscite. That's great. And you thought a referendum was an unnecessary expense, and that regular people can't be trusted with intelligent, non-offensive debate. I'm on board. Unfortunately, your distaste for democratic action has led us back to representative democracy - we elect people who make decisions for us. I implore you, friend: take it to the next level.
Don't just hate the plebiscite because you don't trust people you disagree with: hate representative democracy because you don't trust anyone. Not the people voting, not the Murdoch press journalists, and definitely not the multi-millionaire politicians who need to swoon the former in order to keep their jobs at the expense of our human rights record, the environment, and whichever section of society (hello, Centrelink recipients! It's time for your bi-annual public shaming!) they've chosen to bash next.
Come to the dark side, friends. It's time we had a talk.
Latest bumper sticker: Don't blame me, I lodged a protest vote for a party that is unlikely to have power in the Senate
