Rodney Croome . gay advocate

E-mail of the day: "old, tired and sick"

Marriage equality isn’t a threat to sexual diversity.

"Dreadnought" wasn’t happy with my responses to his recent comments about same-sex marriage and about the Pope.

"The more traditional recognition (that comes with marriage) merely recognises the union of one man and one woman. It necessarily excludes homosexuals. It's like slotting a square peg into a round hole Rodney.

"That's why I prefer civil unions. They allow us to recognise that homo partnerships are different to hetero partnerships and provide room to create our own tradition/s.

"Just because some homos want to pretend to be heteros, co-opting unsuitable rituals, doesn't mean thinking people or rights advocates should support them. This mad rush into 'sameness' at the cost of celebrating our uniqueness troubles me."

Just because marriage has traditionally been for opposite-sex couples doesn’t mean it must remain that way. Up until last century women traditionally did not participate in politics. And anyway what is "traditional"? Some same-sex unions were considered "marriages" in many indigenous and pre-industrial societies.

Sly metaphors about pegs and holes aren’t enough to explain why marriage "necessarily excludes homosexuals". Marriage is a public affirmation of a couple’s deep love and commitment. Heterosexuals do not have a monopoly over these things.

As for "the rush into sameness", I am not an assimilationist. There are differences between LGBT and mainstream culture which are important and valuable.

But I can’t see how the recognition of the profoundly important things we share with other people is a threat to these differences.

If our differences are worth anything they will survive an equal rights campaign. In fact if they are positive, constructive differences then they will be enhanced when LGBT people come in from the cold.

I’m not a militarist but I fought for the right of LGBT people to serve in the defence force. I’m not religious, but I support the right of LGBT people to full participation in their churches.

On each of these issues I was accused of wanting to turn queer people into imitation straights.

But history has shown that sexual and gender diversity is still strong despite progress on these fronts. Indeed LGBT people are making a more valuable contribution as LGBT people, than ever before.

The reason for this apparent contradiction is that it’s not oppression, exclusion and pain which makes LGBT culture different and our experience special. Our suffering is not valuable in-and-of itself. When LGBT people enrich humanity with our difference that enrichment is about love, joy and creativity.

We are in a much better position to enrich, when we are treated equally and with respect.

"Equal" doesn’t mean "same". In fact, sometimes more of one means less of the other.

"Oh, and the point about the Pope was that keeping him on shows that the Church is serious about the dignity and abilities of people who are suffering or disabled.

"Even shaking, dribbling and obviously tired he's doing a better job of running the massive Church structures than I am doing at running my silly little life!

"Old, tired and sick does not equal useless Rodney."

Now who’s using disingenuous PC arguments, eh?

If the church really cared about the well-being of people with disabilities and serious illness, it would stop using John Paul II as a vehicle for promoting an oppressive ideology about suffering, and move him into a position that is more appropriate to his energy levels, and less threatening to his longevity (it would also start supporting safe-sex programs in developing countries, but that’s another issue).

The problem with the way the Pope runs the church is that he doesn’t. Others do it in his name. History shows that regencies are dominated by ambitious and corrupt men and women. If this regency hasn’t gone the same way yet, it soon will.

Despite their affection for "Farmer George" the British had the good sense to shuffle George III off when he started to lose it. They weren’t showing disrespect for the man. They were showing respect for the office. It’s time for Catholics to do the same.