There’s more to the debate of same-sex marriage then the general public usually sees in the media. However, there were two interesting articles this week, both by lesbian freelance writers that are worth reading for what they had to say.

The first article written by Helen Razer in The Age today (03/03) “Homosexuality is a bore now so many gays are wedded to a rickety institution” questions why gay activists are pushing for same-sex marriage.

In her own words on same-sex marriage she said “...there is no scope for debate. Supporting same-sex marriage is compulsory...One cannot say marriage, particularly the “gay” kind, is silly without being pelted by (conventionally grown) refuse.”

Here we have a homosexual saying there is no scope for debate on the issue of same-sex marriage. We couldn’t agree more.

Razer goes onto to say that the changes in 2009 to remove legislative discrimination was a civil equality issue but “getting hitched, expensively and blithely, is not.”

One of her final statements worth taking note is “Marriage equality is not a truly progressive struggle but an effort to privilege one kind of relationship, long-term and monogamous, above all others. I wonder how this is going to play out, particularly for the many gay couples who have spent years finessing a feasible polygamy.”

The second article by Katrina Fox on the ABC’s The Drum website this week goes a little further in revealing that any push for homosexual marriage should also include the recognition of polyamory.

Yes, we didn’t say polygamy but polyamory. Here at the ACL we’ve been concerned that homosexual marriage could lead to polygamy to be legalised, as a court case in Canada is testing this issue.

But back to Polyamory. This is where a group of people share each other sexually and it is a small but growing movement, particularly in the United States.

The homosexual activists’ push to redefine marriage is based on a call for ‘marriage equality’ and ‘equal love’ because love is the only thing that counts in a relationship, they say.

If this is true, then intellectually it is dishonest to deny the ‘poly lifestyles’ a place at the marriage altar, as Fox argues in her article.

“In 2011 it’s time to redefine marriage to include a diverse range of relationships between one or more people of any sex or gender,” she said.

This is one of many reasons why one-man-one-woman marriage matters and should not be tampered with.

If you haven’t already, please sign ACL’s online petition to the Australian Senate urging the Parliament to protect marriage.