'Sarriage' solution to gay marriage debate
Wed, 30 Jan 2013 1:59p.m.
By Laura McQuillan
Renaming gay marriage as "sarriage" would end divisions over marriage equality, Parliament has been told in a quirky submission on marriage equality legislation.
The Government administration committee heard a mix of views today, including from Russell Morrison, who is concerned the bill will give the word "marriage" more than one meaning.
"There are already too many words in our language with multiple meanings and I don't believe that we should be adding to that situation," he said.
He says the words "marry" and "marriage" are understood to refer to a man and a woman, so he's come up with his own solution to avoid any confusion: "sarry" and "sarriage".
"Then a person can be asked whether he or she is married or sarried, and the response will make the situation clear for everybody."
Mr Morrison said MPs may have already dismissed it as a "crackpot idea", perhaps because they don't like the word or because they don't think it's up to Parliament to introduce new words into language.
"If that's the case, I have to ask whose role that is, and why shouldn't Parliament do so if it sees the need?" he said.
"If you don't like the word, by all means use something else. But if you actually try saying it for a little while over and over it doesn't actually sound so out of place."
Meanwhile, Michael Roberts of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints told the committee that redefining marriage will have a negative impact on families, children and society.
Green MP Kevin Hague put it to Mr Roberts that the Mormon church has already redefined marriage by banning its former practice of polygamy.
After a lengthy pause, Mr Roberts said the ban resulted from the law "asking us to reconsider that".
He also expressed concerns about the possibility that churches could be breaking the law if they refuse to marry gay couples and asked that if the legislation is to proceed, that the Mormon church is given an exemption.
Post a Comment
Before commenting, please take the time to read our moderation guide
(Won't be published)
2/03/2013 4:09:38 p.m.
Possible equivalent words that gays/lesbians can use instead of the heterosexual term marriage are: Smarriage, SSmarriage, Lesrriage, Layrriage, Gayrriage, Barriage, Darriage, Farriage, Nahrriage, Porriage, Tearriage, Xrriage.....Don't STEAL the word, marriage. It specific to man and woman and is not an identical, equal relationship for man-man or woman-woman.
10/02/2013 4:38:07 p.m.
Two points I would like to raise. You say "...we don't stone people for homosexuality do we?" This depends on your definition of we. If we = humans, we still do. There are at least 76 countries that actively punish "against sexual activity by lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender or intersex people (LGBTIs)." With stoning, sadly, still practiced in some. Also, can you back up where marriage was practiced that was not between man & woman, unless you are referring to animals, as historical evidence shows that from Celtic times to the 21st century this has occurred, but surely you are not endorsing this in your argument, are you?
10/02/2013 3:29:03 p.m.
Pre christianity, Greek male intellectuals had a wife for procreation and a boy for sexual pleasure, why do they not today? The Romans were also rather open about homosexuality, what happened to them? No children can issue from a homosexual union, as such, I believe homosexuality is about sexual deviancy as it offers nothing to the coninuation of the human race which is a fundamental biological necessity. Children or civil union, your choice.
5/02/2013 2:19:39 p.m.
One law for all, regardless of race, gender, class or sexuality. What's next if we continue to prohibit gays from this basic right they're entiltled to? Will racists demand the end of inter-racial marriage? Because the homophobes got what they wanted so why can't they?
5/02/2013 10:52:18 a.m.
@ Owen, its about equality, if we use another word we will be forced to have this same debate in 12 months time because whatever the new word is it will be turned into a derogatory term. Also I am interested in how you came to the conclusion that marriage has "always" been between a man and woman? where ever your info came from (no doubt some religious cult) it is wrong. You say you have no problem with gay people but if that is true then why do you want to discriminate against them? untill equality is realised there will always be discrimination, its time the religious woke up to the fact that just because a story book says it is evil doesnt mean anything, it also says that gay people should be stoned to death but we dont do that anymore do we
4/02/2013 6:02:07 p.m.
Marriage is between man and woman. It always was and should always be. Why do the gay community want the name that man and woman have? Surely they could opt for another name! To me with them wanting it to be 'marriage' is putting our belief in the sanctity of marriage at risk. I for one would rather they accepted another name for it rather than making a mockery of what I entered into many years ago. Believe me I have no problem with gay people and I admire them for being so up front with their choices but they should not expect to claim the word marriage with their unions.
4/02/2013 12:45:26 p.m.
It's funny how radio stations, media and even the select committee speak highly and FOR gay marriage. Like we keep saying.. "We are NOT AGAINST GAYS" we just don't think the definition of 'marriage' should be re-defined. Gays have civil unions and saying that allowing gay marriage will end percentage of suicide is just pathetic. Someone should show stats of suicide 'before civil unions' and 'after civil unions' and see what the difference is. Then we can predict how much of a difference changing the wording of 'civil union' and 'marriage' will make.
3/02/2013 6:17:14 p.m.
That is the most pathetic thing I have heard in a long time..Marriage is a commitment between 2 people...you don't have to make up a new word for Gay people to use...we have a word so use it...Its Marriage...Sod the bible and all the hypocrites who follow it..come on everyone Life is too short for all this nonsense.
3/02/2013 4:10:20 p.m.
At the last election there was no mandate sought for the politicians to consider gay marriage,yet here we are right in the middle of the most contentious issue that we have had in New Zealand for a long time,we have a panel hearing submissions who use thug tactics against anyone who are not in favour of gay marriage ,they interrogate and ridicule them,hardly fair play.
It has always been my opinion that the medias ideals are to seek out the news,confirm it and publish , not so on this subject,it appears they only seek out news that is in favour of gay marriage,they also block posts on these sites that dose not meet the above criteria.
I think the people of New Zealand are getting a real poor deal from the media,the politicians,the community leaders, the church leaders,they all seem to be frozen in time.It is time everybody woke up and see this legislation for what it is.
31/01/2013 11:53:59 a.m.
@ BEN, dont you know, the bible is only the word of god when it says nice things, all the bad things are just miss interperated or arent to be taken literally. It makes me laugh when people demand that we should live by the rules in the bible when the only people that actually follow the bible properly are terrorists and extremists. If you cherry pick you arent a true christian!
Police had to physically push anti-poverty protestors back after they tried to b...
Tonight comes the Budget announcement you didn't hear yesterday – Food for Schoo...
Viewers overwhelming voted yes to decriminalising soft drugs during TV3's nation...
A petition boasting more than 37,000 signatures against the use of animal testin...
The Police Commissioner Peter Marshall has threatened to discipline any staff wh...
Copyright © 2013 MediaWorks TV. All Rights Reserved.