Australia’s Touching Marriage Equality Ad

[deleted3782]

This new advertisement is circulating among my Facebook friends. I've been ambivalent about gay marriage...but I think this is a powerful ad.

According to reports, marriage equality is a hotly contested issue in Australia, where the Prime Minister supports a conscience vote on same-sex marriage, but would not favor including marriage equality in the party’s platform. A conscience vote would likely not pass.

Meanwhile, groups in the USA such as The Third Way in Washington DC have argued based on new research that it's a message of commitment like this one — and not about benefits or rights — that will be most effective with American voters.

What do you think?

Watch the video on YouTube here.

 

[nudeyorker]

I was ambivalent too before I actually got married. Thanks for sharing this I just posted it to my fb page.

 

[D_Ampelius_Halfinch]

My personal view is that marriage isn't a necessity. My parents are divorced - most of my friends have divorced parents. That advert presents a stereotypical view of marriage. It's not reality.

My personal opinion is that marriage is redundant - there's nothing wrong with co-habiting with someone -I don't get the need for marriage.

 

[B_Hickboy]

It was touching. There is a ballot proposition to amend the North Carolina constitution to define marriage as being between a man and a woman. I hope my North Carolina peeps will join with me in voting to defeat it.

 

[B_Hickboy]

My personal view is that marriage isn't a necessity. My parents are divorced - most of my friends have divorced parents. That advert presents a stereotypical view of marriage. It's not reality.

My personal opinion is that marriage is redundant - there's nothing wrong with co-habiting with someone -I don't get the need for marriage.

People who are not married in the US don't enjoy the same rights as people who are. Whatever your views about marriage, that is the reality. People should not be treated as second class citizens because of they were born to love. Marriage equality won't solve all the existing gender equality problems, but it is a necessary step in the right direction.

 

[TurkeyWithaSunburn]

My personal view is that marriage isn't a necessity. My parents are divorced - most of my friends have divorced parents. That advert presents a stereotypical view of marriage. It's not reality.

My personal opinion is that marriage is redundant - there's nothing wrong with co-habiting with someone -I don't get the need for marriage.

Marriage has many benefits not associated with just being cohabitants. Immigration status can change if you marry someone. The right to not testify against your spouse is one. Automatic survivorship benefits if your pensioner spouse dies. There are many many other benefits in being married vs cohabiting or domestic partnership.

Also there is still a social prestige associated with marriage. Oh that person is married, they've managed to find someone to settle down with and aren't a 2 bit floozy/gigalo playing the field. Something that doesn't quite come across when you just say "my partner" or "my boyfriend" or "my girlfriend".

 

[deleted3782]

My personal view is that marriage isn't a necessity. My parents are divorced - most of my friends have divorced parents. That advert presents a stereotypical view of marriage. It's not reality.

My personal opinion is that marriage is redundant - there's nothing wrong with co-habiting with someone -I don't get the need for marriage.

I come from a divorced marriage too...one that was very nasty and vindictive on both sides. That's a big reason why I am ambivalent about marriage generally.

But in the USA, gay marriage has been discussed in terms as a pathway to rights and benefits...and less about ceremony and romance. The video seems to highlight marriage as a part of a life process...in a way that humanizes gay folks. The cynic in me could just as easily imagine a video of a married gay couple experiencing stages of dissolution of their marriage...so I get what you are saying.

Maybe the video speaks to the romantic in me. Maybe that's the point.

 

[B_subgirrl]

I've never seen that ad before.

It pisses me off that gay marriage isn't legal, but gay couples are considered to be a couple for income/social security purposes. Talk about a double standard.

 

[vince]

I've never seen that ad before.

It pisses me off that gay marriage isn't legal, but gay couples are considered to be a couple for income/social security purposes. Talk about a double standard.

Me too. But the double standards go further than who does or does not get to be married.

Equal rights should be extended to all people regardless of their sexual orientation or relationship status. Married couples, whether they are gay or straight, ought not to have any more rights that single or cohabiting people do. I don't get what is so beneficial to society about marriage that people who choose to be married should have any special rights that others don't.

I also think that a spouse should be compelled to tell the truth under oath about their partner's crimes.

 

[B_subgirrl]

Me too. But the double standards go further than who does or does not get to be married.

Equal rights should be extended to all people regardless of their sexual orientation or relationship status. Married couples, whether they are gay or straight, ought not to have any more rights that single or cohabiting people do. I don't get what is so beneficial to society about marriage that people who choose to be married should have any special rights that others don't.

I also think that a spouse should be compelled to tell the truth under oath about their partner's crimes.

I agree!! Here I don't think there are TOO many benefits in being married (they may get extra tax breaks???), but I'm not sure enough to argue about it :tongue:.

 

[Bbucko]

It pisses me off that gay marriage isn't legal, but gay couples are considered to be a couple for income/social security purposes. Talk about a double standard.

