Report to United Nations: Make gay marriage legal in Australia
No matter who wins the August 21 federal election, the Australian Human Rights Commission will call for Australia to allow same-sex couples to marry at a United Nations meeting.
A commission report lodged with the UN reads, “The Commission recommends that … the Government take all possible steps to enable equal recognition of same-sex marriage.”
The submission will be considered during the Universal Periodic Review of Australia’s human rights in January.
The Commission also notes, “There is no federal law prohibiting discrimin-ation on the ground of sexuality”, in Australia, calling for reform.
It also found GLBTI people “experience significant levels of violence, harassment and bullying in the workplace and the community”, calling on the government to be more attentive when it comes to tackling violence against GLBTI people and other vulnerable minorities.
NSW Gay and Lesbian Rights Lobby policy coordinator Senthorun Raj said he was pleased the Commission had recognised the need for a range of GLBTI reforms, but that the Lobby had wished for a recommendation for same-sex adoption.
“We’re very pleased the Commission has not only acknowledged the necessity for federal protection for people on the basis of sexual orientation and gender identity, but also included a further step in advocating that same-sex couples have the right to marry,” Raj told Sydney Star Observer.
“These two pieces of federal reform would greatly enhance the status of same-sex couples and gay and lesbian individuals in Australia.
“However, while the Commission at least acknowledged our position in a footnote, further steps are needed to ensure that all states and territories across Australia amend their adoption laws to permit same sex couples to be eligible to adopt.”
The lack of anti-discrimination protection for persons who are intersex or sex and gender diverse, and that sex and gender diverse Australians may have difficulty obtaining documents that reflect their sex or gender status, were other areas of concern raised by the Commission.
“The Commission recommends that sex or gender diversity be included as grounds of discrimination in federal laws, and that the Sex Files report be implemented.”
Raj said the lobby had made its own submission to the Universal Periodic Review focusing on adoption, in partnership with the Sexual Rights Initiative, an international coalition of GLBTI groups.
It is understood the Australian Coalition for Equality and Australian Marriage Equality have partnered with other organisations to do the same.
You May Also Like
I seem to have stirred some people sensibilities with semantics.
Ofcourse ,it is a matter of equality.
All I am saying, is that in this current society , especially in Australia , the Christian Churches hav a great deal of economic and political push behind their public persona. We need to deal with this in 2010. Yes they apprpriated marriage . The fact is, they have, and use it for their own purposes. I have several friends in Europe and have been to many ceremonies there. They have all with one or two exceptions been outside a church and the name for them officially was a commitment ceremony. Ofcourse, everyone there, thought of it as a marriage and it was, under the law.
This is a matter of semantics.Surely we are not going to let a word get in the way of our progress to a full and open society
Every society has had a ceremony of some description to recognize that two people are in a committed relationship to each other. Same-Sex Marriage has been documented in Pre-Modern Europe, Ancient Rome, and Imperial China. Even Jesus affirmed a Same-Sex couple http://www.whywouldwe.net . To think the Church owns Marriage is very wrong. It does not and never has. The community has always owned it. I think the case for Same-Sex Marriage has not been made to all in the GLBTQI community. It has just been thrust upon people assuming they all would say “I do”.
Every couple has the right for a society to recognize a relationship. In Australia only a Marriage Certificate gives the highest recognition by our Government and the Courts. Recently I attended my brother’s wedding in a park by a lake. It was a Scottish Celebrant. He went through all the rituals that used to happen before Governments decided who could Marry Who. The village got together, and did things like making the couple climb over a broom stick held by the In-Laws. It was that simple once upon a time. There was no compulsory Government announcement, “The Australian Government defines a Marriage as a Union between a Man and a Woman to the exclusion of all others”. Marriage happened simply without John Howard or Julia Gillard butting in.
Initially I did not believe in Same-Sex Marriage. It seemed very radical. I am openly gay and very comfortable about that. But Marriage seemed to out there for me. It was trouble.
I started to think though, and do research. We did have a right to have our relationship recognised just like the next couple. A Civil Marriage, like my brothers, without the overtone of Church, is a very acceptable notion. The Government has brought this problem onto themselves by butting into the relationships. It is the Governments problem they do not recognize us. They, after all, are the ones who wanted to be intimately involved every Marriage. They wanted to decide who loves who and how much they love each other.
I can well understand some people are uneasy as I was about Same-Sex Marriage. But if you look at the facts, and the history, then I think most people can only come to the conclusion Same-Sex Marriage is a right. The Government has no place deciding if we love each other more or less then the next couple. Having a second class system such as a Civil Union makes us second class people. Let us be bold and brave. We have the courage and conviction to get Same-Sex Marriage. We will get this. History is on our side. Our love for our partners is as strong and meaningful as the next couple and should have no boundary placed on it.
Shame Australia, shame! As a signatory to the Human Rights Convention do we have to drag our filthy linen onto the world stage? I’m with you Peter. I’ve been portrayed as a veherment opponent to ‘gay marriage’. It’s the word itself I object to. Why not simply Equal Human Rights with all the priviliges & responsibilities it entails? Anyway, those who want marriage have that opportunity already. It’s called the Metropolitan Community Church (for those who follow the Christian ethic). Perpetual love from Hell xoxoxo
dear peter Bining,
7 countries here in Europe have marriage for same sex and opposite sex couples. and these 7 countries have Marriage with all of the rights, and not limited civil unions (except Portugal who denies children to be adopted for them). And there are 10 countries in the world with this same marriage.
secondly, the marriage was “abducted” by religions but before the Vth century was a roman institution and gay couples could marry. was the christian emperors who excluded gays from marrying and even executed those who were already married. so no sacred stuff, sorry! just a roman contract!
so civil marriage is the point, equality and no more. religious marriage is another fight, more or less interesting but is not our fight right now (at least not mine… nevertheless I can see is the next step in our countries where we already have the civil marriage).
good luck australia, you are ready for equality and you know it, let your leaders know that!
david
barcelona, spain
““Marriage” was origionally a sacrement of various religions who are against homosexuality.”
