Abstract:
Liberalism is based on the fundamental premise of individual self-determination, human freedom and equality. The task of government is to protect the equal liberty of citizens in society and before the law. The only reason the state may legitimately interfere with individual liberty is to prevent harm to others. Using a liberal theoretical framework, this research essay analyses same sex marriage as provided for in the Marriage (Definition of Marriage) Amendment Bill. I argue that the Bill’s supporters endorse the Bill on the basis of the liberal ideas of individual liberty and the harm principle. I further argue that Adrian Wellington’s variant of the harm principle cannot be used to justify opposition to the Bill.
The Bill neutralises marriage to allow same sex couples to marry, thus providing for gender neutral marriage. I assess gender neutral marriage with Elizabeth Brake’s proposal for minimal marriage. I conclude that the Bill removes discrimination and in this sense promotes individual liberty, but that minimal marriage extends the liberal idea of limited state intervention into individual liberty. Brake’s theory of minimal marriage is consistent with an ideal liberal state as it does not make distinctions between types of relationships and would also promote the rights and obligations of same sex couples. Nevertheless, I endorse Wall’s Bill as an important step to remove discrimination against same sex couples.
