Opinions are like noses – for a less crude term – and everyone has one.
Australian tennis legend Margaret Court made hers perfectly clear when she told Qantas that she would boycott flying with the airline after their support of same-sex marriage.
And almost instantly, every man and his dog made their own opinions clear on Court’s comments. Some called for the Margaret Court Arena to have its named changed, while others defended Court, saying that she is entitled to her opinion.
While I agree Margaret Court is free to have her own opinion, I am also entitled to my own – and I am free to speak it.
While I wouldn’t be rushing to change the name of the arena, I certainly would take it into consideration.
To name a stadium after an individual, especially in Australia, you would assume they displayed the sportsmanship, pride and personification of what it is to be an Australian sportsman, and an Australian in general.
Court, sadly, does not. To come out and so blatantly deny equal rights to somebody, because she does not believe that they should have such rights, is as un-Australian as it gets.
To go out of her way and boycott a company simply because they support marriage equality, is preposterous in the very least.
The whole anti-same sex marriage argument is flawed in of itself. For one, the Bible has also outlawed eating pork, ignoring the judgment of a priest, cutting the hair on the sides of your head, or living in a city that failed to surrender to the Israelites. The Bible is over a thousand years old, and to continue to follow the practices so vehemently is absurd.
Secondly, I have never truly understood the whole idea that God forbids marriage between the same sex.
Wouldn’t a God so wonderful and welcoming want to embrace two people who want to be married under his eyes, regardless of their sex?
And thirdly, marriage isn’t something that the Church or Margaret Court should be able to decide. It isn’t really any of her business if two people want to get married, regardless of their gender.
Court argued that she was bullied on The Project recently, and that she was ‘bullied’ by the gay community for suggesting that her name be replaced on the Margaret Court Arena.
With all due respect Margaret, you told the LGBTI community that they don’t deserve to have the right to be married to someone they love. Did you expect them to react kindly?
(Wikimedia Commons/DestinationAlan)
Margaret Court’s values are exactly that, her own, and she is entitled to them. But they aren’t everyone else’s, and when you begin to push your own values onto somebody else and it affects their lives, then there becomes a problem.
Australia is already quite far behind in the marriage equality debate. We are one of the last Western countries to still deny LGBTI people the right to get married under law.
With people like Margaret Court constantly crowing over how two people should have no right to be together under marriage, it severely undermines not only us as a country, but the fact that we still have her name plastered across Victoria’s second biggest tennis stadium.
Margaret Court is entitled to her opinion, but everyone else is entitled to their own. Just because she says something controversial does not mean those who disagree aren’t allowed to make it known.
So while Margaret Court is allowed her opinion, I am also allowed mine, which is I would consider renaming the Margaret Court Arena after what I have heard the past few days.
And people may agree or disagree, and they will have their own opinion on the matter, and that is perfectly fine. After all, it is what free speech is all about.
northerner
Guest
Nature didn't design marriage, people did. Marriage was a civil contract long before it was a religious ceremony, and I know of no reason why two people of the same sex can't enter into a civil contract.
Beryl
Guest
I have concerns that same sex marriage has not been debated in the public arena. I have no qualms about same sex marriage in a civil, legal form. Go for it. Where I have problems is that the nuts and bolts have not been discussed. Should the churches, temples, and mosques be forced to perform marriages by a priest, rabbi or imam? I suspect Labor sniffed the wind of inner city constituents who'd vote No when it went against the government's plan for a plebiscite. Let's have the debate. Until then, if QANTAS can get involved in politics and use a big business to promote same sex marriage, let the Margaret Courts have their say.
tryan
Guest
Marriage has always been defined to be between a man and a women. That is how nature design it to be. If a man could naturally make another man pregnant without donor eggs and a women carrying the child till birth then the agrument would not hold true. Same hold true for a women and women relationship. can a women made another women pregnant without the help of a man donor.
northerner
Guest
In defence of Christians, I would point out that some (obviously not all) of the Christian churches are far more advanced on the subject of gay rights and same sex marriage than quite a few other religions I could name. And they haven't resorted to torture or mass murder to get to that point.
Chris Vogel
Guest
Poor old Margaret, assuming that everyone must do and act as she demands. all being very Christian. Regardless of what the law is, Court is never obliged to do anything she doesn't want, but she wants her dingbat beliefs forced on everyone else, by law. We must be grateful that modern secular governments do not permit Christians their traditional responses to difference: torture and mass murder.
Gonna Hear Me Roar
Guest
She's entitled not to support gay marriage. But to go out if her way to avoid flying Qantas is very, VERY immature. In life there are always people you don't like or agree with but you have to learn to tolerate people. She's a homophobe. That trumps her other achievements. It's really sad.
Jock Cornet
Guest
Alan Joyce is the disgrace hiding behind a popular sentient to get revenge on an individual using his company power . Well done Margaret for sticking to your views. Anyone can endorse the popular sentiment. Waled Aly is now dictating on tv how we are meant to think and behave , foff.
Gordon Smith
Guest
I personally struggle with this modern concept of not separating peoples achievements with their personal views. We are all flawed. If I was to banish the achievements of people who I thought were appalling I would never watch a Polanski movie or listen to Wagner or Michael Jackson for that matter. I doubt that I would find a football team I could support.
ChrisT
Guest
Margaret Court was simply supporting the CURRENT LAWS! She is saying the same as what Gillard and Wong were saying not too long ago but gay suicide is only a problem if conservatives are against it, eh?. The way this 74 yr old Australian legend has been bullied and badgered by the so called compassionate progressives, is a disgrace. She even had a Sunni Mulsim (Waleed Aly) giving it to her on The Project - he might want to check what his Sunnis are doing to gays in the Middle East before spitting on someones long held Christian values. It's quite revealing how nasty the pro SSM is...
Gordon Smith
Guest
Dylan - has anyone suggested that you are not entitled to your views. Has anyone suggested retribution against you for expressing your views. I think it is called a robust democracy.
MarinerFan
Guest
We may be missing the big point in this. Margaret has stated her views, we may or may not agreed with it - currently she is simply stating the law. Last time I checked she had a stadium named after her based on her tennis ability - not her Christian values. I also find it ironic that QANTAS come out and be so pro this choice but hide the concept of partnering with an overtly muslim airline in Emirates - where the treatment of LGTBI people is far, far worse.
Tom Hunt
Guest
Thank you for articulating such a comprehensive response. Spot on!