21 October 2013

ACT blinking on Gay Marriage

| johnboy
Join the conversation
28

The ABC reports that Simon Corbell’s legal advice on gay marriage is looking Notso Hotso and the Chief Minister is muttering about amendments:

Ms Gallagher has signalled the bill could be amended during tomorrow’s debate in the Legislative Assembly.

“We’re certainly looking at it and the Attorney-General and I have had some discussions over the weekend, and there’s a little bit more discussions to be had,” she said.

The ABC’s fact check unit thinks Simon has screwed the pooch:

When ABC Fact Check last looked at state laws on same-sex marriage, it found the issue to be a lawyer’s picnic. A challenge to the ACT laws looks equally tasty for the legal community.

However, the ACT bill has some problems and its long-term prospects are doubtful. A rethink may be needed if the ACT wants to persuade the High Court that a same-sex marriage law can operate concurrently with the Commonwealth Marriage Act.

Join the conversation

28
All Comments
  • All Comments
  • Website Comments
LatestOldest
thebrownstreak6911:58 am 22 Oct 13

PantsMan said :

What, so now transgender people cannot get married? And the gay people who do only get an second-class Territory marriage?

Sounds like discrimination to me.

This is an interesting point. Maybe the ACT govt should be lobbying the feds for a national solution.

Robertson said :

Well, a good proportion of people understand “marriage” as being a union of man and wife. Some of us may have been sympathetic to legislative changes that, after all, wouldn’t affect us, however the rabid and aggressive reaction towards anybody who questions why “homosexual marriage” is an issue has convinced plenty of us that we have no sympathy the anti-social extremists who are lobbying for this change, for through their vicious attacks on those who disagree with them we see them as the sociopaths that they clearly are.

Marriage isn’t a “right” – never was and never will be.
I don’t know for whose benefit all this is, but it seems perfectly obvious that the greater good would be far better served by addressing the real issues which need attention, such as the failing public education system and the appallingly inefficient healthcare system.[/quote>

There was a time a good proportion of people thought women shouldn’t vote, slavery of black people was ok as well. Society evolves and the people wasting the money are those opposing it. Its not going to affect anyone in any way other than being able to bully their beliefs onto society as a whole.

The way i see, if two gay people get married, nobody is hurt. If its the other way around people are hurt. Just like two people don’t need to be married either to have children, yet many would find this a sin, however it doesn’t affect anyone but the couple.

The money wasting is coming from the opposition to the issue. There is no need for a high court case, other than for political gain on the coalition side. This will eventually happen at federal government level so the money is definately wasted in opposition.

PBO said :

Wow, did anyone else hear the worlds tiniest violin playing the world’s saddest kylie tune over ScienceRules’s lisp riddled guilt trip?

No.

What, so now transgender people cannot get married? And the gay people who do only get an second-class Territory marriage?

Sounds like discrimination to me.

Also, will mainstream religions be forced by the Commonwealth Anti-Discrimination Act to perform ceremonies?

ScienceRules said :

voytek3 said :

Who cares? Non issue not worthy of the back page of the chronicle.

Unless you’re gay. Or have loved ones who are gay. Or are a decent human being.

Wow, did anyone else hear the worlds tiniest violin playing the world’s saddest kylie tune over ScienceRules’s lisp riddled guilt trip? How the hell do you type a word with a lispish twist anyway? CTRL-ALT L?

This bill probably would have been happily passed by everyone a long time ago if it wasnt for the Today-Tonight, Flaming, Overly Militant homosexualist’s scaring the public with their “in your face” lifestyle choices and gay-extremist views.

I hope this homosexual terror campaign is dealt with and pushed aside for some worthier socially retarding problem like catching Downs Syndrome from unclean toilet seats or Lefthandedism.

Robertson said :

I think it’s sad that the people who should be providing public education, healthcare, roads and water & sewerage are apparently at such a loose end they can devote the time (and our money) to playing these stupid political games with issues that are none of their business.

