Argument
The main argument is that the majority of Australia would like to have marriage equality but powerful individuals believe it is not an important issue. Rodney Croome, national director of Australian Marriage Equality argued that it is only a matter of time before same-sex marriage legalises. However, Senator Eric Abetz believes that same-sex marriage is highly trivial at this point in time and should not be discussed. This notion was disputed by Keegan Buzza, who believes that Abetz is unaware of the full extent of the issue.
Rodney Croome argued that the Australian community wants same-sex marriage legalised. The public has shown immense support in marriage equality such as through social media and thus, this proves that Australia is at a point where same-sex marriage is highly important. So, even though the Government wants to delay responding to the issue; it would only be a matter of time before the Government has to react to the public’s want. Croome’s argument was contrasted by Senator Eric Abetz.
Abetz had a strong stance in this report. Abetz view on marriage equality was that it is not a priority for Australia. In fact, he …show more content…
In my opinion, Rodney Croome’s argument was significantly valid. As social media has shown in their support in same-sex marriage, it would only be a matter of time before Australia legalises it. The only significant hurdle that was presented in the report was the Government. Senators like Eric Abetz downplay the importance of this issue. Through their political views, marriage equality is seen as an insignificant topic that does not need to be discussed. Furthermore, Abetz’s comparison between Asia and Australia was, in my opinion ridiculous. It was a poor excuse to deflect from the real or no reason behind not legalising same-sex marriage. The comparison between the two countries was absurd, as the religions and cultures are so
The main argument is that the majority of Australia would like to have marriage equality but powerful individuals believe it is not an important issue. Rodney Croome, national director of Australian Marriage Equality argued that it is only a matter of time before same-sex marriage legalises. However, Senator Eric Abetz believes that same-sex marriage is highly trivial at this point in time and should not be discussed. This notion was disputed by Keegan Buzza, who believes that Abetz is unaware of the full extent of the issue.
Rodney Croome argued that the Australian community wants same-sex marriage legalised. The public has shown immense support in marriage equality such as through social media and thus, this proves that Australia is at a point where same-sex marriage is highly important. So, even though the Government wants to delay responding to the issue; it would only be a matter of time before the Government has to react to the public’s want. Croome’s argument was contrasted by Senator Eric Abetz.
Abetz had a strong stance in this report. Abetz view on marriage equality was that it is not a priority for Australia. In fact, he …show more content…
In my opinion, Rodney Croome’s argument was significantly valid. As social media has shown in their support in same-sex marriage, it would only be a matter of time before Australia legalises it. The only significant hurdle that was presented in the report was the Government. Senators like Eric Abetz downplay the importance of this issue. Through their political views, marriage equality is seen as an insignificant topic that does not need to be discussed. Furthermore, Abetz’s comparison between Asia and Australia was, in my opinion ridiculous. It was a poor excuse to deflect from the real or no reason behind not legalising same-sex marriage. The comparison between the two countries was absurd, as the religions and cultures are so