Claire Gummer: Opponents of civil union gay-bashers in disguise

COMMENT

People who oppose civil union generally equate it to marriage, and suggest the Civil Union Bill will undermine that institution.

This "imitation" argument is one with which many potential candidates for civil union, the Prime Minister included, vehemently disagree. Many of us have neither dreamed of nor desired marriage. Civil union, on the other hand, is an idea we can live with; perhaps even an institution we can enter happily with our partners.

But let us, for a moment, go along with the idea that civil union is an imitation of marriage. How could this be a problem? Imitation is, as the saying goes, the sincerest form of flattery. It does not seek to undermine.

In the case of civil union, it does not seek even to profit by illegitimately using the good name of the original, as do the purveyors of pretend Rolex, Nike and the like.

Marriage is undermined by its own monopoly, if anything. Many men and women who marry each other do so because they lack an alternative, rather than because they wish to tie the knot in the traditional way.

This entry into matrimony by a host of reluctant recruits who would rather be elsewhere must surely weaken the structure of marriage. Perhaps it has a bearing on the increasing number of marital breakdowns.

The introduction of civil unions as an alternative choice will, therefore, leave marriage intact. It may even strengthen it.

Marriage proponents who attack civil union are making a big mistake. Attacking others' choices - or seeking to limit them, as opponents of the Civil Union Bill are doing - is not the way to market marriage. (And if marriage needs anything today, it is an A-grade marketing campaign.)

Anyone who wants to strengthen marriage should promote it as a positive lifestyle choice rather than deriding gays and lesbians.

Deriding gays and lesbians is what this opposition to civil union comes down to. For while many of the beneficiaries of the Civil Union Bill will be heterosexual couples, what really frightens the bill's opponents (the United Future Party, the Maxim Institute, Catholic bishops and inveterate letter-writers) is the possibility that gay and lesbian couples may be accepted and welcomed as fully functioning and contributing members of society.

The argument that marriage may be undermined by civil union is simply a smokescreen for this truth.

Fear drives people to desperation. A Herald letter-writer who described Tim Barnett, the mild-mannered, kindly MP for Christchurch Central, as "rabid" must be deeply fearful and, indeed, desperate.

The letter described Mr Barnett as "a dangerous man to society". The comment seems odd, given that the MP is merely following his principles in accordance with New Zealand law.

The United Future leader, Peter Dunne, has told the Herald that his advertisement against the Civil Union Bill was not anti-homosexual. But its attack on what it calls "pink think" revealed the true anti-homosexual nature.

The words "pink think" appear to have been carefully chosen as a subtle but recognisable synonym for gay agenda (let us save the debate about whether such an agenda exists for another day).

United Future's advertisement goes on to insult couples who may be candidates for civil union by dismissing the bill as "silliness".

My partner and I celebrate our 15th anniversary in less than a week. We have been through a great deal together, we love each other and we plan a united future - though emphatically not of the party political kind.

Undergoing a civil union would help to show this, as well as to gain recognition of our relationship. For people like us, talk of "silliness" is deeply offensive.

As for United Future's talk of there being more pressing social and economic concerns, was this not true when the party advocated the formation of its Family Commission? Or does United Future have double standards that preclude support for another initiative promoting close, stable, healthy relationships?

Many men, women and children can vouch for the fact that there is nothing to fear from such relationships, whether heterosexual, gay or lesbian. Indeed, they contribute to the civil society we all want.

* Claire Gummer is a member of GayWatch.