‘Coalition out of step’ – AME
Marriage equality advocates have said that continuing opposition to same sex marriage in the Liberal and National parties is out of step with the views of Coalition voters.
During debate on a Greens bill allowing the ACT and Northern Territory greater autonomy, the Shadow Attorney-General, George Brandis, made it clear the Coalition continues to oppose marriage rights for same-sex couples by arguing that the bill needed to be amended to specifically stop territories passing laws that conflicted with the Federal Marriage Act.
“They have, in effect, whether they realised it or not, given their sanction to gay marriage in the ACT,” Brandis said.
Brandis was joined by the Liberal Senator Mathias Cormann who attacked the Greens’ social policies.
“The Coalition is very supportive for us to have a comprehensive look at how self-governing arrangements can be improved,” Cormann said, “But this is not what is driving the Greens.”
“The Greens are driven by their social agenda in relation to same-sex marriage, in relation to euthanasia.”
Australian Marriage Equality (AME) spokesman Peter Furness said recent polls had shown good support among Coalition voters across Australia – including in Coalition held electorates, supported same-sex marriage.
“Polling consistently shows that more Coalition voters support marriage equality than oppose it, and an overwhelming majority of voters in key Coalition-held electorates where surveys have been conducted also support equality”, Furness said.
“Coalition MPs in electorates where there is strong support for marriage equality deserve the right to represent their voters, so we call on Tony Abbott to allow a conscience vote on the issue.”
“We also call on Mr Abbott to rule out Coalition support for a national civil union scheme, because such a scheme would entrench a second-class status for same-sex relationships and not help remove discrimination.”
National polls by Galaxy Research have consistently found about 50 percent of Coalition voters supported same sex marriage, with only 45 percent opposed.
Liberal MPs, Teresa Gambaro and Malcolm Turnbull both found support over 70 percent in their electorates while Joe Hockey found 78 percent support among young people in his electorate.
78 percent of Australians support a conscience vote on the issue, including 75 percent of Coalition voters.
Furness said Australian Marriage Equality supports the right of states and territories to legislate for same-sex marriage if they wished to.
Meanwhile the Greens have warned that people living in Liberal electorates will have their voice silenced on the issue of marriage equality as a result of the Liberals practically ruling out a conscience vote on the issue.
“Today the Deputy Leader of the Opposition, Senator George Brandis, practically closed the door on allowing a conscience vote for Liberal members of Parliament,” Greens’ Senator Sarah Hanson-Young said, “This is disappointing as the position on marriage equality should not be dictated by party politics and the voice of local communities should be heard.”
“Those living in Liberal electorates should have the same say as other voters on this important reform. Marriage equality isn’t a Labor, Liberal or Green issue – there is strong support for this across the political divide and in electorates right across the country.
“Why should these communities be denied the right to have their voice heard?”
Meanwhile national progressive lobby group GetUp! Have launched a final push to have supporters of same-sex marriage contact their local MPs before they report back to the parliament on their consultations with constituents on the issue.
INFO: To take part go to www.getup.org.au/marriagematters
I am sorry Ben,
There is another Ben that writes in here from the Labor Party. I could not imagine him being as handsome as you! I hope you were not offended.
I argue for parenting rights, but I will never be having children, as I have seen the work couples who are gay have put into them, and I would be to exhausted to do the work they do. So running off to New York and getting married will not change my ability to argue for this to be recognized, or for us to be included in the Federal Equal Opportunity Act.
I think you’re confusing me for someone else.
I have said nothing in support of civil unions, nor will I ever, and I am not a member or supporter of any political party.
I wish you all the best with your marriage however.
Oh Ben, the Labor Party still advocates for discrimination and does even include us in the Federal Equal Opportunity Act, let along give us the right to marry. There is, of course, the way around that silly Gillard document. And if I continue to fight, wear a red shirt, or just enjoy life, it will not affect your previous arguments for Civil Unions. I will also not be joining your beloved Labor Party either.
At the Marriage hate rally, in the Great Hall, there was of course the Labor party member, standing side by side people who called us Evil and tried to get people to kill us. You will have to forgive me if I do not feel compelled to run off and join Labor. I acknowledge the work of people within Labor who are working for change, but I can only judge the party by the actions of its leader and the policy outcomes. So far I am yet to hear Gillard berate the ALP member who was stiring up hate against us.
Sorry to burst your bubble Dave, but the government will not issue a very important document you’ll need to get married overseas if it is a gay marriage.
