Rainbow Labor push goes online
LGBTI members group Rainbow Labor have created a website for Labor Party members, supporters and trade union members to register their support for same-sex marriage with tales from their own family life, straight, gay or in between, and why they believe it is time for marriage equality in Australia.
ThreeQuestions.com.au will allow Labor supporters of same-sex marriage to share personal stories, post pictures and video messages and explain their support for marriage equality by answering the three questions-
“Are you a Labor member, a Labor supporter or a trade union member?”
“How would you describe your family?”
“Why do you believe it’s time for marriage equality?”
The website will be formally launched at a fringe event during the weekend’s NSW ALP State Conference but it already contains the personal testimony of 93 ALP members supporters and union members.
One of these, Cheyne Rich, a South Australian union official, wrote, “I find the pursuit of human rights to be one of the most important things in our community. To me, the defence of human rights extends from protections in the workplace through to equal recognition of relationships, no matter the gender. This is a basic issue of inequality – why is my relationship worth more than a relationship between two people of the same sex? The union movement and the ALP have often campaigned on human rights, so it’s time we got behind this change.”
Rainbow Labor co-convenors, Jessica Epps and Ashley Ubrihien said the group had launched the campaign to show the importance of marriage to all Australians.
“All Australians recognise that marriage is an important and valuable institution that enables couples to express their love and commitment to each other,” Epps said.
“That’s why it’s important we make sure all couples have the opportunity to celebrate their love and commitment with their family and friends and have their relationship fully recognized by our laws.”
“Rainbow Labor’s online campaign gives party members and supporters the opportunity to stand up and be counted in this important discussion,” Ubrihien said.
ThreeQuestions.com.au will be officially launched at Rainbow Labor’s fringe event at 5.30pm on Saturday, July 9 in the Lower Town Hall Foyer at Sydney’s Town Hall.
Symbolism, schymbolisim. A denial of my right to choose whom I marry (or not) when others can be recognised at law for whatever brief time they choose to be married is a denial of my human rights!
My brother is onto his second marriage after the first one lasted 8 months. My partner and I have been together for 20 years but still cannot have the State recognise our relationship with one simple action.
Don’t forget that the Howard amendment to the Marriage Act was passed with the FULL SUPPORT of the ALP. It is time that Ms Gillard woke up and realised that she is a one term PM and this would be an opportunity to go down in history for DOING something rather than just BEING something (first femal PM in Australia).
Mark, please look at the bigger picture – a law supporting same sex marriage will not end homophobia, in the same way the end of slavery did not end racism. But (and this is a big BUT) when someone’s relationship is disenfranchised, as happens every day in this country for same sex attracted couples (we are having a battle with the NSW Attorney General’s Dept right now) a law is a handy way to throw the book at the officious little shits who get in the way of our relationships in all the places you think same sex equality is delivered. It just isn’t delivered despite the ALP’s recent work on the issue, and it won’t be until full equality is reached. Even after that it will still take time, but we must move forward (to quote your leader of choice) and it is no longer 2007 or 2009, we have moved onto the next phase. I don’t care about symbolic rights, I want the full support of the law for my relationship, to wield it at will against the deniers until nobody knows or cares about the perceived differences. In your world, equal rights for women would have rested as symbolism, or inter-racial marriage. And get off you high horse about others writing passionately, or get off this site soft cock!!!!
And Dave, while we’re waiting for Labor to catch up, those gender and sexuality related youth suicide stats aren’t diminishing. In Holland they were reduced in one generation … a generation ago. We, and out kind, do not have time!
Don’t get me wrong – I support marriage equality. But I think we need to place it in perspective.
So, let’s talk about symbolic and substantive rights. There is an important difference. In 2008 the Federal Labor Government amended over 80 Commonwealth laws to provide equal treatment to same sex couples across the full suite of Commonwealth laws and programs. In addition, State Labor Governments had already done that at the State level. So is your partner recognised at the hospital, at Centrelink, by the Tax Office, by the Immigration Department and so on in exactly the same way as a married couple? Yes. These are substantive rights.
What the current wording of the Marriage Act means is that same sex couples are not allowed to have a particular ceremony called “marriage” that is recognised by the Federal Government. There is not a single other Commonwealth Act under which your treatment would be affected by saying the words “I do.” That’s why it’s a symbolic right. (I’d also point out there is also no impediment to a same sex couple having a ceremony to celebrate their love and commitment. You just can’t have it recognised by the Federal Government – insulting? sure. symbolic right – definitely)
Symbolic rights are important. The Marriage Act needs to be amended. But let’s put it in context and not lose our heads about this one.
Mark, if a guy ever asks you to marry him, just say no. For now, move out of the way. Your party is no fun anymore. If it passes gay marriage, it will only be because its supposed progressive side is brought to its knees. For a Prime Minister to not even look at passing something that will cost the community nothing, yet make life better for thousands, is just ignorant.
Oliver, if Catholics had sympathy for gays they would not hound gay and lesbian people out of St. Mary’s cathedral on a routine basis, with specially-hired and homophobic security guards.
To both men, until you have been in the position of having your relationship disenfranchised under law, you will not understand the need for full marriage equality. Perhaps you don’t even have relationships?
Mark (July 8, 9.29am)
You may as well have ended your post with the words “written and authorised by the ALP”. It should be obvious to astute readers that you are not a disinterested commentator but a servant of the Labor Party.
In case readers haven’t noticed, the ALP is NOT a progressive political party and does not even come close to being one. Anti-gay policies, 2am lockouts of licensed premises and internet censorship are just some of the conservative social policies supported and/or introduced by this party. And they just seem to get worse and worse with the passage of time.
