Pollies to fight adoption reform
Politicians from both major parties have vowed to fight proposed changes to NSW adoption laws that would see same-sex couples able to adopt.
The NSW Law and Justice Committee last week released their findings from the same-sex adoption inquiry, urging the government to allow adoption for same-sex couples.
The committee also recommended faith-based adoption agencies be allowed to refuse same-sex couples, but be obliged to refer them to services that could assist them.
Endorsed by a narrow margin of four votes to three, the Committee remained divided over the issue even as they announced its release.
The Coalition’s David Clarke and Labor’s Greg Donnelly, who sat on the committee, have indicated they would be advising their parties to block any reforms.
I don’t think there is any mandate for the Government to act in this report and I don’t think it is in the best interest of the children, Clarke said.
He said he was concerned about forcing religious organisations to go against their beliefs and refer same-sex couples to other agencies.
Donelly said he doubted same-sex adoption would be in the best interests of a child.
A child should be entitled to expect that they will be raised by a mother and a father, he said.
My difficulty is that, in a situation where there is such a difference in the number of children compared to the number of couples seeking a child, that a child may be provided to a same-sex couple and that child will not have the benefit of growing up with a mother and a father.
Committee chair Christine Robertson urged the government to follow the recommendations.
This reform will address discrimination against same-sex couples and their children, removing one of the final areas of NSW law where discrimination … has been allowed to remain, she said.
To allow same-sex couples to adopt will help ensure the best interests of the children are met by our adoption laws.
Greens’ GLBT spokeswoman Lee Rhiannon pushed the Rees Government to endorse the recommendations by offering a guarantee to work with the government to ensure the quick passing of same-sex adoption legislation.
The inquiry’s recommen-dation takes on added significance as it was reported in May that Upper House MP Reverend Fred Nile had won the support of Premier Rees not to back such legislative reform, she said.
Now the Premier has the Upper House report, he should demonstrate that he has not done a deal with Rev Nile and move quickly to work quickly with the Greens to make the necessary legislative changes.
You May Also Like
Their proposals to bring back an opting in regime for fault based divorce will never get through, as it will only to serve to trap people in abusive relationships. But the religious right has never been known for its compassion.
“outlawing divorce” – You betcha! Have a look at these Liberal Party plans… http://www.smh.com.au/national/battlelines-are-drawn-with-a-nod-to-family-tradition-20090711-dgp1.html
They are first planning to bring back 1950’s At Fault Divorce where you also have to wait 5 years for a divorce, then once that’s gotten into law, the next stage after that will be to ban divorce altogether! Gays were just a leverage for them to get this far- otherwise if they annoucned thier original plans at the beginning they would have been laughed at. But by using gays to attack, no-one in the straight media cared… no watch them start jumping out of the trees indignant… but the straight media allowed this to happen, for the Libs to get this far that they can feel confident to announce the next stage of thier plans, but still framing it as a “battle” against the gays. ie ban divorce to show how much you hate gays? But will the straight media still continue to swallow with that one thrown into the mix????
Well, Time has come people. Both sides do not believe in equality and yet want us to vote for them.
Time people to put our votes to good use. Vote supportive independents or greens.
These men are Dickensian caricatures. How in the name of common sense did a “Law and Justice” committee get loaded in this way? It’d be a joke if it wasn’t so tragic. Just another instance of the palpable inadequacy of the State Government at all levels and in both the major parties.
Donelly: “A child is entitled to expect they will be raised by a mother and a father”. Please! A child doesn’t EXPECT anything. Children aren’t social statisticians. They NEED love. That is all. A welcoming, nurturing environment is not merely in the best interests of a child, it is the child’s sole ‘best interest’. Every parent knows that (or you would think so). What they don’t need is rejection, misery and exposure to religious platitudes.
“-œA child should be entitled to expect that they will be raised by a mother and a father, [Donelly] said.”
I’m so glad to hear that both parties will be outlawing divorce when children are involved!
Clarke said, “I don’t think it is in the best interest of the children
Donelly said, “he doubted same-sex adoption would be in the best interests of a child.”
I infer from the statements of both Mr. Clarke and Mr. Donelly that they think it is better for children to remain orphans in a orphanage that to live with a family as a member of that family.
I wonder if Mr. Clarke and Mr. Donelly have any views related to sectarian ethics?
Do they think that placing a child in a family that practices a different religion to that of the child would not be in the child’s best interest?
What about race?
Do Mr. Clarke and Mr. Donelly think that placing a child in a family of a different race to that of the child would not be in the best interests of the child?
Mr. Donelly and Mr. Clarke do not have to answer those questions because those matters were dealt with in the past and now there is no need for adopting parents to pass religious tests or racial tests.
There is however still a need for parents to pass a gender test.
I told you so!!
This inquiry was a classic example of politics at work. What is meant to be a transparent process to get to the truth of what is happening in society was a sham in some parts. Clarke and Donnelly had their minds made up in advance, and no amount of logic or rational reasoning was going to persuade them of the merits of permitting same sex adoption. I fear the same will happen with the Marriage Act Senate inquiry. We will have strong rational arguments in favour of same sex marriage, but the right whingers will bleat their usual and predicatble hate filled propaganda which will grab the attention. By no means am I suggesting not to fight. The force of their hatred should be enough to motivate all of us.
Both major parties eh? Well it’s high time that all gay Labor voters for once in their lives, even just for one election next one coming up, all vote 1 The Greens (or are gays as well believing the Exclusive Brethern paid viral campaign that the Greens are “kooky” cause they have a gay leader Bob Brown?).
That way, you can vote 1 the Greens, and 2 Labor, to create a Labor government under the thumb of a Greens balance of power for pro-gay decision making like we’ve never seen before. Every election the Greens are gaining in power- lets give them a massive boost next federal election to gain the full balance of power (instead of having to share it with FamilyFirst & Nick Xenaphon).