Presented orally on 18 July 2000 to
The Justice & Electoral [Select] Committee of Parliament.
by Wellington Christian Apologetics Society (Inc.)
Introduction:
In summary: The effect of changes to the Matrimonial Property Amendment Bill proposed in SOP 25 will primarily be injurious to the public good. It should not proceed.
"Because marriage contributes to a range of benefits to individuals and social order and because of its preferred status, it is unwise to establish legislation that is likely to have a negative effect on that status. For example, marriage is entered into on the basis of trust and commitment. It is not, even at the level of property rights a benefit that can be arbitrarily bestowed by laws primarily concerned with the rights of individuals. It is not a contract. It is not even about boring rights and responsibilities. It is a pledge on the exchange of favours and restrictions between two people of the opposite sex because they have characteristics and needs peculiar to being members of the opposite sex. It is a pledge in which the public and social dimensions of the need to raise children are paramount. Sexual fidelity is therefore an intrinsic component."
[Bruce Logan, Director of the New Zealand Education Development Foundation. From public seminar address given to the Wellington Christian Apologetics Society (Inc.), Turnbull House, Wellington. 30 June to 1 July 2000].
Wellington Christian Apologetics Society (Inc.) |