Save yourself the heart-ache and join us to change things here rather than running away from it.
Dylan
I see where your point, but religious groups never owned marriage. They only ever owned their own different ceremonies. Most do not even agree on each other or the role of women in a church let alone us. Most marriages have no church at all. It is simply a legal contract that gives rights and protections. The argument from most people of conservative religions as that it makes homosexuality normal. So you get the usual deviate comments etc against us when it is mentioned – how we want to molest children etc. It is a bit like saying a Buddhist should be Christian. It has nothing to do with conservative church people who I live with or marry. If they win on this, they will turn back the clock on many areas. I am though, off to New York soon, as I am not waiting, and when the law change happens, I will already be married. I am having a choice about when I get married.
Until recent history, it was not the business of any government who got married. People had a celebration with their family and friends and that was it. Same-sex couples married, straight couples married, it was up them, not some government. They announced they were married at the celebration and that was it. Now we have regulations, and so comes rights and protections with those regulations.
But if you think about it, poll after poll shows the majority of Australians support Marriage Equality. And the hate rally in Canberra against Marriage could only raise a few hundred people. Mardi Gras has hundreds of thousands, and Midsummer about a 100,000. The vast majority of young Labor and Liberal, strongly support equality. A generational change in parliament is taking shape, just as it did to end the White Australia Policy, and to treat Aboriginal people as citizens.
There are over 1084 pieces of legalisation that refer to the Marriage Act. It would take years and years of parliament to change all these. Certainly no person who advocates for Civil Unions, like Malcolm Turnbull, is proposing to give any of the same protections the Marriage Contract has. They are putting up a passive argument, a Civil Union without power – no rights and no protections. And I have to ask, what business is it of Malcolm Turnbull’s who I marry? I did not turn up to his wedding and tell his wife to do a runner. Butting into the lives of people and telling them who to marry is a recipe for disaster.
It is interesting how the Liberal Party argues we should pay Equal taxes, but not have Equal laws. There is certainly a contradiction in the way some Australians are treated. I thought being a Liberal, was about reducing the “Nanny State”, not increasing it.
Since when has George Brandis been “Deputy Leader of the Opposition”? Seriously, sometimes Sarah Hanson-Young needs to engage her brain before opening her mouth …
I agree with almost every point here. The only one I don’t understand is the push against a civil union system.
I say “That’s fine! You don’t want to give us marriage because of religious context, whatever. Legally abolish the term marriage and replace it with “civil union” or “oogalaboogala” or whatever term you want. Let the religious keep “marriage” sacred and pure (which they’ve been doing a bang-up job of thus far, I must say) as a religious ceremony individual churches can regulate per their assorted traditions, which enacts a civil union, and let the legal system provide protection and security equally for all Australians.”
Sometimes it feels like the push for equality under the law has transformed into a “get this ‘word'” scenario.
We don’t want “marriage” per se, we just want the same as our heterosexual counterparts. Or am I missing a major point here?
Be very afraid if Tony Abbott ever becomes the PM of this country. We’ve seen glimpses of what his social agenda is if the last few days are anything to go by – particularly in the actions from people in the shadow ministry. I can’t believe that womens’ groups haven’t also been up in arms over the sexist, patronising remarks made by Barnaby Joyce and Bob Katter the other day. Abbott should have scolded them for it, but of course, we all know they just verbalised what he thinks privately anyway. The fact that he would have Kevin Andrews (who belongs to the Exclusive Brethren) as “Family and Community Services” Minister says it all.
Tony Abbott, patting Kevin Andrews on the head, for standing shoulder to shoulder at the anti-marriage rally, trying to get people to kill us, as they said we are the “Greatest Evil”, and we want to molest children, while Barny the Banana applauded, is the only radical social agenda I know of.
I am no fan of Julia Gillard, but parading a coffin around with her name on it, while Tony Abbott laughs and applauds, is certainly a radical departure from the behaviour of a member of parliament. It is the actions of a criminal.
Saying that the Greatest Gift a woman can give is virginity, left me speechless, but there was that radical again, the Liberal Party.
Not letting some people access health care when they are old and sick based on their sexuality, excluding them from protections in the Equal Opportunity Act, is also a radical social agenda.
I stand honouring those of us who have died like my first great love at the hands of hate inspired bashers, and I will continue to fight of the living.
But lest we forget Malcolm Turnbull, who has been silent on all this, not having the courage or conviction to do the right thing, and take a stand to save the Liberal Party, from a radical social agenda.