Turnbull breaks ranks, but Libs fail gay report card
Former Opposition leader Malcolm Turnbull has contradicted his party on legal recognition for same-sex couples.
The Wentworth MP, while not in favour of same-sex marriage, has thrown his support behind federally recognised civil unions for gay and lesbian couples.
His stand comes just days after the Coalition released a GLBTI issues platform in response to an election survey conducted by the Tasmanian Gay and Lesbian Rights Group (TGLRG).
After learning on Monday that every other candidate in Wentworth supported same-sex marriage or civil unions, Turnbull clarified comments he made to Sydney Star Observer in May that he was open to same-sex couples being given a form of recognition under federal law.
A media advisor for Turnbull told Sydney Star Observer, “Mr Turnbull believes that marriage is a union between a man and a woman. However, he supports same-sex civil unions”.
When asked to clarify if this meant civil unions under federal law she said, “Yes”.
[poll id=”33″]
In Wentworth the Greens’ Matthew Robertson, Labor’s Steven Lewis, the Secular Party’s John August, the Carers Alliance’s Stuart Neal and independent Pat Shiel all support same-sex marriage, while another independent, Malcolm Duncan, supports civil unions.
Days before, Coalition federal campaign director Brian Loughnane released a statement to the TGLRG ruling out formal recognition of same-sex couples under federal law if the Coalition wins power, mirroring Labor’s policy of leaving it to the states.
“The regulation of same-sex relationships is a matter for the states and territories … In that context, the Coalition has no plans to introduce civil unions or relationship registers for same-sex couples.”
In the same statement, the Coalition condemned “all forms of discrimination”, recognising that “amendments to Commonwealth legislation may be necessary in respect of discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation” but had no plans for an inquiry that might bring to light deficiencies in that area.
On GLBTI young people in schools, the Coalition touted the National Safe Schools Framework and National Safe Schools Week initiatives introduced while they were in government, but then cited the National School Chaplaincy Program, which sends religious chaplains into state schools, as something that might alleviate bullying of GLBTI youth.
On GLBTI health the Coalition supported a health system that “supports Australians regardless of their economic or social status or their sexuality”, but ruled out the creation of “new national health plans that are tailored to help specific groups”.
On transgender issues the statement says the Coalition will seriously consider the recommendations of the Australian Human Rights Commission on sex and gender identity, while misnaming the report the Commission produced on the subject.
On violence against GLBTI people the Coalition would not fund a national strategy to combat homophobic violence, “because the Labor government has left the budget in a parlous state”.
TGLRG spokesman Rodney Croome said the Coalition’s response was a big disappointment.
“The Coalition has offered few concrete commitments to the GLBTI community and has failed to improve its GLBTI platform since the last election,” Croome said.
The TGLRG hopes to publish platform statements of GLBTI issues in the coming week.
You May Also Like
Of course he says he supports us! He does want to be re-elected after all !
We love you Michelle!
Its no surprise. He does want to be re-elected. He knows his demographics.
Michelle- you have Class to write into here! Thanks for the support!
HI , just thought I would let you know that a straight , menapausal, bogan ,married Mum from the burbs.I fully supports your right to marry and love whomever you want .How dare anyone tell another person how to live . Good luck
Jimontrack it is a question about autonomy. You are seeking to deny the autonomy of people to decided if they want to Marry on the basis of sexuality. It is that simple. It is in fact a homophobic response to say you cannot Marry due to your sexuality.
Conservatives have never owned Marriage. Every culture and civilization has a Marriage like celebration where a loving couple is able to express to their friends and family that they are committed.
It is bit like saying I want people only to wear a red shirt. Who am I to say they should not wear what they want? If I told people what to wear or how to live their life I would get a quick Fuck Off.
It is the same arrogance to tell people they cannot Marry. By all means you can believe that, but to openly tell others what they can or cannot do puts you in the same category as me telling people what clothes to wear. I think you are a better man then that.
Jimontrack, you talk about ‘rights’. I have 2 adult daughters – one straight and one gay. My straight daughter was married recently with no mention of any god/religion in the ceremony. Why should her sister be denied the same right?