– Not true… homophobia was invented 2,000 years ago- marriage was around before then, including same sex marriage. Think back to 300BC when Alexander The Great was the ruler of the known world, with his male partner Hephastian. Homopbobia hadn’t been invented at that point. The elite King’s army was made up of 140 pairs of male lovers. Think beyond the last 2,000 years- there are examples of same sex couples & same sex marriage all across the world & different cultures, before Christian Missionaries have spread homophobia across the globe in the last 2,000 years, and “deleting” as much information & history records as they could along the way. Lucky much information still survives.
Marriage is a fine institution…but who wants to live in an institution.
:P
Homosexuality is not a choice. Just like you don’t choose the color of your skin, you cannot choose whom you are sexually attracted to. If you can, sorry, but you are not heterosexual, you are bi-sexual. Virtually all major psychological and medical experts agree that sexual orientation is NOT a choice. Most gay people will tell you its not a choice. Common sense will tell you its not a choice. While science is relatively new to studying homosexuality, studies tend to indicate that its biological.
(Change *** to www)
***-news.uchicago.edu/releases/03/differential-brain-activation.pdf
***.newscientist.com/channel/sex/dn14146-gay-brains-structured-like-those-of-the-opposite-sex.html
Gay, Straight Men’s Brain Responses Differ
***.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,155990,00.html
***.livescience.com/health/060224_gay_genes.html
***.springerlink.com/content/w27453600k586276/
To those of you using the Bible as a weapon against homosexuality, you are wrong. Homosexuality is not a sin. The Bible is constantly being taken out of context to support anti-gay views. Scholars who have studied the Bible in context of the times and in relation to other passages have shown those passages (Leviticus, Corinthians, Romans, etc) have nothing to do with homosexuality. These passages often cherry-picked while ignoring the rest of the Bible. The sins theses passages are referring to are idolatry, Greek temple sex worship, prostitution, pederasty with teen boys, and rape, not homosexuality or two loving consenting adults.
To those of you using the Bible as a weapon against homosexuality, you are wrong. Homosexuality is not a sin. The Bible is constantly being taken out of context to support anti-gay views. Scholars who have studied the Bible in context of the times and in relation to other passages have shown those passages (Leviticus, Corinthians, Romans, etc) have nothing to do with homosexuality. These passages often cherry-picked while ignoring the rest of the Bible. The sins theses passages are referring to are idolatry, Greek temple sex worship, prostitution, pederasty with teen boys, and rape, not homosexuality or two loving consenting adults.
http://www.soulfoodministry.org/docs/English/NotASin.htm
http://www.jesus21.com/content/sex/bible_homosexuality_print.html
http://www.christchapel.com/reclaiming.html
http://www.stjohnsmcc.org/new/BibleAbuse/BiblicalReferences.php
http://www.gaychristian101.com/
Thats why Jesus never mentions it as well. There is nothing immoral, wrong, or sinful about being gay. Jesus, however, clearly states he HATES hypocrisy. If you preach goodness, then promote hate and twist the words of the Bible, you are a hypocrite, and will be judged and sent to hell. Homosexuals will not go to hell, hypocrites will.
This is very similar to the religious bigots of the past, where they took Bible passages to condone slavery, keep women down, and used Bible passages to claim blacks as curses who should be enslaved by the white man. People used God to claim that blacks marrying whites was unnatural, and not of God’s will.
@ Peter:
This is a matter of equality for all under the law.
If churches do not agree with gay marriages, they would not be forced to conduct them!
Marriage is no longer the sole domain of religious organisations. Many couples in Australia are married by a celebrant in a ceremony with no mention of any god or any religion. Gay couples should have the same legal right. Until they do, ‘democracy’ is not a term that can truthfully be applied to Australia.
As a Gay man of an older generation who has survived persecution incl. arrest and Electric Aversion Therapy, I do support the idea of “Gay Marriage”.
However, we should clarify some things. “Marriage” was origionally a sacrement of various religions who
are against homosexuality.
Europe and other places for the most part do not have :Gay Marriage: as such, they have civil unions at a registary office. Most people then refer to this as Gay Marriage.
There are very few religious organizations that will condone such ceremonies.
In most places in the world , when people want to “Marry”, they must register this first at a Civil Office i.e. the Town Hall, before having a wedding in a church. Our marriage act does not do this.You sign a register during the service.
I think therefore, that we should be pushing for a Civil Union, because our reactionary religious bodies for the most part will never agree and they do have a very powerful lobby group in our country.
Ofcourse, if we get this then we will also have to have Gay Divorce and all its rammifications.
Come on Aussie’s, history will look back at this time and see all the ‘true freedom countries’ and who all helped the ball rolling to a better world. Dont fall to far behind; even Argentina can now consider itself one of the top 10 nations of the millenium.
This is heartening however I wonder if it will make a difference. Let us hope we will finally catch up with the rest of the world !
Kudos to Argentina, and many other countries, cities, and states around the world for supporting full civil and marriage equality rights in the 21st century.
And to Connecticut, where we legalized civil unions in 2005,and marriage equality in 2008.
Onward, Joe Mustich & Ken Cornet, Justices of the Peace,
Washington, Connecticut, USA.
It’s time Australia.