PDA

View Full Version : Couple vow to divorce if Australia legalises same-sex marriage



Serpo
10th June 2015, 04:45 PM
Couple vow to divorce if Australia legalises same-sex marriage http://www.stuff.co.nz/etc/designs/ffx/nz/stuff/clientlibs-all/images/icon_video.png
Last updated 08:16, June 11 2015













smh
Nick Jensen explains the logic behind his vow to divorce his wife over gay marriage.



An Australian couple have vowed to get a divorce, ending their "sacred" 10-year union, if Australia follows New Zealand's lead and allows same-sex couples to legally marry.
Nick Jensen and his wife Sarah believe widening the definition of marriage to include same-sex couples threatens the sacred nature of the union and leaves the door open to polygamy.
The Christian couple, from Canberra, have been happily married for over a decade, have no intention of separating and hope to have more children. For all intents and purposes they have a healthy marriage.
http://www.stuff.co.nz/content/dam/images/1/5/9/2/g/h/image.related.StuffLandscapeSixteenByNine.620x349. 1592gz.png/1433968395743.jpg Facebook/Sarah Jensen
Sarah and Nick Jensen say they are doing their bit to "save" marriage.



But in a novel protest against any successful move to legalise same sex-marriage in Australia, Jensen wrote in an article published in Canberra CityNews on Wednesday (http://citynews.com.au/2015/gay-law-change-may-force-us-to-divorce/) that they are prepared to divorce.
"My wife and I, as a matter of conscience, refuse to recognise the government's regulation of marriage if its definition includes the solemnisation of same sex couples," said Jensen, who is director of the Lachlan Macquarie Institute, which partners with the Australian Christian Lobby (http://www.lachlanmacquarieinternship.org.au/partners.aspx) to offer scholarships designed to develop a Christian worldview and foster leaders in government policy.
Jensen said he and his wife entered into their marriage "as a fundamental order of creation, part of God's intimate story for human history, man and woman, for the sake of children, faithful and for life".
"And so, if later on in the year the state does go ahead and changes the definition of marriage and changes the terms of that contract then we can no longer partake in that new definition unfortunately," he said.
Legalising same-sex marriage would undermine "our most sacred institution, and have serious consequences for children who would grow up without a mother or father," Jensen said.
He also feared that recognising same-sex couples would mean that the definition of marriage could be expanded even further.
"Once you say that marriage is detached from children, [that it's] just about love, then when three people come to the state and say 'well we're all in love', then the state has no grounds, except unjust discrimination, to say why they can't get married," he said.
"When it becomes detached to the child's right to a mother and a father and the sacred institution that it is, then suddenly it becomes meaningless and those boundaries can't be put back in place," he said.
The move is in stark contrast to high-profile celebrities who have vowed not to marry until gay marriage is legalised.
While Brad Pitt and Angelina Jolie reneged on their promise not to marry in 2014, former Wallabies captain David Pocock and his partner Emma Palandri pledged in 2011 (http://www.canberratimes.com.au/act-news/pocock-palandri-to-seal-the-deal-when-same-sex-marriage-allowed-around-australia-20131025-2w5rw.html)to not get married until same-sex marriage was legalised in Australia.http://www.stuff.co.nz/life-style/love-sex/69287363/couple-vow-to-divorce-if-australia-legalises-samesex-marriage

singular_me
10th June 2015, 05:08 PM
swing pendulum, swing... swing... sure gay marriages are going to deter heteros from getting married... you gotta love dualism here... while the state should *not* have a say at all to start with.


http://www.davidicke.com/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2015/06/Untitled9-587x390.jpg

Glass
10th June 2015, 05:41 PM
yes but the contract of marriage is not the same as holy matrimony or wedlock. Different things. People don't seem to know that marriage is not what men and women do but is a 3 way commercial contract in which the State gets a claim on the increase from the joint venture.

Since marriage became a thing conducted by celebrants outside of holy venues it became pretty obvious it was not the real thing. Of course most people don't qualify to be joined in a holy venue because they don't meet the criteria set out by the religions.

Then of course religions abandoned their trusts and entered into the commercial world by becoming incorporated for the purposes of taxation. So they can't perform holy matrimony services anyway. So no holy matrimony and no one who could perform it, if it were wanted. Which apparently it is not.

Cebu_4_2
10th June 2015, 05:57 PM
Marriage to the state or marriage by the church, both are no longer valid avenues of true marriage. How would one have a true marriage these days?

Serpo
11th June 2015, 03:54 AM
Marriage to the state or marriage by the church, both are no longer valid avenues of true marriage. How would one have a true marriage these days?

By getting married without a contract by a third person , in front of God any where.

Maybe later get the gov contract............