Skip to content Skip to main navigation

Community

The ANU College of Law
Australia’s National Law School

From civil unions Simon cracks on to gay marriage

By johnboy - 23 August 2012 36

After getting his Civil Unions legislation through the Assembly last night Simon Corbell has announced a more ambitious push just so we’re all clear where he’s coming from:

“Marriage equality is an issue that deserves a collaborative approach and I am pleased that my Tasmanian counter-part, Attorney General, Hon. Brian Wightman MP, has agreed to proceed with discussions that would see our two progressive governments work together to further state and territory-based legislation to promote same-sex marriage.

“The Tasmanian Government has announced its support for legislation to grant marriage equality for same-sex couples in Tasmania within the current term of Government. Following my discussions with Mr Wightman we have agreed to share information that may assist the other jurisdiction to develop laws that provide for same-sex marriage.”

What’s Your opinion?


Post a comment
Please login to post your comments, or connect with
36 Responses to
From civil unions Simon cracks on to gay marriage
Holden Caulfield 2:44 pm 23 Aug 12

Jethro said :

Holden Caulfield said :

As a general concept I am fully supportive of equality in marriage rights.

But as a run of the mill hetero guy who is happily married, I’ve never really looked into what the existing inequalities are regarding same sex relationships.

Anyone care to inform my lazy arse?

At the end of the day marriage is little more than a symbolic institution for straights or gays, as most legal rights stemming from marriage exist anyway. But it is important symbolism and it is an institution that many value. Being married to someone often carries more social recognition than being a de-facto partner of someone. Refusing to allow certain couples to be married is symbolic of the fact that some people see these relationships as less valid or valuable.Just because marriage doesn’t necessarily bring more legal protection than a de-facto relationship doesn’t mean that the gay marriage issue isn’t important. How would you feel if the law said you weren’t allowed to marry your partner?

It would suck and I would want it changed.

Like I said, I agree with the general concept. I’m just not up to speed on the finer details, that’s all.

Jim Jones 2:40 pm 23 Aug 12

HenryBG said :

Jethro said :

SnapperJack said :

Would you believe the gays *still* aren’t happy. They’re saying it doesn’t go far enough. Perhaps they want normal marriage to be abolished and gay marriage to be made compulsory.

I know.. wanting equal access to a major social institution. The nerve of them.

Everybody has access to it, but there is no such thing as “equal” access.
Find a partner of the opposite sex who agrees, and you can get married. That’s what “marriage” means.
There’s no “right” to get married, no guarantee that you will find somebody who agrees, and it isn’t compulsory for you to do it.

“Wrong side of history”, indeed. Bunch of fruitloops.

Ah, good old Henry BiGot!

chewy14 1:36 pm 23 Aug 12

Holden Caulfield said :

chewy14 said :

So much time and effort wasted on something that shouldn’t be anything to do with any government.

I still can’t believe that so many people need the government to bless their “Love”.

Isn’t it about the rights that go with the GovCo blessing? Such as next-of-kin in the event of life threatening emergency, superannuation and the like?

Not withstanding the fact that the civil union bill already did this, why do we need a government sanctioned ceremony at all?

Everyone should be able to register any relationship(s) they want. They can then organise any ceremony they want and call their union whatever the hell they want to.

The government should not be involved in peoples ‘love’.

DrKoresh 12:46 pm 23 Aug 12

SnapperJack said :

Would you believe the gays *still* aren’t happy. They’re saying it doesn’t go far enough. Perhaps they want normal marriage to be abolished and gay marriage to be made compulsory.

What f***ing planet do you come from? Of course they’re not happy, they’re still being arbitrarily discriminated against by not being allowed to marry. As for the abolishing normal marriage nonsense, I can’t even believe someone would be stupid enough to even utter such crap. Pull your head out and maybe you’ll stop having farts instead of thoughts.

Jethro 12:38 pm 23 Aug 12

Holden Caulfield said :

As a general concept I am fully supportive of equality in marriage rights.

But as a run of the mill hetero guy who is happily married, I’ve never really looked into what the existing inequalities are regarding same sex relationships.