It's the same thing here for anything that's means-tested, despite the fact that my state (Florida, currently) has changed its constitution to exclude same-sex marriage and such relationships are barred from federal recognition under DOMA (Defense of Marriage Act).

I agree!! Here I don't think there are TOO many benefits in being married (they may get extra tax breaks???), but I'm not sure enough to argue about it :tongue:.

As listed above, there's survivor benefits and immigration rights. There are also very special rights regarding decisions made during medical emergencies, hospital visitation and end-of life and inheritance issues. A spouse is automatically the most powerful next-of-kin in anyone's life. This is especially important when so many LGBTs are estranged from their families.

I doubt I'll ever get married, myself. But I abhor the "sanctity of marriage" language that bars me from the franchise, as if I (and my relationships) were inherently unworthy of the same consideration and respect as heterosexual marriage. It just grates.

 

[Willifred]

I don't think God discriminates against people who love other people.

And even if he did, the State shouldn't.

 

[august86]

This new advertisement is circulating among my Facebook friends. I've been ambivalent about gay marriage...but I think this is a powerful ad.

According to reports, marriage equality is a hotly contested issue in Australia, where the Prime Minister supports a conscience vote on same-sex marriage, but would not favor including marriage equality in the party’s platform. A conscience vote would likely not pass.

Meanwhile, groups in the USA such as The Third Way in Washington DC have argued based on new research that it's a message of commitment like this one — and not about benefits or rights — that will be most effective with American voters.

What do you think?

Watch the video on YouTube here.

Such a beautiful ad! Thanks for posting.

I believe that marriage is sacred, and should not be entered into lightly, but more importantly should be reserved for two people who are inlove and ready for the committment it encompasses. -regardless of gender and orientation.

Flawed interpretation of religious beliefs should never come between the fair treatment and equality of citizens. You don't pay less tax for being gay or receive other concessions, and yet one should accept unfair treatment?

As many have mentioned, a recognised union brings with it many legal benefits ito succession, immigration, medical power of attorney, property rights, etc, that any straight person automatically gets when marrying. Not to mention in terms of pension, medical insurance, and other work and state benefits.

I wouldn't be surprised to hear that many gay partners have been kicked out of their homes and had assets taken away upon the death of their partner, by relatives, ex wives, etc who previously disowned and ostracised the person who died for being gay. This would not happen had the couple been affored their due rights.

As Chris Rock says: "gay people have the right to be just as miserable as straight people".

 

[deleted3782]

Such a beautiful ad! Thanks for posting.

I guess we all just wanna meet that hot guy on the Manly ferry who writes his name and number in our book. :tongue:

 

[B_subgirrl]

There are also very special rights regarding decisions made during medical emergencies, hospital visitation and end-of life and inheritance issues. A spouse is automatically the most powerful next-of-kin in anyone's life. This is especially important when so many LGBTs are estranged from their families.

The hospital visitation etc used to be the same here, but I was under the impression that things had changed. Maybe I'm just deluding myself.

I doubt I'll ever get married, myself. But I abhor the "sanctity of marriage" language that bars me from the franchise, as if I (and my relationships) were inherently unworthy of the same consideration and respect as heterosexual marriage. It just grates.

It doesn't even affect me directly and it still grates!!!

 

[B_Hickboy]

*sweet and lucid prose snipped*
I doubt I'll ever get married, myself. But I abhor the "sanctity of marriage" language that bars me from the franchise, as if I (and my relationships) were inherently unworthy of the same consideration and respect as heterosexual marriage. It just grates.

Yes, wouldn't it be lovely if we lived in a world where a meeting of the minds would be considered holy?

It happens so seldom, and is fraught with peril.

 

[D_Miranda_Wrights]

I'm a heterosexual male, hardly a relationship traditionalist, and it completely pisses me off that gays aren't free to pursue "marriage" -- as flawed of an institution as it may be -- on the same terms that I am. Few things grate me more, honestly.

 

[AquaEyes11010]

There really is no requirement for any kind of relationship for a marriage to be issued and recognized in the US. Basically, it's just a legal contract. Anything else that goes on is up to the parties involved. There are no obligations to have children, to be in love, to have sex, to have a religious ceremony, no age maximum (though there are minimums), no number-of-marriages limit, no minimum time spent "married" before a divorce is allowed, no restrictions on credit or criminal history, etc. All that is required is one man and one woman to consent to the contract. And once that happens, a whole suite of benefits follow.

As marriage is simply a legal contract, it is sexual discrimination to allow Mark (male) but not Michelle (female) to enter into a contract with Jane (female).

Do we have the same requirements about male/female participants in a business contract? Do two people on the same mortgage have to be a male/female pair? Must the beneficiary of your life insurance be a member of the opposite sex? No. Then someone please explain to me, from a legal perspective of the construct of what a marriage is, how barring two members of the same sex from entering into this contract has any foundation under the current system of equal rights for men and women?