John Murphy (Lowe, Australian Labor Party, Parliamentary Secretary to the Leader of the Opposition) Share this | Hansard source

I support the motion moved by the member for Ryan, which extols the virtues of marriage. What is marriage? For the purposes of the House, marriage is one of the Commonwealth government’s powers of enumerated jurisdiction, enshrined in our Commonwealth Constitution under section 51. It is right and proper, therefore, that we discuss this power.

Marriage is a natural bond between man and woman, recognised in the vast majority of cultures, whether Christian or otherwise. This universal recognition largely reflects the natural law, in that nature ordains the natural procreative function of man and woman. Marriage is therefore an essential part of the foundation and stability of the family. The institutions of family and society are the essence of what is known as the ‘common good’ from which all public interest derives.

Marriage is the natural relationship of the two different sexes. Nature reveals that this relationship is one of complementarity. Man and woman are both biologically and emotionally different. That is why they are intrinsically different creatures. Marriage mutually perfects the other so that they become one. Together, man and woman complement each other, ultimately and naturally bringing children into the world.

Marriage is a reality that exists at every level—biological, physical and spiritual. It is in the act of marriage that the spiritual reality of the joining of man and woman is given moral and legal approval. Again, this reality is recognised by the majority of people across all cultures and religions. This reality is a natural reality that is seen by the great majority of cultures worldwide. Marriage is a reality that is truly unique to the monogamous, heterosexual realm.

‘Marriage’ is well defined in section 5 of the Commonwealth Marriage Act and section 5 of the Family Law Act as ‘the union of a man and a woman to the exclusion of all others’. This definition is the only valid recognition of our civil laws which correctly reflects the natural law and moral law. You do not have to be a Catholic to reach that conclusion. You do not even have to be a Christian to reach that conclusion. In fact, you do not even have to believe in anything to draw that conclusion. Therefore, the word ‘marriage’ cannot be used to describe any form of relationship other than the union of one man and one woman to the exclusion of all others. This is so because there is no way to produce children naturally other than by a man and a woman. Technology and legal redefinition attempt to overcome this fact, but there is no other natural means by which the propagation of the species can occur.

We parliamentarians act and speak in the public interest. That is our role. It is therefore necessary for us to defend the common good. Nature speaks of the procreative function. No technocentric, cultural or ideological position or solution can substitute the way in which nature ordains the procreative function of a man and woman joined in marriage. We cannot barter or negotiate with nature; it is absolute.

This House of parliament cannot repeal the law of gravity, even if it passes a law that says it is repealed. You do not have to be a religious adherent to believe that marriage is a cornerstone of Australia’s functional society. Functional healthy societies are those that support marriage of one man to one woman for life. The case is good, therefore, for laws to support marriage and positively discriminate in favour of marriage. Laws that favour marriage make good economic, social and political sense. Our duty towards the common good compels us to draft laws that recognise, promote and protect marriage. The family unit depends on the healthy support of marriage. Marriage is therefore the primary unit of a functional society. It is for the common good of Australia that laws are made that reflect positive support for the family and for marriage, for marriage and the family are inseparable. You cannot have functional families without laws that support marriage or vice versa. That is why our family laws and marriage laws were amended recently to give long awaited recognition to the statutory definition of ‘marriage’ as being ‘the union of one man and one woman to the exclusion of all others’.

That said, we are all let down by those who are naive enough to mask their support for marriage and who employ it as a weapon to attack the many other relationships in our society. Such attacks are unconscionable, unnecessary and unjustified. In concluding, I am therefore pleased to support this motion and an institution that has well served our society and countless other societies for many thousands of years.

See this speech in context