One Nation Party leader Pauline Hanson is pushing Malcolm Turnbull to settle the marriage issue with a referendum that would include a definition of marriage legally bound into the constitution.
The Australian reports:
The One Nation Party leader wants a “fresh and clear definition” of marriage built into the constitution, so future parliaments cannot cave into demands to extend marriage rights.
“A plebiscite simply gives the green light for legislative change to include same-sex marriage. However, that legislation could run the risk of being revoked or further altered to pave the way for reducing the marriageable age or the introduction of polygamy,” a party spokesman said.
“By holding a referendum on the matter, it provides a fresh and clear definition of marriage, that can be enshrined into the Australian constitution. Therefore, that definition cannot be altered by future Governments without a follow-up referendum.”
Even without the debate over whether to decide this issue through a referendum or a plebiscite, Hanson’s comments raise an important point: if we decide in this instance that the definition of marriage can be changed by the Parliament without the input of the public, we will not be able to ensure that marriage will not be further redefined for reasons of political expediency. When a society decides to make allowances for the sexual preferences of one group, it has no logical reason to disallow the sexual preferences of other groups to slip into law as well. Legalising same-sex marriage would damage society by opening the door for a whole new host of laws designed to do nothing but affirm sexual preferences. Ask yourself whether the question: “Is this really the last change to the definition of marriage you will be asked to accept?”