A competent ACT Government should be able to deal with core issues and still address issues such as these without dropping the ball. If it turns out that the Territory does not have the power, then they should be able to, cheaply, keep applying pressure on the Feds to do something. If the Territory does have the power then they have a responsibility to address the issue for or, in my opinion, less ideally, against….. but I will be among the many who will be very pissed if they’ve spent a lot of money and stuffed the wording.

ScienceRules7:17 pm 21 Oct 13

Robertson said :

I think it’s sad that the people who should be providing public education, healthcare, roads and water & sewerage are apparently at such a loose end they can devote the time (and our money) to playing these stupid political games with issues that are none of their business.

Maybe they can do more that one thing at a time. And why would it not be any of their business? It’s exactly the sort of thing that government needs to address. You know, basic human rights and all.

ScienceRules7:16 pm 21 Oct 13

voytek3 said :

Who cares? Non issue not worthy of the back page of the chronicle.

Unless you’re gay. Or have loved ones who are gay. Or are a decent human being.

Robertson said :

the anti-social extremists who are lobbying for this change, for through their vicious attacks on those who disagree with them we see them as the sociopaths that they clearly are.

BWA AHA HA HAHAHA AHA HAH

Yeah, the ‘gay marriage terrorists’ have been terrible.

BW AHA HA HA HAHAHAHAHA HAHA

Who cares? Non issue not worthy of the back page of the chronicle.

Jim Jones said :

CrocodileGandhi said :

I wonder how many people at the time thought that there were better things to spend money and time on than allowing women or indigenous people to vote.

All the “I’m-not-racist-but…” people.

The ‘it’s just a waste of taxpayers money’ arguments come from people who haven’t the slightest idea what time or money has been spent, but (rather unsurprisingly) consider it all a waste anyway. Given this revelation that they believe that any amount of time and/or money dedicated to equal rights is a waste, it’s hilarious that so many people who’ve been called out for homophobia previously think that they can hide their nastiness behind that ‘waste of my taxdollars’ bollocks.

Well, a good proportion of people understand “marriage” as being a union of man and wife. Some of us may have been sympathetic to legislative changes that, after all, wouldn’t affect us, however the rabid and aggressive reaction towards anybody who questions why “homosexual marriage” is an issue has convinced plenty of us that we have no sympathy the anti-social extremists who are lobbying for this change, for through their vicious attacks on those who disagree with them we see them as the sociopaths that they clearly are.

Marriage isn’t a “right” – never was and never will be.
I don’t know for whose benefit all this is, but it seems perfectly obvious that the greater good would be far better served by addressing the real issues which need attention, such as the failing public education system and the appallingly inefficient healthcare system.

HiddenDragon4:25 pm 21 Oct 13

I was interested to learn, from the ABC “fact check” item, that it took sixty years of Federation before the Commonwealth felt the need to “bring the regulation of marriage into the jurisdiction of the Commonwealth”:

http://www.aph.gov.au/About_Parliament/Parliamentary_Departments/Parliamentary_Library/pubs/BN/2011-2012/SameSexMarriage

and from the same source that: “The colonial statutes dealing with marriage and divorce were subject to disallowance by the Imperial Parliament, with a view, as Quick and Garran explained, to securing ‘uniformity of marriage laws among the Christian races of the Empire’ “.

This will be an interesting one to watch.

CrocodileGandhi said :

I wonder how many people at the time thought that there were better things to spend money and time on than allowing women or indigenous people to vote.

All the “I’m-not-racist-but…” people.

The ‘it’s just a waste of taxpayers money’ arguments come from people who haven’t the slightest idea what time or money has been spent, but (rather unsurprisingly) consider it all a waste anyway. Given this revelation that they believe that any amount of time and/or money dedicated to equal rights is a waste, it’s hilarious that so many people who’ve been called out for homophobia previously think that they can hide their nastiness behind that ‘waste of my taxdollars’ bollocks.

