http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/all-about/gay%20marriage
New
Zealand has passed down 'The Same Sex Marriage' law. It is a big change
to the country or to a city especially if there are people who
disagreed to this argument. Although it has already been accepted it has
been clear that there are still arguments and disapproval's. People do
have different argumentation and perspectives but I would like to prove
that there are no reasons to argue about 'the Same Sex Marriage'.
PAST AND PRESENT
Marriage is two people who get together and dedicate their lives to each other. Marriage was seen as men and women together rather than the 'Same Sex Marriage' as the Marriage Act defined men and women. Everyone believed marriage was between women and men because of the past generations and religions. Such as Christians, they disapprove strongly to the 'Same Sex Marriage'. However, these days some countries and cities are forgetting about the past and placed a new law with 'the Same Sex Marriage', therefore now in New Zealand "The new statutory definition of marriage in the Marriage Act defines marriage as "the union of two people, regardless of their sex, sexual orientation, or gender identity."" (Scoop 2013)
SUPPORTERS
New Zealand has passed down the law
of 'Same Sex Marriage' on the 19th of August 2013 and the same sex
couple's were and finally able to announce themselves wife and wife or
husband and husband. Many people are supportive. One of the Labour MP's, Ms Wall, has witnessed the
first 'Same sex marriage' and quoted "All the theory of Parliament now
comes to fruition today and we
can put in practise the fact that any two people, regardless of
their sex, sexual orientation or gender identity can get a marriage
license and so that's what we are going to be celebrating
today."(TVNZ 2013) It is not just NZ political members that support 'Same Sex Marriage' But also Australian's Prime Minister Kevin Rudd has
announced that he supports marriage equally. (GayNZ 2013)
HUMAN RIGHTS ACT
I would also like to argue that as under the Human Rights Act 1993 of "The primary functions of the Commission are (a) to advocate and promote respect for, and an understanding and appreciation of, human rights in New Zealand society; and (b) to encourage the maintenance and development of harmonious relations between individuals and among the diverse groups in New Zealand society." (HRA 1993 No.82) People have their own rights with the Human Rights Act and also focusing on (a) understanding others. It's not anybody's opinions or decisions to make for someone; (b) to create good relation between others. Hence, people should not be arguing or disapproving others marriage. They have their rights to marry someone they like, and I believe the 'Same Sex Marriage' should of been legal when Human Rights Act was issued because each and everyone would have their own rights.
I would also like to argue that as under the Human Rights Act 1993 of "The primary functions of the Commission are (a) to advocate and promote respect for, and an understanding and appreciation of, human rights in New Zealand society; and (b) to encourage the maintenance and development of harmonious relations between individuals and among the diverse groups in New Zealand society." (HRA 1993 No.82) People have their own rights with the Human Rights Act and also focusing on (a) understanding others. It's not anybody's opinions or decisions to make for someone; (b) to create good relation between others. Hence, people should not be arguing or disapproving others marriage. They have their rights to marry someone they like, and I believe the 'Same Sex Marriage' should of been legal when Human Rights Act was issued because each and everyone would have their own rights.
RELIGION
Could people over-react or misunderstand the 'Same Sex Marriage'? "While the Bible does address homosexuality, it does not explicitly mention gay arriage/ same- sex marriage... The Bible alone, however, does not have to be used to demonstrate this understanding of marriage... History argues against gay marriage."(Got Questions.org) It has been written in the Bible that it addresses homosexuality. I believe that the people could be misinterpreting the idea. I also argue that, because the Bible is not clear about the gay marriage it needs to be supported by history; history is the past and people need to stop thinking about the past and think of the things that would be positive for the present and the future.
I argue to say that people should make their own decisions. Everyone has their own rights to act against their own will instead of using history as their back up. I am not against the Bible or the religion, but have my own views to it. People are arguing about the past and not considering the present or the future.There is always time for a change and time to adapt.
http://evidencebasedliving.human.cornell.edu/2013/03/26/how-gay-marriage-impacts-the-well-being-of-children/
Reference:
TVNZ. Love is in the air as the same- sex couples tie the knot. Retrieved September 23, 2013, from http://tvnz.co.nz/national-news/love-in-air-same-sex-couples-tie-knot-5536656
Human Rights Act. No.82 Public Act Functions and power of Commissions. Retrieved September 23, 2013, from http://www.legislation.govt.nz/act/public/1993/0082/latest/DLM304274.html
Gay NZ. World- Wide interest in NZ same- sex marriage. Retrieved September 25, 2013, from http://www.gaynz.com/articles/publish/2/article_13836.php
Got Questions.org. What does the Bible say about gay marriage/ same-sex marriage. Retrieved September 26, 2013, from http://www.gotquestions.org/gay-marriage.html
Scoop Independent News. 82 same sex marriages since law change. Retrieved September 26, 2013, from http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/PO1309/S00221/82-same-sex-marriages-since-law-change.htm
Comments Made
http://iwrites2g3.blogspot.co.nz/2013/09/10-links-and-general-ideas.html
http://iwrites2g3.blogspot.co.nz/2013/09/lucys-opinion-piece-10-links-and-ideas.html
http://antipaparazziforfreedom.blogspot.co.nz/2013/09/why-photographers-and-journalists.html
This is a perfect topic to do since it has just recently been made legal in New Zealand, so it will be a lot of opinion son the matter. I really like how you added in the quote "the union of two people, regardless of their sex, sexual orientation, or gender identity."" (Scoop 2013) . Also how you talk about human rights, it is our human right to marry whoever we choose to and I find that a great argument point. Overall I think you did a really nice job and is well written and gets your argument across
ReplyDelete
ReplyDeleteAlthough I am biased in this argument, I do try to see both points of view and I greatly appreciate the respected sources that you have used in your essay, including the Human Rights Act.
Although this law does not necessarily justify every civilian's perception of gay marriage, it does indicate that the majority of New Zealand's population does agree with this law.
I also appreciate that you have included straightforward arguments from said sources that the general population would not like to argue with, e.g. 'to encourage the maintenance and development of harmonious relations between individuals and among the diverse groups in New Zealand society', particularly publicly in today's world where gay marriage is widely accepted. Including New Zealand's law is also a very wise decision, in my opinion, as the United States of America seems to generally dominate public perception in today's society, so I applaud your use of including New Zealand's law.
Overall, a great essay, Jessica!! I very much admire the concrete sources you have used, particularly the Human Rights Act.
:-)
Also commented on :
ReplyDeletehttp://shamsswonderland.blogspot.co.nz/2013/09/culturalreligious-practices-vs-health.html?showComment=1380451475179&m=1#c2956499916899318639