This situation will not change if members of our community and other progressive Australians continue to support the ALP. Only when they continue to lose seats and support will they realise they need to change course.
I recommend that readers support the Australian Sex Party or the libertarian Liberal Democratic Party as their first preference. I myself have voted for the Labor Party most of my life, however I have belatedly come to the realisation that they do not deserve my support any more.
Mark I agree with you, de facto relationships are very much the equivalent of marriage anyway. Yes, homelessness is a much larger more important issue here in australia.
@Dave, Labor is a Catholic Party? since when? more like fundamentalist christian “influence” Catholics always had sympathy for Gays.
When the Federal Conference of the Labor Party change the platform in December to support Marriage Equality, Gillard has no choice but to support Party policy. It’s the way Labor works. Look at how Penny Wong was silenced on marriage until SA Labor passed the Marriage Equality plank to the platform.
Patrick,
Well said!
Stop being an apologist for your own party Mark. I find it both offensive that you think equal marriage is a symbolic right, but also that your Unity mates have convinced you as such. Equality before the law, or the continued existence of legal discrimination, should not be referred to in the patronising manner of a “nice symbolic change” If mixed race couples were were not recognised as equally married under the law, would similar reform be flippantly termed a “nice symbolic change”, but one not very high up on the Labor agenda, and that those mixed race couples should appreciate all the hard work Labor has done to merely recognise that their relationship exists under federal and state laws? Labour parties in the UK, Ireland, the NDP and Liberal Party in Canada, much of the US Democratic party, and almost every social democrat party in Europe have a policy of recognising equal marriage in countries with similar support for reform as Australia. Labor has sold out on social justice, and is putting Australia, and itself, behind the rest of the western world.
The machinery of Labor is broken. You have a situation where an unelected Catholic Union is in power, and the not the Prime Minister.
The Liberals past many GLBTI law reforms, and some Liberal Governments even decriminalised homosexuality. The Democrats were the reason GLBTI people were accepted into the Military as the then Labor Government did not wish for this to happen, but had to do deals them, just like they are now having to deals with the Greens. Labor for most of its life even supported the White Australia Policy.
The fact is whatever Labor did in the past, they are currently advocating against equality before the law, and it will again take the minor parties to drag them kicking and screaming out of the Catholic 1950’s.
Labor does not even include our community in the Federal Equal Opportunity. We can be denied government funded jobs on the basis of their sexuality. Many older GLBTI people are denied Nursing Home placements as Senate Enquires have found. All this let alone the 1084 pieces of legislation that discriminate against couples not married.
So if Labor has policies that lead to great cruelty and suffering, then I will continue to vote Green, a party who the Labor Party now needs.
Labor has no plan to end all discrimination. Perhaps in hundreds of years from now, they might not have an issue with our sexuality, but until then I am voting Green.
@Scott: The head may reject it, but if it’s voted as the new party line, she just has to suck it up. And the reason to support this Labor initiative is to make the statement that their policy is not ok with you.
Silence is tacit approval, speak up in stuff like this so you’re not unwittingly counted as non-committal or even worse, in agreement.
The better the numbers the harder it is to reject. Plain and simple.
Also, equal marriage might be the most important thing to you – but it’s not actually that important. Gay and lesbian couples (and heterosexual couples in de facto relationships) are treated exactly the same as married heterosexuals across Commonwealth and State laws. It will be a nice symbolic change but that’s about it.
How does it compare on a list of political priorities that includes dealing with climate change, reforming the taxation system, tackling homelessness, actually closing the gap between indigenous and non-indigenous Australians so that Indigenous Australians don’t die 20 years younger than the rest of the population? Yeah, not so high really.
Rant finished.
Seriously, what stupid contributions. It’s time for some reality checking here. “What is the point here?: Equal marriage can only be achieved by the Labor Party in Government. There is quite literally no alternative. No Labor Government – no equal marriage. The Greens certainly can’t pass it by themselves, what with their 1 Reps member and their 10 Senators. And the Libs? With Tony Abbott as leader? Or perhaps Malcolm Turnbull – who has exactly the same position as Gillard and he’s their most progressive member.
I’m sick to death of people in our community dismissing the contribution that Labor has made to advancing equal rights in this country. It hasn’t always been perfect but every single piece of LGBT reform in this country has generally been passed by Labor Governments and always depending on Labor votes. Decriminalisation, anti-discrimination, relationship recognition (Federal and State), gays in the military, Australia’s response to HIV/AIDS, relationship registers, immigration law reform, right to sexual privacy – all of these happened because of Labor Governments, with the votes of Labor MPs and the actions of Labor Ministers.
And let’s not forget when we started talking about marriage – 2004. There was no push within the LGBT community in Australia for gay marriage until Howard amended the Marriage Act. Everyone wanted equal recognition of de facto relationships. So that’s what Labor delivered when it was elected in 2007 – because that’s what the community wanted. And then we all decided that we wanted marriage too, and not just the relationship recognition that Labor had agreed to.
Reform doesn’t happen instantly in politics – it actually takes time. It will happen – but it will only happen with the votes of the Labor Party.
I will continue voting Green thanks!
The only reason we are talking about Marriage, is the Greens are getting elected. Gillard has referred to Same-Sex Marriage as “Radical Social Policy”. But to me that is my husband she is talking about.
Labor is the Catholic Party. It is a broken and in a great big mess, it does not want to change the structure that sees the Catholic SDA Union control the Prime Minister.
What is the point here. The head of the Labor party (Gillard) has said that she will not support same-sex marriage so why should any gay man or women support any Labor initiative which will be rejected by the top.
I had been a Labor support most of my adult life but no longer – their agenda is not ours.