Aussie sampling
Well, the Aussies have gone ahead and done it. Gay marriage has just been approved by their parliament; this after an overwhelming majority of Australians expressed their "preferences" in a national poll. And just this Friday, December 8 (right in time for Immaculate Concepcion), Australia's governor general signed the law into effectivity.
What took you so long, Australia? What with the world famous Sydney Pride marches and the Gay Games (the gay version of the Olympics), events that made homo life so ubiquitous down under (hello Priscilla!), it seemed the country was, at least in respect to marriage, lagging far behind the other western liberal democracies.
This sort of baiting is pointless, actually, as finally, gay marriage is here. (I mean, there.) For those not yet married, a 30-day waiting period is necessary before the license can be used. For those already married in other countries, they would automatically be recognized by the state.
And us? Nothing happening on that front within our coconut republic, despite having an openly transgender congresswoman, and popular gay and transgender bloggers able to galvanize mass supporters into action. Instead, we have some senators who have even expressed opposition to the very concept, so I would guess that despite the sweeping changes we see in civil society, that same changes ain't happening in the marital front.
Speaking of sweeping changes, I wonder if what happened to America right after Obama led the charge to legalize gay marriage will also happen to Australia, now that it's followed suit. Will a leader that will appeal to ultra-conservative, less affluent, blue collar voters likewise gain ground in Aussie, and end up taking over the helm of the entire country?
I remember the sensational news when the US Supreme Court struck down discriminatory laws and allowed gay marriages to proceed. "Victory for liberals, victory for democracy!" was the battle cry. The future was here, and America was leading the way! (Despite many other western countries having legalized it years before America did).
Well, the Deep South and the Midwest weren't too happy with a Supreme Court deciding for them, and a backlash came quickly after. Some speculate this was part of the reason why the Democrats lost the presidential elections: because the populace felt that the existing government wasn't listening to them.
Will the fact that the Australian citizens had been given the chance to voice out before the legislators pushed the bill into binding legislation be the crucial difference? Will the overwhelming majority that expressed their conformity to "Love is Love" help quiet and calm down the vocal bigots?
Perhaps that should be the strategy that should be followed here. Take a poll. Ask the ordinary Filipino what he thinks. Take the pulse of the nation.
But does the man on the street really care whether two persons of the same sex are allowed to marry? Is it something they even think about? Will they even vote, if given the chance? Or is this non-readiness or non-acceptance merely being projected on them by the bigots? Or perhaps, a superficial belief fed to them by their idols in government or the blogs or radio personalities, that they parrot what they are fed?
More likely, the man on the street would actually prefer to focus on peace. Being allowed to make a living, safe from extrajudicial killings, and given the basic tools for survival like decent education and job opportunities.
Oh well. It's a long time since anyone listened to Juan, anyway, so this is wishful thinking. Government can't even provide them decent transport or a driver's license. Why should Juan be given tools for rational, dispassionate thought?
The party's in Aussie.
- Latest
