Wednesday, February 16, 2011

Some Australian GLTBIs Throw Poly People Under the Bus

According to this report, several people who should know better refused to stand up to bigots, instead throwing poly people under the bus.

Victorian Liberal MP Clem Newton-Brown delivered his maiden speech in State Parliament last Wednesday, breaking ground as the first Liberal MP to voice support for same-sex nuptials in the new Legislative Assembly.

Newton-Brown said same-sex marriage had no connection with polygamy.

"It is a ridiculous assertion to link same-sex marriage with polygamy. The issue should be debated without resort to peripheral issues which have no direct relevance."

Here's the issue: recognizing marriages formed by consenting adults. It would be good to see Australians get the same-sex freedom to marry. It would be best if every adult is able to marry any consenting adult(s).

Federal Greens Senator Sarah Hanson-Young, who has already tabled an equal marriage private members bill in parliament, said the ACL was muddying the waters in the marriage debate.

“The intention of my bill is clear for all to see – it specifically refers to marriage as being ‘a union between two people… to the exclusion of all others’.

“The suggestion from the Australian Christian Lobby that marriage equality for same-sex couples will somehow open the floodgates for polygamous relationships is ludicrous.”

No, it is just showing that they are bigoted towards more than just same-sex couples. But I expect that from them. What I would hope for from the likes of Hanson-Young is some solidarity and some guts. Why the two-person limit?

Melbourne-based GLBTI activist Rod Swift believes marriage should only be reserved for two people in a consensual relationship.

Why? Why deny poly people their rights? And does Swift really mean "two people" or does he mean "two people who are not closely related?" Does he throw consanguineous couples under the bus, too, or just poly people (including GLTBI poly people)?

ACL Victorian director Rob Ward weighed into the debate, citing a controversial court case in Canada – a nation which has already legalised same-sex marriage.

“In Canada there’s been a case before the courts suggesting the link between same-sex marriages and polygamous relationships.

“The basic issue is if you’re going to change marriage, then what are you opening it up to?"

It was nice to see a responding comment from "Old guy"...

Another day, another country. Yet again we have "gay activists" throwing people under the bus to argue for SSM.

As a polyamorous person, I find it pretty annoying.

I've been supporting SSM for about, oh, what, 30, 35 years now? Not because it's ever been personal for me; same-sex sex is a rare sideline for me, and same-sex marriage has never been a prospect. No, I supported it because it was right. Because people ought to be able to commit to those they love, and society ought to support that.

It'd be one thing to say "society's not ready for that". But that's not what we get. We get people screaming that the same basic fairness arguments that apply for GLB people just plain don't apply for polys. "It's about two people!". Apparently justice and the number two are united to the exclusion of all others. And apparently it doesn't matter if you trash somebody else, as long as you get what you want.

The people who started that strategy knew what they were doing. They knew they were abandoning comrades. They decided not to care. And now most of the movement seems to have brainwashed itself so much that it actually believes there's no parallel.

People who presume to speak for the gay community have shown themselves willing to abandon their fellows. Not just polyamorists in general, but the strong polyamorous thread in traditional gay culture. They've done it just as they've been so happy to "sanitize" anything else in the culture their movement grew from of that might scare the "mainstream".

Very well said!

I want to take this moment to once again thank all of the LGBT people who aren't polyamorous who DO show solidarity. And, thanks to the poly people (like "Old guy") who have shown solidarity for the same-sex freedom to marry. We need FULL marriage equality.

UPDATE: Rod Swift clarifies his statements.
— — —

No comments:

Post a Comment

To prevent spam, comments will have to be approved, so your comment may not appear for several hours. Feedback is welcome, including disagreement. I only delete/reject/mark as spam: spam, vulgar or hateful attacks, repeated spouting of bigotry from the same person that does not add to the discussion, and the like. I will not reject comments based on disagreement, but if you don't think consenting adults should be free to love each other, then I do not consent to have you repeatedly spout hate on my blog without adding anything to the discourse.

If you want to write to me privately, then either contact me on Facebook, email me at fullmarriageequality at protonmail dot com, or tell me in your comment that you do NOT want it published. Otherwise, anything you write here is fair game to be used in a subsequent entry. If you want to be anonymous, that is fine.

IT IS OK TO TALK ABOUT SEX IN YOUR COMMENTS, BUT PLEASE CHOOSE YOUR WORDS CAREFULLY AS I WANT THIS BLOG TO BE AS "SAFE FOR WORK" AS POSSIBLE. If your comment includes graphic descriptions of activity involving minors, it's not going to get published.