Oh, and I hope that JB’s comment that “Simon has screwed the pooch” was a lapsus calami, else he will raise the whole bestiality side-show again.

It is, no doubt, an entirely metaphorical dog.

But having told us how ironclad his legal advice was things are not looking good.

The proposed changes will not satisfy anyone, except the government and the lawyers.

Those opposed to gay marriage will obviously not be satisfied by it.

Those who support gay marriage won’t be satisfied by it either, as it will be separate from marriage between heterosexual couples. Does anyone else remember “Separate but equal?”

CrocodileGandhi2:56 pm 21 Oct 13

I wonder how many people at the time thought that there were better things to spend money and time on than allowing women or indigenous people to vote.

Woody Mann-Caruso said :

EVERY TIME A GUBMINT LOYA GIVES ADVICE ABOUT GAY MARIJ A BABY DIES IN TEh EMERGENCY WARD

EVERY TIME A GUMINT LOYER GIVS ADVYCE ABOUT GAY MARIJ, AN ENOSENT RODE WORKA CATCHZ TEH AIEDS!

And it will just get worse…lol.

Why is this such a bigger issue than it should be, let them get married so they can suffer in equality like the rest of us…….

Woody Mann-Caruso said :

EVERY TIME A GUBMINT LOYA GIVES ADVICE ABOUT GAY MARIJ A BABY DIES IN TEh EMERGENCY WARD

Even the most rabid extremist wouldn’t usually find a one-to-one correlative relationship like that. Not to mention using a grieving family who has recently lost their baby as a political football.

Woody Mann-Caruso2:20 pm 21 Oct 13

EVERY TIME A GUBMINT LOYA GIVES ADVICE ABOUT GAY MARIJ A BABY DIES IN TEh EMERGENCY WARD

I see a lot more taxpayers money spent on expensive barristers, good luck with reducing hospital waiting times when we’re out of cash.

This is an interesting spin on the issue – everything that I’ve read indicates that the ACT government is simply making it clear in the law that this relates only to marriage for same-sex couples so that there is less opportunity to slap the law down for contradicting federal marriage law which is specifically between a man and a woman.

Surely it makes sense that a government interested in passing and protecting a law would take every measure possible to present the best possible version of that law.

I think it’s sad that the people who should be providing public education, healthcare, roads and water & sewerage are apparently at such a loose end they can devote the time (and our money) to playing these stupid political games with issues that are none of their business.

I think it is sad that the homosexual community are being used in wedge politics.

thebrownstreak6912:54 pm 21 Oct 13

Does anyone else see that under the ‘recommended for you’ section at the bottom (hee hee) of the Canberra Times story is a link to another story called ‘Miss my arse’?

Passing judgement much? What about our sisters in the fight, whay aren’t their needs being addressed? It’s a Human Rights issue.

I’m pretty sure that there is a basic constitutional concept called “covering the field” in which all State/Territory legislation touching upon a particular area is invalid because one cannot one cannot obey both laws at the one time, or because one law purports to confer a right that other purports to take away.

But the ACT Government knows better?

Don’t check with someone who knows Simon, spend $15 million of our money making a d%ck of yourself.

CrocodileGandhi11:57 am 21 Oct 13

I don’t see this as being a problem. Surely they just need to take on whatever advice is offered and amend it in a manner that will give it the best chance of standing up to a challege. If after these amendments it still doesn’t stand up to scrutiny, then we know that this is an issue that is completely in the Federal domain and pursue it there. until then, they should do whatever they can to try and get it up here.

Daily Digest

Want the best Canberra news delivered daily? Every day we package the most popular Riotact stories and send them straight to your inbox. Sign-up now for trusted local news that will never be behind a paywall.

By submitting your email address you are agreeing to Region Group's terms and conditions and privacy policy.