A court in California today has overturned the ban on gay marriage, among other things stating that ‘Moral disapproval alone is an improper basis on which to deny rights to gay men and lesbians.’
Where’s the outrage about Julia’s betrayal of the Gay community? So much for Labor Values. At least turnball will happily talk about Gay issues – she’s such a nasty bogan she won’t even go there. Both parties disgust me. But Labor more-so since you would expect better. Bunch of opportunist shitheads. Fuck ’em!
Evelyn Gray said,
August 4th, 2010 @ 5:57 pm
I am not against legaised Quarrages or Civil Unionships. I quite like what the UK has done in this respect.
On the issue of the word Marriage, I do believe that word is defined to mean ‘unionship between a man and a woman’
Therefore, I would ask those in the Homosexural community to continu as they are now, but just do not use the word Marriage.
*****************************
Dave said,
August 4th, 2010 @ 6:34 pm
I do support the Homosexural community in a number of different ways, on the issue of legalised unionships, I do feel that the Homosexural communities are seeking these important points….
….For the Government to have a register of their relationship
….To be legally recognised in a number of different ways such as next of kin and other legal issues.
And, I do support them on these things.
I just do not support the use of the word Marriage. I think the Homo-Conservative world have the right to keep that one little thing.
***************************
Jason said,
August 4th, 2010 @ 9:08 pm
Yes, you do have a valid point. There has been a lot of progress in recent years.
I do need time to do a proper response to your post, so I shall leave this here and come back later.
Although I will say that it had been their world, and to them you come across like an invading army trying to take them over. They fear you just as much as the Muslim migration may see all Australians wearing Burkas one day. The Homsexural community do need to understand that they are pushing for ‘too much change’ and all ‘too quickly’.
The fact is that, there are three conflicting cultures, they will never mix, they will never be one, the best thing you can hope for is ‘mutural respect of each other’.
Jimontrack – “No matter what happens, both sides of the debate need to respect each other. RESPECT GOES BOTH WAYS”
With every piece of gay reform in Australia we have had to demand it, so you can understand that the request for respect is very tiring, and some older generation GLBT may find it insulting that you even mention “respect goes bothways”.
The fact is the Liberals have NEVER honored one positive GLBT commitment they have made, but yet lots of GLBT continue to vote for them.
In our history Australia has been at War even when we could not afford to. This is because the Government considered the cost to the community will be greater than if we do nothing. Equally it is not a financially responsible Government that does nothing about homophobia. Our Government knows the great cost of homophobia. It is homophobia that kills more people than the road toll. It destroys lives and significantly impacts the community.
Dr Lynne Hillier, from La Trobe University’s Australian Research Centre in Sex, Health and Society University said one in five gay young people would experience homophobic bullying, and 16 per cent would be assaulted because of their sexuality. Of those who were victims of assault, 60 per cent had considered seriously harming themselves.
I think excluding our community from Marriage is a very strong homophobic message. To bring back Same-Sex Marriage would cost the government not a cent but give so much to so many people. It is certainly a way of being financially responsible and builds social capital by making all members of our community part of the entire Australian community. The policy of exclusion(denying people Marriage) has a far greater cost to Australia then people think.
I am so disappointed with the Liberal Party’s stance on these issues.
They couldnt even name the HREOC report correctly – I wonder if they even read it. This is just not good enough.
I’m so frustrated right now! This is so unfair.
Best get back to writing more letters to politicians.
Peace to you all – I know we will win this battle in the end.
x
Jimmontrack- I find it hard to respect people like yourself when you do not respect the rights of others. You lack that basic respect that others want to Marry, so you impose your view of them. You do not have to get married. Nobody is forcing you. Many others clearly want that right to get married.
So why do you not respect other people?
Well Jimontrack, we see that you oppose ‘homosexural’ marriage, but perhaps we could hear more of your wisdom re marriage for homosexuals!!
If the regulation of same sex relationships is a “state and territory matter”, why did the Howard Government override the ACT’s legislation several years ago. You can’t have it both ways.
