Family First NZ, a registered charity (Reg. No. CC10094) that was registered with the Charities Commission on 21 March 2007, has announced that: “A website to protect the current definition of marriage as ‘one man one woman’ has been launched today. The website is www.protectmarriage.org.nz and has been launched in response to the private members bill of Labour MP Louisa Wall which seeks to redefine marriage.” [The registrant of the domain name protectmarriage.org.nz is Family First NZ, which purchased it on 4/08/2011].
“The website will provide research, latest news, quotes of interest, free downloadable resources about the role and function of marriage, and will host an online petition which will be presented to Parliament,” says Bob McCoskrie, National Director of Family First NZ. “It also has the haveyoursay tool which enables people to easily contact their local MP, all MP’s, or a select group of MP’s to express their view.”
“Politicians have been hammered recently with the reasons for taking the twink bottle to the dictionary and to redefine ‘marriage’. This website will help balance the debate. Ultimately, the state – which did not invent marriage – has no authority to re-invent it.”
Family First also rejects the notion that NZ’ers are ready for same-sex marriage. In the US, polls have also shown support for same-sex marriage increasing, yet in every state where the issue has been on the ballet, voters have rejected it.
“Equality does not mean we must redefine marriage. Same-sex couples have the option of civil unions to recognise their relationship so there is no need for redefining marriage. If the law was redefined to allow same-sex marriage, and only same-sex marriage, we would then be discriminating against those seeking, for example, polygamous, polyamorous, or adult incest unions,” says Mr McCoskrie. “If we are going to have a debate about same-sex marriage and liberalising adoption laws, it is essential that the politicians acknowledge just how far this is going to go.”
“Almost every culture in every time and place has had some institution that resembles what we know as marriage, and it has always been associated with procreation. Every society needs natural marriage. Nature also discriminates against same-sex couples. Same-sex couples cannot have children. Only a man and a woman can produce children. This discloses something of the purposes and providence of nature, and the role and purpose of marriage,”
“We would encourage politicians to spend their valuable time focussing on major issues such as family poverty, negotiating our way through the world recession, child abuse, and getting people employed – rather than taking to the dictionary with a twink bottle,” says Mr McCoskrie.