During the recent definition of marriage debate, the catch-cry from supporters of redefining marriage was that traditional marriage discriminates – and that was unacceptable. “Opposing discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation is a matter of justice. It is also a matter of love.. Should the State be discriminating against New Zealand citizens?” said Louisa Wall MP.
However, we note with interest that a remit proposed by the Labour party’s ruling New Zealand Council at their conference this weekend would require the list-ranking committee to pro-actively ensure that its list fairly represents “sexual orientations”, as well as tangata whenua, gender, ethnic groups, people with disabilities, age and youth. Gay Quota for Labour proposed .
But the hypocrisy isn’t limited to just the Labour party. Both the Greens and the Maori party argued that gender doesn’t matter – and that same-sex couples should be able to marry. But look at their own rules. “One Male, One Female” Their own constitutions demand that the co-leaders be male and female! Isn’t that discrimination?? SEE HERE
“It is true that marriage by definition is discriminatory. A homosexual cannot now legally marry. But neither can a whole lot of other people. Three people cannot get married to each other. A married man can’t marry another person. Two old aunties living together cannot marry. A father cannot marry his adult daughter. A football team cannot enact group marriage – the list is endless. If the law were to allow same-sex marriage, and only same-sex marriage, we would then be discriminating against those seeking polygamous, polyamorous (group), or incestuous consenting adult unions – if all that counts is love and commitment, and the need not to discriminate.”
Of course, our comments are even more significant in light of this CNN story!