Same Gender....Same Rules?

The debate regarding the acceptance of same gender marriage has focussed, not unexpectedly, on issues of equality, tradition, the social status of marriage and the acceptance (or otherwise) of homosexuality. As a lawyer, however, there is perhaps something missing in the debate - and that is, what is marriage in Australia in 2011?

Marriage is, essentially, a construct of the law. This seems obvious, given that it is the law which proscribes same gender marriage. But it is a construct which plainly has social ramifications. It is the foundation of the unit of society which for the most part builds communities - the family. The family is the by-product of the procreative capacities of opposite gender relationships. Whatever social construct the "family" is, it cannot exist without people; and people come from procreation. That fact is immutable.

So, the argument goes, you expand the construct of marriage to beyond basic procreating capacities, then you create, as a by-product, different social constructs, i.e. not a family.

But does that argument remain valid in 2011 Australia? Opposite gender couples remain childless. Same gender couples can still procreate, although not within the strict confines of their relationship. Families are created as varied as the humans which occupy them.

The idea that same gender marriage dilutes the capacity of Australians to form families is invalid. So what of the type of family? Are people with two dads or two mums, or two dads and a mum who lives 3 suburbs away, any less advantaged that those with a mum and a dad? For the argument, we can assume the heteronormative paradigm that having role models of different genders is good for raising kids. So do same gender marriages deny this? Let's assume they do. But if we make that assumption, we must also make the same assumption that the separated, divorced or widowed parent, albeit heterosexual, may do exactly the same thing. And, of course, they don't, any more than gay parents would.

A Canadian couple recently had a baby and intend not to reveal the baby's gender to anyone other than immediate family, because they wish to raise the baby/child without any gender bias. Before accusations are thrown that gay couples will raise wierdo kids, perhaps the straight camp could look to itself first?

I've wracked my brains to think of a reasonable argument against same gender marriages. The only one is that marriage, per se, is a dead or dying institution, so why would same gender couples sign up for it? If you can think of one, let me know.