Redefine marriage and you'll encourage polygamist agendas. At least that's the view of the Australian Christian Lobby (ACL), and one I share.
According to the ACL, "It's important that the definition of marriage remains the union of a man and a woman" not two men or two women – and certainly not four women and one man.
Also, "It's important that marriage is not watered down to include polygamy, such as is being debated in Canada."
The uncomfortable truth: In Canada, where marriage was redefined, Muslim fundamentalists and scripture-twisting cults want their versions of "equality" too.
Canadian multiculturalists are pushing polygamy.
It didn't take long. On July 20, 2005, Canada adopted a politically-correct and therefore divisive "gender-neutral" marriage definition. Today, polygamy is a contentious issue.
Or to quoteThe Globe and Mail Editorial: "Canada's law against polygamy should be upheld." And: "Barring polygamy remains a reasonable limit on religious freedom and a potent reminder that the law must protect the vulnerable and the equality rights and human dignity of women and children."
It's a persuasive argument but one undermined by redefining marriage in the first place. Christians warned this would happen. The result: more divisions, less unity.
Diluting marriage will strengthen inequality.
In slippery slope Canada, Queen's University law professor Beverley Baines advances the position that anti-polygamous laws encourage abuse by isolating religious communities (often code for cults) and has called for Section 293 to be struck from the Criminal Code.
In other words, if it's controversial, go soft, make allowances, and appease multiculturalists.