同性“婚姻”真的是包治百病的良药吗?Is Same Sex Marriage really a Silver Bullet?

近来,同性“婚姻”立法的议题,再度成为澳洲社会的热点。先有几大知名企业强迫员工支持同性“婚姻”,后有自由党议员给现任政府施压,怂恿联合政府背弃大选时做出的承诺,不经过全民公投,直接在议会对“同性婚姻”法案进行表决。一时间,同运激进人士,似乎正在扫平澳洲同婚立法的道路上高歌猛进。同时,支持传统婚姻家庭的“沉默”大多数,也打破沉默,表明自己的立场,大声对同运霸权说不,敦促联合政府兑现承诺。

不可否认,由于支持传统婚姻的人士“沉默”的时间太长,媒体舆论已经一边倒地支持同婚。在关于婚姻平权的辩论中,我们似乎处于下风。但是,媒体的煽情和渲染,无法掩盖真相,在事实面前,谎言不攻自破。

Same-sex marriage has again become the focus of Australian society in recent days. We hear about big corporate companies putting pressure on employees to support same-sex marriage, and Liberal Party members putting pressure on the government to ditch its election promise of a plebiscite. It seems as if LGBTI activists are gradually removing all roadblocks to their goals. At the same time, the silent majority who support traditional marriage are finally starting to break their silence and voicing their request that the government deliver its promise of a people’s vote on marriage.

It may seem at times that the silent majority has been “silent” for so long that most media outlets are now on the side of same-sex marriage. However, more and more facts are being revealed about the real consequences of same-sex marriage that cannot be covered up.

支持同性婚姻的人士,常常引用的论据有两点。第一,同性吸引乃是“天生”,因此必须给予其“平等”的“婚姻”权。第二,同性恋、跨性别、双性人等群体,在生理、心理等方面,面临的所有问题,都是由于社会歧视造成的,只要给予其“平等”的“婚姻”权,所有问题都会迎刃而解。总而言之,同性“婚姻”,对于LGBTI群体而言,就是包治百病的良药。

事实真是如此吗? 澳洲本地网站 www.thebigdealaboutmarriage.com.au 对大量相关研究进行分析总结,为我们提供了宝贵的思路。

LGBTI activists often use the following two arguments to support same-sex marriage: firstly, that people are born gay, and secondly, that the issues experienced by the LGBTI community are due to discrimination and achieving marriage “equality” will resolve these issues.

Is it truly the case that, for the LGBTI community, same sex marriage holds the answer to it all? Large scale studies summarised by the Australian website www.thebigdealaboutmarriage.com.au suggest otherwise. Here are some facts about this issue:

 insurance-1991213_1920.jpg

 

第一,同性吸引并非“天生”。

大量研究表明,性取向的成因复杂,与生理因素和社会环境因素均有联系。造成性取向差异的因素中,生理因素充其量只占三分之一,而环境因素占三分之二,是决定性因素。

而且,至少对于某些人来说,性取向是流动的,根据不同的情况,男性和女性,都能对他们产生吸引。由此可见,性取向是可以改变的。对于希望改变自己性取向的人来说,治疗的效果是可持续的,研究对象中,超过半数接受治疗的人,治疗并没有造成额外的伤害或烦恼。

虽然同性恋行为可追溯到远古时期,但LGBT历史学家们却暗示,“同性恋”成为身份标识,是150年前才在西方文化中第一次出现,因此是近代才出现的“社会构造”。

综上所述,同性吸引即非天生,又不是一成不变,且澳洲同性伴侣已经可以合法生活在一起,在各方面均拥有与异性事实婚姻伴侣同样的权利。而婚姻是社会的基本制度,改变婚姻的定义,必定会颠覆人类社会赖以生存和发展的基础,对社会的每一个成员,都会造成无法挽回的后果。我们为何要为了“同性恋”这一数量未知、随时可变的社会构造,而冒如此之大的风险呢?

Firstly, there is no evidence that people are born gay.

  • There is a large body of data which tells us that there is no proven single cause of sexual orientation. In other words, there is no gay gene. Factors that affect sexual orientation do include biological factors, which contribute at most 1/3, with social/environmental factors contributing 2/3. This means social and environmental factors are key in affecting sexual orientation.
  • For some people at least, sexuality is 'fluid' in that they are attracted to men and women under different circumstances. So, we do know for a fact that sexual orientation is not necessarily fixed.
  • Although sex between people of the same-sex has been known to occur since ancient times, LGBT historians themselves suggest that the concept of a “gay identity” only began in western cultures approximately 150 years ago, and therefore is likely to be a social construct.
  • For people who wish to change their orientation, treatment programs result in lasting change for more than 50% of people studied with no increases in harm or distress.

文章内容翻译自 / The above information is selected from: http://thebigdealaboutmarriage.com.au/category/same-sex-marriage-research

 

第二,同性“婚姻”合法化,无助于解决LGBT群体面临的生理和心理问题。

北欧国家,自1989年起,陆续通过同婚法案,并收集了大量数据。这些数据并非基于主观色彩强烈的调查,比如,询问有同性伴侣的人士,“感觉如何”,而是关于婚姻、离婚及死亡的真实、客观的原始数据。全球范围内,北欧国家对LGBT的容忍度最高,因此可以排除“恐同”因素的影响。

Secondly, there’s no proof that legalising same-sex marriage improves physical and psychological health outcomes for the LGBTI community.

