NEWS SA debate on gay marriage yields some suprising support November 01, 2004 Allan Boesak CAPE TOWN — Saturday's debate on same-sex marriages saw politicians Gareth Morgan from the DA and Lance Greyling from the Independent Democrats agreeing with the issue, while Allan Boesak presented a solid argument that the Bible is not always taken in the context of modern life. The debate formed part of the Triangle Project's annual Sex and Kultuur festival, and the issue of same-sex marriage featured as a result of the recent publicity around the court action filed by the Equality Project. Wendy Isaacs was present to defend the Equality Project's legal angle, and Dr Yvette Abrahams from UWC's Historical Research spoke about traditional same-sex relationships in other African cultures, particularly in Zimbabwe and the Khoi Khoi culture. Prof Pierre de Vos from UWC Faculty of Law slated marriage as a institution, saying that it was outdated and obsolete and should be abolished, but that while it continues to exist it should be available to all. The discussion was chaired by Bishop David Russell, a retired bishop of the Anglican Church. The general tone of the debate was one of agreement with the issue, as the expected dissenting voice of the ACDP failed to show up. Speaking first, Boesak set the tone by stating that it was time to approach the issue in a different way from the traditional one. He said that no-one who enjoys certain rights has the right to deny the same rights to others. He questioned what marriage was really about, saying that if it was about companionship, about living a clean and decent lifestyle and combining incomes to achieve an improved standard of living, then why should it be limited to heterosexual couples. He felt that conflicting viewpoints should be confronted, and the matter be brought to a speedy conclusion. Both the political representatives quoted their party's acceptance of the constitution, with the DA representative stating unequivocally that the law should catch up with society and that it should have no choice but to recognise same-sex marriages. Yvette Abrahams spoke about the fact that adulthood in African cultures revolved around the family, and the lack of legal recognition meant that same-sex couples were condemned to endure child status all their lives. Wendy Isaacs took the discrimination line, saying that while same-sex marriages remain unrecognised, gays and lesbians were still a social group that was being discriminated against. That relegated homosexuals to the status of second-class citizens, and ensured that her relationship of ten years standing was not worthy of the same respect as that of her heterosexual sister who had been married for two months. Lance Greyling from the Independent Democrats promised support if the Gay and Lesbian organizations lead the process for recognition, resulting in a challenge from Dawn Betteridge, director of the Triangle Project, that politicians were elected by the people to represent all social groupings and that the onus fell on them to identify discrimination wherever it existed and to take measures to address it, rather than waiting for the group being discriminated against to take the lead. Throughout the debate, the emphasis was on the fact that religious acceptance was not what was being sought, but that legal recognition was required in terms of the constitution, which allows for all citizens to marry a person of their choice. Until the laws change, however, that only applies to a person of choice if they happen to be of the opposite gender. This was particularly important for under-resourced persons, where poverty ensured that partnership agreements and wills were luxuries and the death of an intestate partner often left the surviving partner destitute, even after a long period of co-habitation and combined resources. From the floor, Elna Boesak questioned whether the media gave similar priority to homosexual issues as it did to women's issues and Aids, or whether these issues were largely ignored. Yvette Abrahams concluded the debate on the point that as a black female activist during the Apartheid years, she knew who the enemy was. "After being part of the struggle for so many years, I still don't enjoy equal rights under the government I fought for, and I find that confusing and hurtful", she said. – issued by Triangle Project Related stories It's Sex and Kultuur time again! [15/10/2004]