HomeGay Marriage : Against : • Marriage is, by definition, a union between man and woman, designed for procreation, and that redefine marriage to include same-sexual marriages undermines the traditional and cultural meaning of the act. • Recognises marriage primarily for childbearing, and that the best environment is their biological mother and father, and that same-sex marriage separates marriage from its sole purpose to procreate. • Marriage is a sacred covenant lead by God, meant only for a man and a woman. Same sex marriage is in contrast of divine law. Source 1- submission to parliment Origin This source is a written submission from 2012 by Margaret Somerville, a professor of law and ethics, to an Australian Senate inquiry about whether same-sex marriage should be legalised. It comes from the time of the political debate, so it shows the views of opponents during that period. However, it reflects the perspective of one individual rather than a neutral or representative view. Purpose The purpose of the source is to persuade lawmakers not to legalise same-sex marriage by arguing that it could harm children, families, and society. It is intended to influence government decisions, not to present both sides equally, so it focuses only on arguments against the policy. Value The source is useful for understanding the reasoning and concerns of people who opposed marriage equality in Australia before it became legal. It shows how ideas about children’s rights, biology, and social values were used in the debate, and it is written by an academic in a formal submission to parliament, which makes it a credible example of organised opposition. Limitation The source is strongly one-sided and does not include evidence supporting same-sex marriage or research that contradicts the author’s claims. Many arguments are based on opinions or predictions rather than proven facts. Because same-sex marriage is now legal in Australia, some concerns expressed in the source may also be outdated or not supported by later evidence. For: • Overseas experience shows same-sex marriage has been “entirely positive,” with marriage having a “positive and profound” impact by improving couples’ mental and physical health, commitment, and feelings of acceptance and legitimacy. • Children of same-sex couples were reported to be “happier and better off,” feeling more “secure and protected” and benefiting from greater family stability. • Civil unions are viewed as inferior — described by some couples as “a bit of nothing” — and do not provide the same recognition as marriage. • Legalising same-sex marriage has not harmed heterosexual marriage rates, which continued “at the same rate as before,” sometimes increasing. • Same-sex marriage can bring economic benefits, with weddings generating significant spending in local economies. Gay Marriage in Australia: • Same-sex marriage became legal in Australia on 9 December 2017 when the Marriage Act was amended to give same-sex couples the same right to marry as heterosexual couples. • The reform followed decades of campaigning by LGBTQIA+ communities after a long history of persecution, discrimination, and criminalisation of homosexuality. • Before legalisation, same-sex couples had fewer legal and financial rights than heterosexual couples, even after anti-discrimination laws were introduced. • In 2004 the law was changed to define marriage as between a man and a woman, which increased public debate and led to many unsuccessful attempts to legalise same-sex marriage. • A voluntary national postal survey in 2017 asked Australians whether the law should change; about 61.6% voted “Yes,” leading Parliament to redefine marriage as “a union of two people.” Source 2- Nation Museum Australia Origin This source comes from the National Museum of Australia’s “Defining Moments” project, which presents important events in Australian history for educational purposes. It was created after marriage equality was achieved, so it reflects a historical overview rather than an argument from the time of the debate. As a government-funded museum resource, it aims to be factual and informative. Purpose The purpose is to educate readers about marriage equality as a significant historical event in Australia. It explains the background, key events, and outcome rather than trying to persuade readers to support or oppose the change. Value The source is useful because it provides a clear, factual summary of how marriage equality was achieved, including legal changes, public opinion, and historical context. It comes from a reputable national institution and is designed for students, making it reliable for understanding what happened. Limitation The source is mainly descriptive and does not explore arguments for or against same-sex marriage in depth. It simplifies complex debates and may leave out detailed perspectives or controversies. Because it is a summary, it cannot provide full analysis of the social or political impacts

Gay Marriage : Against : • Marriage is, by definition, a union between man and woman, designed for procreation, and that redefine marriage to include same-sexual marriages undermines the traditional and cultural meaning of the act. • Recognises marriage primarily for childbearing, and that the best environment is their biological mother and father, and that same-sex marriage separates marriage from its sole purpose to procreate. • Marriage is a sacred covenant lead by God, meant only for a man and a woman. Same sex marriage is in contrast of divine law. Source 1- submission to parliment Origin This source is a written submission from 2012 by Margaret Somerville, a professor of law and ethics, to an Australian Senate inquiry about whether same-sex marriage should be legalised. It comes from the time of the political debate, so it shows the views of opponents during that period. However, it reflects the perspective of one individual rather than a neutral or representative view. Purpose The purpose of the source is to persuade lawmakers not to legalise same-sex marriage by arguing that it could harm children, families, and society. It is intended to influence government decisions, not to present both sides equally, so it focuses only on arguments against the policy. Value The source is useful for understanding the reasoning and concerns of people who opposed marriage equality in Australia before it became legal. It shows how ideas about children’s rights, biology, and social values were used in the debate, and it is written by an academic in a formal submission to parliament, which makes it a credible example of organised opposition. Limitation The source is strongly one-sided and does not include evidence supporting same-sex marriage or research that contradicts the author’s claims. Many arguments are based on opinions or predictions rather than proven facts. Because same-sex marriage is now legal in Australia, some concerns expressed in the source may also be outdated or not supported by later evidence. For: • Overseas experience shows same-sex marriage has been “entirely positive,” with marriage having a “positive and profound” impact by improving couples’ mental and physical health, commitment, and feelings of acceptance and legitimacy. • Children of same-sex couples were reported to be “happier and better off,” feeling more “secure and protected” and benefiting from greater family stability. • Civil unions are viewed as inferior — described by some couples as “a bit of nothing” — and do not provide the same recognition as marriage. • Legalising same-sex marriage has not harmed heterosexual marriage rates, which continued “at the same rate as before,” sometimes increasing. • Same-sex marriage can bring economic benefits, with weddings generating significant spending in local economies. Gay Marriage in Australia: • Same-sex marriage became legal in Australia on 9 December 2017 when the Marriage Act was amended to give same-sex couples the same right to marry as heterosexual couples. • The reform followed decades of campaigning by LGBTQIA+ communities after a long history of persecution, discrimination, and criminalisation of homosexuality. • Before legalisation, same-sex couples had fewer legal and financial rights than heterosexual couples, even after anti-discrimination laws were introduced. • In 2004 the law was changed to define marriage as between a man and a woman, which increased public debate and led to many unsuccessful attempts to legalise same-sex marriage. • A voluntary national postal survey in 2017 asked Australians whether the law should change; about 61.6% voted “Yes,” leading Parliament to redefine marriage as “a union of two people.” Source 2- Nation Museum Australia Origin This source comes from the National Museum of Australia’s “Defining Moments” project, which presents important events in Australian history for educational purposes. It was created after marriage equality was achieved, so it reflects a historical overview rather than an argument from the time of the debate. As a government-funded museum resource, it aims to be factual and informative. Purpose The purpose is to educate readers about marriage equality as a significant historical event in Australia. It explains the background, key events, and outcome rather than trying to persuade readers to support or oppose the change. Value The source is useful because it provides a clear, factual summary of how marriage equality was achieved, including legal changes, public opinion, and historical context. It comes from a reputable national institution and is designed for students, making it reliable for understanding what happened. Limitation The source is mainly descriptive and does not explore arguments for or against same-sex marriage in depth. It simplifies complex debates and may leave out detailed perspectives or controversies. Because it is a summary, it cannot provide full analysis of the social or political impacts

