Is gay marriage the Marriage Foundation's blind spot?

  • Print
  • Comments (17)

Readers' comments (17)

  • Souns to me like the Marriage Foundation has a very traditional view of marriage. If they spoke out, it probably would be to oppose it. If they keep silent on the issue of same-sex marriage, that might be the best we can hope for.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • Why should they engage in what the definition of marriage is if they have set out their stall to engage with 'marriage-whatever marriage is held to be'?
    I think that their position is more to do with avoiding controversy that may harm their perception among the wider public.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • An organization, especially a nascent one, that does not include gay marriage in any discussion of marriage is out of date with the times. Six states allow gay marriage along with the District of Columbia. Countries as divergent as Canada, Argentina and Spain all have gay marriage. When the Marriage Foundation states, "We can have healthier relationships that are less likely to break down", then I propose that gay marriage is at the pulse of that goal.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • I suspect most criminal defence lawyers would like to see themselves redundant too. I'm sympathetic to the idea of eliminating copyright and that's my specialist field, so you may not be alone.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • I'm sorry but even as a flippant opener, the suggestion that family lawyers are probably the only lawyers that would love to live in a society in which they were entirely redundant is holier than thou nonsense. I'm pretty sure a lot of criminal practitioners would feel better off without crime and the social welfare lawyers working for little remuneration in housing, debt, benefits, deportation and asylum are hardly flag wavers for the social ills they have committed their careers to combatting. Poor show.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • Zoe Saunders seems to be arguing for mission creep. How many other organisations should make a statement of support for her pet cause? Childline? The NSPCC? Maybe even the RSPCA?

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • "How many other organisations should make a statement of support for her pet cause? Childline? The NSPCC? Maybe even the RSPCA?"
    In my view, it is wholly unacceptable that the NSPCC have failed openly to support gay marriage, which is self-evidently in the best interests of children. Silence on the matter is no longer good enough. A failure actively to support and promote gay marriage constitutes a thought crime and should be punishable by law.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • "Gay marriage...is self-evidently in the best interests of children"
    Why? You may (or may not) be right, but there is nothing 'self-evident' about it. Many might say that it is in the best interests of children to have both a mother and a father.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • One gets sick of this discourse on gay marriage. I live in Australia and I am sick of fringe groups demanding what the majority of Australians can have in their Marriage Act. The vast majority of Australians want marriage to stay what it is.
    Gays and lesbians have no right to gay marriage because marriage does not apply to them.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • For anyone married with children they will know that the most important thing for childrens' upbringing is stability. In most cases that means a stable family with both parents. The Marriage Foundation appears to have this aim as its core principle.
    The criticism from Zoe Saunders is misplaced and unjustified. The article seems to be saying that the Foundation should amend its core principle to support and focus on gay marriage. The Foundation does not give any definition of marriage and is not therefore favouring one form of marriage over another. The writer appears to have totally missed the point.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

View results 10 per page | 20 per page

Have your say

Mandatory Required Fields

Mandatory

Comments that are in breach or potential breach of our terms and conditions in particular clause 8, may not be published or, if published, may subsequently be taken down. In addition we may remove any comment where a complaint is made in respect of it. These actions are at our sole discretion.

  • Print
  • Comments (17)