Northern European countries that have been legalising same-sex unions or marriages since 1989 have collected large amounts of data on same-sex marriages, including divorce and mortality rates. These countries are very tolerant of homosexuality, which means that the adverse outcomes are unlikely to be due to discrimination.

此类数据显示,同性婚姻中的男性,由于各种原因造成的死亡率,比异性婚姻中的男性高40%;而同性婚姻中的女性,这一数据至少为70%。同性婚姻合法化之后,居高不下的死亡率,没有任何改善。同性婚姻中的男性,面临的自杀风险,比异性婚姻中的男性高三倍。同性婚姻中的女性,自杀的风险,更是比异性婚姻中的女性高六倍. 同性婚姻中的男性,死于艾滋病的比例,比异性婚姻中的男性高300倍,甚至与跟同性同居、但不结婚的男性相比,也高出50倍.

stats_table.jpg

图:性倾向条例家校关注组面书页

The data shows the following comparisons:

Compared to traditional marriage:

Male in same sex marriage

Female in same sex marriage

Mortality*

Increased by 40%

Increased by 70%

Suicide rate

3 times

6 times

Death from AIDS

300 times

(Not studied)

*  Introduction of SSM laws did not change this higher mortality rate

 

横跨二十余年的高质量数据显示,同性婚姻中的男性和女性,总体死亡率更高,尤其是死于自杀的比例,远高于异性婚姻中的男性和女性。重新定义婚姻,将同性婚姻合法化,与同运人士鼓吹的“无害”,相去甚远。同性婚姻合法化,无法根本改变与同性恋行为相关的健康模式:男性的滥交(导致艾滋病)与女性的精神疾病(导致自杀)。而这些数据均来自于对同性恋行为接受程度最高的北欧国家,因此,不能将数据的成因归结于“恐同”或“歧视”。

More than 20 years of quality data shows extremely high mortality rate and suicide rates of men and women in same-sex marriages compared to those in traditional marriages. Legalising same-sex marriage has not changed health outcomes, including AIDS and mental illnesses. Since this data comes from countries in Northern Europe that have high acceptance towards LGBTI communities, we cannot merely attribute these poor health outcomes to results of “homophobia” or “discrimination.”

在北欧国家,同性“婚姻”只是“象征性”的变化,同婚合法化之前,同性伴侣已经拥有与异性伴侣同样的权利,允许其结婚,并不能给予他们更多的权利。澳洲现在的情况,与同婚合法之前的北欧一样,同婚合法,并不能带来本质性的变化。

In these Northern Europe countries studied, legalising same-sex marriage was largely a "symbolic" change, as people in long term committed same-sex relationships already enjoy the same rights before the law as any other long term committed relationships, just as they do now in Australia.

文章内容翻译自:The above information was sourced from: http://www.thebigdealaboutmarriage.com.au/category/gay-lifestyle-research

 

这是我们“同性婚姻的真正后果”系列文章的最后一篇。请点击以下链接读第一和二篇

同性婚姻威胁我们的核心自由

这些同性恋者的孩子们为何反对同性婚姻

 

This is the final instalment of our series of articles on the real consequences of same-sex marriage. If you missed them, you can read the two other articles below:

Same Sex Marriage threatens our Core Freedoms

Why do these children of same sex parents oppose same sex marriage?

 

事实胜于雄辩,同性“婚姻”不仅不是包治百病的“万能药”,而且,还有可能给同性吸引人士带来更大的伤害。在同性伴侣已经拥有与异性伴侣同样权利的澳洲,重新定义婚姻,既无法赋予同性伴侣更多的权利,又无助于改善LGBT人士的整体福祉。同婚合法国家的无数实例证明,所谓婚姻“平权”,必定会侵蚀言论自由、宗教信仰自由和良心自由,侵犯儿童由亲生父母抚养成人的权利,而父母也不再拥有按照自己的价值观抚养孩子的权利,并受到类似“安全学校”项目的威胁。前车之鉴,后事之师。希望广大支持传统婚姻价值观的华人朋友,不要再沉默不语、任人宰割,而是勇敢地站出来,为了子孙后代的福祉,大声对同婚说不,写信敦促所在选区的自由党议员,兑现大选时的承诺, 还人民公投的权利。

我们需要向周围的人解释同婚的害处。让我们澳洲华人社群一起扞卫人类社会的基石:我们的婚姻家庭!

The evidence shows both that same-sex marriage is not the answer to all the issues the LGBTI community suffers from, and also that there is the possibility it could cause more harm to the community. Same-sex couples already have the same rights as any other long-term committed couples in Australia, and so redefining marriage is not a necessary step. Conversely, cases around the world show that the so-called marriage "equality" movement takes away our core freedoms of speech, religion and conscience and the right of children to access their biological parents. Parental rights to raise their children according to their own family values are also being threatened through programs like “Safe Schools”. 

When we understand the real consequences of legalising same-sex marriage, we can no longer remain silent. For the sake of our next generation, we must now bravely speak up and make our voices heard, and say “No” to same-sex marriage. We need to write to Liberal Party MPs and ask them to deliver their promised plebiscite, and we need to explain to our friends and family the real consequences of same-sex marriage.

We call on you to take a stand with us, as the Australian Chinese community, to defend marriage and the family – the bedrocks of our society.