| Subject: Howard ... would you just shut up?! |
Author:
No name
|
[
Next Thread |
Previous Thread |
Next Message |
Previous Message
]
Date Posted: Tuesday, June 01, 03:33:24am
In reply to:
Sexuality Officer
's message, "Same-Sex Marriage Debate" on Wednesday, May 19, 11:04:53pm
BAN ON SAME-SEX MARRIAGES DOESN'T TARGET GAYS: PM
April 27, 2004
Prime Minister John Howard today denied he was targeting gay people when he signalled a ban on same sex marriages, saying he was just stating what most people thought.
Mr Howard says he wants to overhaul the Marriage Act to say that marriage could only be between a man and woman, and to stop courts recognising foreign gay unions, to defend traditional families.
"The proposal would be to simply insert a definition in the Marriage Act which gives formal expression to what most people regard to be the case - and that is marriage, as we understand it in Australia, is between a man and woman," Mr Howard said.
"This is not directed at gay people. It's directed at reaffirming a bedrock understanding of our society."
Mr Howard said the existing law did not contain the formal definition that marriage was between a man and a woman.
"I just believe it. There are certain institutions that we understand to have a certain meaning and why not say so?" he said.
Labor is not likely to oppose Mr Howard's amendments.
Opposition attorney-general spokeswoman Nicola Roxon has said Labor would consider closing off Australian recognition over overseas gay marriages.
Greens Senator Bob Brown said Mr Howard should relax and accept gay marriages as part of the future's social fabric.
"Like women getting the vote and Britain giving up its empire, gay marriage is inevitable. It's logical. It's part of the future," he said.
Senator Brown said Labor appeared ready to turn its back on its history as socially just, progressive and reformist.
Equal Rights Network spokesman Rodney Croome said Mr Howard was proposing to cement in place a second-class status for homosexual relationships.
"Not so long ago, marriage defined women as property and excluded inter-racial unions, but it changed, and it should be allowed to change again to incorporate and celebrate same sex unions," Mr Croome said.
"What the Howard government is proposing will set in concrete the second-class status of same sex relationships for years to come, with much less hope that this status can change to match rapid and inevitable changes in community attitudes."
Mr Croome also expressed disappointment at Labor's stance.
Australian Democrats justice spokesman Senator Brian Greig vowed the legislation would be vigorously opposed by the Democrats.
"Most gay and lesbian people in long-term relationships demonstrate the same love, respect, commitment and dedication that most heterosexual couples do," Senator Greig said.
"Denying same-sex couples the right to any formal legal recognition of their unions just imposes social, legal and financial discrimination on them and any children they may be raising."
But the Australian Christian Lobby welcomed the proposal and said the government was standing up for family values.
[
Next Thread |
Previous Thread |
Next Message |
Previous Message
]
| |
Feedback: 