Cory Bernadi's recent speech in the Senate linking homosexuality to bestiality illustrated how inverted and confused politics in Australia has become.
Bernadi and other so called common sense conservatives contend that amending the marriage act to allow gay couples to marry is a case of extreme left-wing politics. As if gay marriage is a radical and abstract liberal idea.
In fact, conservatism and gay marriage are no longer irreconcilable. Indeed the most persuasive arguments in favour of gay marriage are distinctly conservative.
The most cogent argument is based upon facts. Studies in psychiatry and neuro-psychology have for decades demonstrated that an individual's sexual orientation is not a matter of choice. Those who contend otherwise have a narrow understanding of the established science.
Pragmatism and established facts have never bothered conservatives. Facts are the domain of realists and help demolish loosely constructed theoretical ideas. In light of the facts the millennia old idea that marriage must solely be a heterosexual phenomenon collapses.
Second, those who take exception to perceived aspects of gay life should welcome the institution of gay marriage. Wouldn't the alleged promiscuity inherent within the gay community benefit from the edifying influence of marriage? Of course it is spurious to claim that gay couples do not equally value fidelity. At a time when heterosexuals are increasingly spurning commitment, here is a group that is championing the institution of marriage. Perhaps gay couples might even coax straight couples back on to the marital path?
Third, people choose marriage for a wide range of reasons, not just to start a family. In affluent societies young married couples are increasingly eschewing large families and instead focusing on advancing their careers. Others choose to not have children at all. We do not revoke the marriage certificates of those who decide not to be parents, or those who are unable to have children.
Fourth, the children's rights argument is weak and particularly misleading. The parental debate should not automatically be attached to the marriage debate. Yet it is important to note that our society legally acknowledges the parental status of gay couples that already have children. What is the benefit of preventing these couples from marrying?
Fifth, the attempt by some conservatives to apply religious tenets to the debate has become tedious. Theological suppositions