Against :

· Marriage is, by definition, a union between man and woman, designed for procreation, and that redefine marriage to include same-sexual marriages undermines the traditional and cultural meaning of the act.

· Recognises marriage primarily for childbearing, and that the best environment is their biological mother and father, and that same-sex marriage separates marriage from its sole purpose to procreate.

· Marriage is a sacred covenant lead by God, meant only for a man and a woman. Same sex marriage is in contrast of divine law.

Source 1- submission to parliment

Origin

This source is a written submission from 2012 by Margaret Somerville, a professor of law and ethics, to an Australian Senate inquiry about whether same-sex marriage should be legalised. It comes from the time of the political debate, so it shows the views of opponents during that period. However, it reflects the perspective of one individual rather than a neutral or representative view.

Purpose

The purpose of the source is to persuade lawmakers not to legalise same-sex marriage by arguing that it could harm children, families, and society. It is intended to influence government decisions, not to present both sides equally, so it focuses only on arguments against the policy.

Value

The source is useful for understanding the reasoning and concerns of people who opposed marriage equality in Australia before it became legal. It shows how ideas about children’s rights, biology, and social values were used in the debate, and it is written by an academic in a formal submission to parliament, which makes it a credible example of organised opposition.

Limitation

The source is strongly one-sided and does not include evidence supporting same-sex marriage or research that contradicts the author’s claims. Many arguments are based on opinions or predictions rather than proven facts. Because same-sex marriage is now legal in Australia, some concerns expressed in the source may also be outdated or not supported by later evidence.

For:

· Overseas experience shows same-sex marriage has been “entirely positive,” with marriage having a “positive and profound” impact by improving couples’ mental and physical health, commitment, and feelings of acceptance and legitimacy.

· Children of same-sex couples were reported to be “happier and better off,” feeling more “secure and protected” and benefiting from greater family stability.

· Civil unions are viewed as inferior — described by some couples as “a bit of nothing” — and do not provide the same recognition as marriage.

· Legalising same-sex marriage has not harmed heterosexual marriage rates, which continued “at the same rate as before,” sometimes increasing.

· Same-sex marriage can bring economic benefits, with weddings generating significant spending in local economies.

Gay Marriage in Australia:

· Same-sex marriage became legal in Australia on 9 December 2017 when the Marriage Act was amended to give same-sex couples the same right to marry as heterosexual couples.

· The reform followed decades of campaigning by LGBTQIA+ communities after a long history of persecution, discrimination, and criminalisation of homosexuality.

· Before legalisation, same-sex couples had fewer legal and financial rights than heterosexual couples, even after anti-discrimination laws were introduced.

· In 2004 the law was changed to define marriage as between a man and a woman, which increased public debate and led to many unsuccessful attempts to legalise same-sex marriage.

· A voluntary national postal survey in 2017 asked Australians whether the law should change; about 61.6% voted “Yes,” leading Parliament to redefine marriage as “a union of two people.”

Source 2- Nation Museum Australia

Origin

This source comes from the National Museum of Australia’s “Defining Moments” project, which presents important events in Australian history for educational purposes. It was created after marriage equality was achieved, so it reflects a historical overview rather than an argument from the time of the debate. As a government-funded museum resource, it aims to be factual and informative.

Purpose

The purpose is to educate readers about marriage equality as a significant historical event in Australia. It explains the background, key events, and outcome rather than trying to persuade readers to support or oppose the change.

Value

The source is useful because it provides a clear, factual summary of how marriage equality was achieved, including legal changes, public opinion, and historical context. It comes from a reputable national institution and is designed for students, making it reliable for understanding what happened.

Limitation

The source is mainly descriptive and does not explore arguments for or against same-sex marriage in depth. It simplifies complex debates and may leave out detailed perspectives or controversies. Because it is a summary, it cannot provide full analysis of the social or political impacts.