Monday, 10 October 2016

WHAT'S IN A NAME ?

The  issue that is roiling Australian politics is - "Same Sex Marriage "!  Traditionalists recoil at the thought of what they term the "sanctity " of the union between a man and a woman being violated by the same term granted to a union between two of the same sex.

Much of this opposition would probably drain away if such a union was termed "a Legal Cohabitation Agreement ", provided it conferred all the inheritance rights, tax advantages and rights to adoption that are granted with the signing of the traditional marriage certificate.   But that would be totally unacceptable to the Gay community.

Strangely, this push for Same Sex Marriage is likely to confer one of the tribulations that afflict married couples but does not apply to those who choose cohabitation.  If marriage is legally granted to gays of the same sex, with it will come the rigors of divorce - if they separate !   Right now they have a degree of freedom that many married people envy.

Perhaps this is a good time to have a think about something that seems to have originated out of the "Old Testament ".   In that era it was the custom for a man to choose a wife to nurture and raise his children, and she was treated as a chattel rather than a person.   There is no doubt that sex outside marriage played a part in biblical times because it gets many a mention in the bible, and it was frowned upon by the church.

What we term the "Christian Church " has always struggled to separate "sin " and "sex ".   In earlier times they preached that sex was only for the begetting of children - and should not be engaged in for sheer pleasure.   The pleasures of the body were regarded as sinful, and marriage was a contract that lasted for the lifetime of those who marry.   Strangely, the only valid reason for annulling a marriage was the refusal of one of the parties to engage in sex.

Islam was the other great religion of those times, and it had a very different view on marriage.  A Muslim was entitled to have up to six wives, if he could afford to feed and clothe them.   Islam had very liberal laws on the matter of divorce.  A man simple uttered the phrase "I Divorce Thee "" three times - and the marriage was over.   Unfortunately, this divorce action was not available to the wives.

Today, we are fast approaching the stage when almost half the marriages in Australia ultimately end in divorce.   Most of the Christian churches accept the re-marriage of divorcees and welcome them back into their congregations.   The holdout is the Catholic church, but even they have been making conciliatory noises in recent times.

This Christian pre-occupation  with marriage as a monogamous union of a man and a woman that lasts a lifetime was once used as a weapon by an unbending church.   Eventually,  civil law replaced the iron clad edicts of the clergy and the ending of a marriage dissolved into a custody fight over children and division of the spoils accumulated during the time of the union.

We seem to be moving into a new age where marriage is a quaint custom still practiced by traditionalists - but ignored by the bulk of the community.   Most young couples live together openly and the children of many families have different fathers.    This custom of monogamy  seems to be suffering a slow death.   Perhaps the human race was not conditioned to be other than fruitful with many partners.

It is highly likely that this same sex marriage bill will eventually become law, but it is equally possible that the greater number of marriages performed may be same sex unions because the " straight " world has abandoned the practice.    That seems to be the direction in which we are headed !

No comments:

Post a Comment