‘On violence against GLBTI people the Coalition would not fund a national strategy to combat homophobic violence, “because the Labor government has left the budget in a parlous state”.’
When discrimination becomes an angle for you to label another party as failing financially despite a worldwide depresion is low. Failing to recognise the importance of stopping discrimination and bullying is lower.
There are a lot of people in the Homosexural world of whom are opposed to Gay marriages or Quarrages, and Penny Wong may clearly be one of them.
It is not just the Homophobic who are against it.
There are also the Homo-Conservatives (like me) of whom are happy to let the Homosexural world have what they need. That is to have their love-ship recognised by the Government. That is what the UK has got currently.
No matter what happens, both sides of the debate need to respect each other. RESPECT GOES BOTH WAYS.
While a homosexural couple may be the same in love, they are not the same as straight couples, just because they are not strait. What next, do Gays/Lesbians want to be called Straight people?
I say Yes to Quarrages for Homosexurals, BUT NOT Marriages for Homosexurals. They are exactly the same, just a different word being used.
John, I specified homophobic areas in marginal seats, of which there are more in WA and Qld than in other states. Have those states legislated for gay marriage? News to me.
But I agree that our politicians of both parties don’t seem to be truly representative of Australia as a whole, and don’t reflect what most people think on the same sex marriage issue.
Equal Taxes, Equal Love, Equal Human Rights.
Discrimination may be cultural, it may be historical, it may be religiously and legally reinforced, but it is not acceptable.
@Phil Scott
Don’t blame Qld and WA voters for the Liberal Party’s homophobic policy. The citizens of those two great states have moved forward on gay rights and gay marriage.
It is the leadership of the major political parties who don’t see our needs.
Malcolm supports discrimination against people who are from the GLTBQI community. He does a lot of dog whistling but stands against our community.
His only excuse against Same-Sex Marriage is his belief that he has a right by birth to deny others what he has, a loving marriage. He wants the government to decide who loves who and how much. He believes we love each other less then he loves his wife. Civil Marriages happen all the time with no Church by a hundreds and thousands of Australians. There is no excuse why Malcolm should be such a hypocrite, to deny two loving people the right to have the Government recognise their relationship. Same-Sex Marriages have happened throughout history.
Various types of same-sex marriages have existed, ranging from informal, unsanctioned relationships to highly ritualized unions.
In the southern Chinese province of Fujian, through the Ming dynasty period, females would bind themselves in contracts to younger females in elaborate ceremonies. Males also entered similar arrangements. This type of arrangement was also similar in ancient European history.
An example of egalitarian male domestic partnership from the early Zhou Dynasty period of China is recorded in the story of Pan Zhang & Wang Zhongxian. While the relationship was clearly approved by the wider community, and was compared to heterosexual marriage, it did not involve a religious ceremony binding the couple.
While homosexuality was technically illegal from late Roman times, it was only from about the 14th century that antihomosexual feelings swept western Europe. Yet same sex Marriages continued to take place.
At St. John Lateran in Rome (traditionally the Pope’s parish church) in 1578 a many as 13 couples were “married” at Mass with the apparent cooperation of the local clergy, “taking communion together, using the same nuptial Scripture, after which they slept and ate together”, according to a contemporary report.
For further reading http://www.gaychristian101.com/Gay-Marriage.html
Nice try Malcolm, but separate is not equal. And when is federal politics ever going to be rid of that soulless Liberal backroom demagogue Brian Loughnane?
The prospect of an slippery Abbott Liberal government with equality-shirking Loughnane pulling the strings ought to scare the bejeezus out of all Australian voters.
The reason the coalition says civil unions are a state matter is obvious. The win-or-lose marginal seats are in homophobic areas of Queensland and Western Australia which the Libs (and Labor too) don’t want to frighten off with a national civil union initiative. The bigots would hate it if same-sex couples suddenly turned up on their doorstep- as if! You’d be out of your mind to want to live amongst redneck trash. Nevertheless, for some inexplicable reason their votes count more than ours.