• Biblical Families is not a dating website. It is a forum to discuss issues relating to marriage and the Bible, and to offer guidance and support, not to find a wife. Click here for more information.

Hearing by government committee on gay marriage

FollowingHim

Administrator
Staff member
Real Person
Male
The New Zealand government is currently debating whether to make gay marriage legal. I have submitted against this proposal, and am appearing before the government select committee considering this matter tomorrow (Monday 28 January) to present my case orally. I would appreciate prayer that I would know what to say, and that my line of reasoning would resonate with at least some of the committee members.

This debate has been greatly frustrating for me as the bulk of the Christian opposition to the bill has been around the slogan "One man, one woman, that's marriage" - a statement I technically agree with, but don't agree with what most people mean by it! Also, most Christians seem to think marriage is a Christian religious institution, and should remain only for heterosexual, monogamous couples because that's what the church teaches. When I point out that other religions also marry, I've had responses like "but that's not really a proper marriage"! This line of reasoning isn't going to go far with a secular government. Why should they enforce the ideas of one religion? Actually, they shouldn't, so there is a strong possibility that all this opposition is only going to make the government more keen to introduce gay marriage to avoid being accused of religious discrimination.

My written submission is at the link below.
http://www.parliament.nz/NR/rdonlyr...I_00DBHOH_BILL11528_1_A292294_DrSamuelJam.pdf
The key website for the Christian opposition to the bill is below, if you want some background information.
http://www.protectmarriage.org.nz/
 
Thankyou. The hearing went surprisingly well in the end, although the bias of some of the committee was obvious it was not aggressive, and I actually had great interest by at least some in my submission. One MP said he'd like to discuss this with me further afterwards, which was a great accomplishment. Most of the committee are secular liberals, but there is one Sikh member who does a good job of being a level-headed moderating influence as far as I can see, I got to discuss it with him afterwards and I like his approach to the matter. It will be interesting to see what the result is.
 
The audio of my submission is here if anyone is interested, it's about 10 minutes long. You really don't know how often you say "um" until you listen to yourself!

The three inaudible questions at the end are
- One MP asking whether I was aware changes could not be made to the bill wording until after the hearings were finished.
- A second MP asking why, after outlining how marriage had changed so much throughout history, I was opposed to this new change.
- The same MP asking whether the most important thing about marriage was that it was simply a union for life.
http://db.tt/2vap4f77
 
Back
Top