Sitting in my University Hall common room on Wednesday night watching the reading of the Marriage Equality bill there was a common sense of acceptance.
And I don't mean acceptance in the reluctant sense with which the word is often used; there was a shared sense that this bill should pass, and must pass, into law. It was accepted that marriage equality is what is just and what is right.
This was a debate which restored faith in the parliamentary process, which engaged people like never before; the idea of twenty 18-year-olds sitting around Parliament TV on student night in Auckland is testament to this.
This spoke, to me, of a pleasing and beautiful shift in the way our population thinks about issues. My generation, "gen-y," holds so much more of a consensus towards liberty. Even though some of the people watching the bill being debated in Parliament weren't entirely comfortable with homosexuality, they understood that its existence did not affect them and it was profoundly important for those it did affect.
This is evidenced by the fact that every political party's youth wing stated their support for the bill. It's evidenced by the mass and indomitable support for the bill on social media platforms, where youth voice their views in droves. And it's evidenced by the fact that the representatives of generations gone by, NZ First, were the single party that unanimously voted against the bill.
They claimed to support a referendum; to put to the majority an issue that deeply affects a minority is a dangerous path to take. The tyranny of the majority in these situations should not be encouraged further than a democratic system already does.
The shift towards liberalism could also be seen in the way National Party members voted. On the one hand, it can be viewed as a great shame that under 50 per cent of the caucus voted in favour of the bill. On the other, it can be seen as progress.
When homosexuality was legalised through the 1986 Homosexuality Law Reform Act, just three National MPs voted in favour; 33 voted against. So today's figures of 27 in favour of the marriage equality bill and 32 against represent a move towards greater acceptance of social progression.
In many ways, our own MP Chester Borrows encapsulates the state of the party on social issues, both positively and negatively. On the one hand, he spoke of his friendship with gay people and how he had become more enlightened and more accepting of difference over time.
At one point Mr Borrows indicated he may be moving from the nays to the ayes on the issue, stating early in his speech that he has been led "along a line that has got me to change my views in respect of gay things". The applause in Parliament represented how uplifting it would have been if our MP had been changing his vote in favour of the bill.
Alas, the promise of the early stages of the speech was not upheld in the latter, as we learned that he would still vote against the bill. Why? Because he felt we should "having the larger debate about what marriage is and what marriage is not".
This was a shame and a poor avoidance of stating his true personal view, because that debate has been had for the entirety of this bill's progression through parliament and the hearts and minds of society. It is a shame that Mr Borrows came to stand on the wrong side of history, but his progression on matters of gay equality in general shows the promise and path that the National Party as a whole are on.
Aside from the party politics, as this was a bill which all parties came together to work on, this move says something important for us as a collective. New Zealand affirmed its status as a world leader in the market for liberty and equality. Watching those in our House of Representatives, and Kiwis across the nation, declare their support for a cause that displays complete acceptant of difference. And it is on nights like that that true patriotism and pride for our nation is warranted and indomitable.