Anyone care to inform my lazy arse?

At the end of the day marriage is little more than a symbolic institution for straights or gays, as most legal rights stemming from marriage exist anyway. But it is important symbolism and it is an institution that many value. Being married to someone often carries more social recognition than being a de-facto partner of someone. Refusing to allow certain couples to be married is symbolic of the fact that some people see these relationships as less valid or valuable.Just because marriage doesn’t necessarily bring more legal protection than a de-facto relationship doesn’t mean that the gay marriage issue isn’t important. How would you feel if the law said you weren’t allowed to marry your partner?

Comic_and_Gamer_Nerd 12:32 pm 23 Aug 12

snoopydoc said :

One wonders just how long the religious / conservative / wowser faction can hold back the tide of common sense… and whether the federal government’s weird desire to pander to a very small percentage of voters (the aforementioned cognitively/ethically challenged folk) will result in a replay of the heavy-handed “thou shalt not” enacted by the Howard government the last time the ACT took a step in the right direction on this issue… ?

quoted for truth

HenryBG 12:32 pm 23 Aug 12

Jethro said :

SnapperJack said :

Would you believe the gays *still* aren’t happy. They’re saying it doesn’t go far enough. Perhaps they want normal marriage to be abolished and gay marriage to be made compulsory.

I know.. wanting equal access to a major social institution. The nerve of them.

Everybody has access to it, but there is no such thing as “equal” access.
Find a partner of the opposite sex who agrees, and you can get married. That’s what “marriage” means.
There’s no “right” to get married, no guarantee that you will find somebody who agrees, and it isn’t compulsory for you to do it.

“Wrong side of history”, indeed. Bunch of fruitloops.

Holden Caulfield 12:32 pm 23 Aug 12

chewy14 said :

So much time and effort wasted on something that shouldn’t be anything to do with any government.

I still can’t believe that so many people need the government to bless their “Love”.

Isn’t it about the rights that go with the GovCo blessing? Such as next-of-kin in the event of life threatening emergency, superannuation and the like?

chewy14 12:18 pm 23 Aug 12

So much time and effort wasted on something that shouldn’t be anything to do with any government.

I still can’t believe that so many people need the government to bless their “Love”.

Holden Caulfield 12:13 pm 23 Aug 12

As a general concept I am fully supportive of equality in marriage rights.

But as a run of the mill hetero guy who is happily married, I’ve never really looked into what the existing inequalities are regarding same sex relationships.

Anyone care to inform my lazy arse?

Jim Jones 11:53 am 23 Aug 12

SnapperJack said :

Would you believe the gays *still* aren’t happy. They’re saying it doesn’t go far enough. Perhaps they want normal marriage to be abolished and gay marriage to be made compulsory.

Ah, ‘normal’ marriage.

Have fun on the wrong side of history, you crazy anachronistic curmudgeon.

Jethro 11:52 am 23 Aug 12

SnapperJack said :

Would you believe the gays *still* aren’t happy. They’re saying it doesn’t go far enough. Perhaps they want normal marriage to be abolished and gay marriage to be made compulsory.

I know.. wanting equal access to a major social institution. The nerve of them.

geoffappleby 11:36 am 23 Aug 12

Huzzah! Keep it coming!

SnapperJack 11:35 am 23 Aug 12

Would you believe the gays *still* aren’t happy. They’re saying it doesn’t go far enough. Perhaps they want normal marriage to be abolished and gay marriage to be made compulsory.

snoopydoc 11:33 am 23 Aug 12

One wonders just how long the religious / conservative / wowser faction can hold back the tide of common sense… and whether the federal government’s weird desire to pander to a very small percentage of voters (the aforementioned cognitively/ethically challenged folk) will result in a replay of the heavy-handed “thou shalt not” enacted by the Howard government the last time the ACT took a step in the right direction on this issue… ?

1 2 3

Related Articles

CBR Tweets

Sign up to our newsletter

Top
Copyright © 2017 Riot ACT Holdings Pty Ltd. All rights reserved.
www.the-riotact.com | www.b2bmagazine.com.au | www.thisiscanberra.com

Search across the site