The primary goal of the government’s proposed ‘Single Marriage Statute’ is “to provide same-sex, transgender and ‘all other forms of marriage’ full and equal status in all respects with monogamous heterosexual marriage or the biblical definition of marriage,” says Family Poliicy Institute director Errol Naidoo.
Dismissing government’s claims that the proposed legislation is aimed at rationalising marriage laws, he writes in his latest FPI newsletter that it is the “most socially destructive policy” the government has ever proposed because it “takes a sledgehammer” to traditional marriage which is” a cornerstone institution of society”.
He says he received the discussion paper on the proposed Single Marriage Statute from the South African Law Reform Commission (SALRC), with a request for FPI comment on two legislative options to recognise and regulate “protected relationships, marriages and life partnerships”.
The first option entitled, Protected Relationships Bill and the second, Recognition and Registration of Marriages and Life Partnerships Bill seek to provide for registration, formal recognition and legal protections of those entering into these partnerships regardless of the religion, culture or beliefs of the parties, he says.
He says both options propose that “monogamous protected relationships, marriages or life partnerships, means the relationship of two people regardless of their sex, sexual orientation or gender identity to the exclusion of all others.”
“This is the main objective of sexual rights activists, to equate same-sex and other relationships – in all respects – with traditional marriage,” writes Naidoo.
He says that during debates on same-sex “marriage” in 2005, sexual rights activists vehemently opposed separate legislation to regulate their relationships. They demanded the Marriage Act of 1961 be amended to include both heterosexual and same-sex couples because as they argued, “marriage is marriage!”
He writes: “They further argued, the formulation of the ‘Civil Union Bill’ as a separate Act to formally recognise and regulate same-sex relationships was discriminatory because it implied same-sex ‘marriage’ was inferior to monogamous heterosexual marriage much like having separate entrances to the same facility for blacks and whites. Thankfully, the valid concerns of religious leaders prevailed and the Marriage Act was left intact – until now.”
Naidoo says the government has finally capitulated to consistent pressure from United Nations agencies and local sexual right groups, to redefine marriage — “an institution that faithfully served every culture over thousands of years of human history”.
“Traditional marriage is a public good for all people, in all cultures and in every civilisation. Redefining it to appease the unreasonable demands of a small group of sexual rights radicals is social suicide,” he writes.
He says the proposed Single Marriage Statute presents a serious dilemma for the Christian Church and religious marriage officers. The three separate Marriage Acts currently preclude religious marriage officers from solemnising unions that violate their conscience or convictions. However, the proposed statute provides no such leeway.
He says the The wording of the legislation also leaves the door open for the legal recognition and protection of polyamory (group marriage) and potentially inter-generational marriage (adult-child marriage).
“The ultimate goal here is to dissolve traditional marriage into a smorgasbord of humanistic options – to cater for the increasingly bizarre sexual whims of fallen mankind – which ultimately will destroy this God-given institution and the society it holds together,” writes Naidoo.
He urges Christian churches, institutions, groups and individual to make their voices heard on the proposed legislation by emailing Mr Pierre Van Wyk at email@example.com by the deadline of March 31.