Rally for Same Sex Civil Unions - Sat 2nd Feb, 1pm

It also relates to being able to make hospital visits (the actively hostile parents of a patient can make sure that their child’s same-sex partner can’t visit them, no matter how long the relationship), as well as a number of other rights (one story I was told had a man being denied the right to find out what was happening to his partner’s dog by his vet).

To me, marriage is an english language word that means what happens when two people who love each other come together in front of friends, family and a celebrant or friendly priests (yes, there are many religious people who DO support same-sex unions – some of them in positions of power). So I’d be happy with the word marriage.

Strange as it may seem (and possibly because I am still single) I think it’s not a bad thing for people to decide to share the rest of their lives together, forsaking all others, in good times and bad. And I don’t really give a flying hoot whether they happen to be same sex or opposite sex.

People were getting married well before Christianity came along. Pagans, Buddists, the ancient Romans, Greeks… whatever. Just because some weddings take place in churches doesn’t mean they control it. Just because some people drink wine in a church doesn’t mean that churches have control over the distribution of red wine, either…

That should be Homosexual and defacto partners folks 🙂

Sorry 🙂

Will and superannuation and all that crap aside, Partners still do not have enduring power of attorney by default. What this means is that if they are unaware and have not applied for enduring power of attorney they can not make decisions in regards to when to turn of life support, what drugs to administer and any medical decisions where they subject is in no physical or mental state to make those decisions themselves..

Also, the under superannuation legislation the definition of ‘dependent’ may include same sex couples however once the money goes to the estate another set of rules applies – hence why you are best seeing a lawyer re your estate, not your superfund advisors…

Oh and giving people equal rights whether it’s women, different races etc etc. Is useful : ) And Australian.

Leaving money to your estate is one way to have a say in where your money goes yes (although wills can still be bitterly contested) however being married makes your partner the FIRST dependent a superfund will consider paying the money to.

Let’s just say that it essentially would lessen the fight for gay couples when the payment of super is contested.

I don’t know why but I have the impression those DIY will kits wouldn’t hold up if challenged. But yeah, I’ll get independent advice.

So given that, as was pointed out above, a will can be drawn up that allows inheritance etc, what’s all the fuss about? Shouldn’t the government be using it’s column inches for something useful?

Plus watch for places that recommend things because they get commission for it.

: P

And be wary, get advice from more than one place.

Best to see a lawyer though re estates. It can be a messy area and a lawyer whose firm specialises in the area will be up with the latest knowledge to prevent problems down the track. Superannuation providers see second – a lawyer will consult with them anyway if they need to.

Or get one of those will kits if you’re confident you can do it yourself…

Excellent, thanks. I’ll give them a call (and I need a financial planner anyway!

As a plug for a local firm, call Dixon Advisory – they have a wills guy who can sort out any of that stuff pretty easily from what I can gather, and you don’t have to get into any of the other financial stuff Dixon do like shares etc if you don’t want to.

I have to get an estate first! I’m getting right onto that now 🙂

: ) and get a form from your super provider to nominate your estate as the beneficiary of your super.

I’d better write a will!

Possibly you can leave it to a friend through your estate though if you have no family, I don’t know much about Estates… : )

Most likely to your estate, as you can’t actually nominate a non-dependent ie. your mum or brother, unless you are caring for them etc.

Someone in your family will then have to get power of attorney to handle your affairs and work out ho to pay out the money, unless you have a will.

If you don’t have family and haven’t left it to a charity (which can be done directly from the fund bypassing the estate) I believe the govt takes it all 😛

Wow. Who does it go to if you’re single?

Marriage is the contract that can ensure that you get someones’ super. Through divorce or death.

Although someone is allowed to leave super to a same sex partner, super is something that needs all the legal safeguards you can throw at it to ensure it goes to the person on your choice. Even then, it’s possible it wont despite the safeguards you think you have in place.

If you want your partner to get your super when you pass away, you get married, quick smart!

(even then it could go to an ex with your kids if they went after it though…)

Pardon my ignorance but can someone just dot point the rights that are being fought for? If you’re talking about super and that sort of stuff, can’t you just draw up a contract?

Wonder what kind off relationship Troy is in?

As I’ve said before, marriage is a term coined by the church to describe the union between a woman and a man. As much as people want to disagree on the rights and wrongs of the situation, at the end of the day the church made it up, therefore they, within a general sense, have full authority to determine who the hell they want gets to be called married or not.

Now, talking about civil unions or whatever the friendly term is at the moment – I agree with Fiona, in terms of the Governments recognition of a partnership, it can probably be safely said that they have followed the established line (church marriage) since well before several guys got together and said ‘lets form a nation’. There is not really any GOVERNMENT recognition of marriage, they have just piggybacked off what was already there.

The opportunity exists to set this point straight, all married people need to be recognised by the Gov, and all the people too fat and ugly to find somebody of the opposite sex (couldn’t resist a jab), also get recognised by the Gov. The Church ‘marriage’ would then be an onion layer over a Government recognition, and they can marry who the hell they like cause it wouldn’t matter.

Personally, I can’t wait for the first backfires to come through – the sob stories about 2 happy dancing clean-freaks who come unstuck after ‘John’ decides that ‘Bill’ is better than his husband, but comes unstuck when the true meanings of partnership means they have to start surrendering assetts.

I vote with my remote, my carefactor is even less.

If you could get equal rights sans marriage that would be a good thing. Marriage is only being pushed I suspect as a means to get equal rights.

(From Troy Williams’ Nov ’07 email interview):

Like many in the Coalition, I believe it is time to end discrimination of same-sex couples. The Human Rights and Equal Opportunities Commission (HREOC) report identified several important steps that should be taken in areas such as superannuation, welfare entitlements, and veterans benefits. The existing arrangements in these areas are not satisfactory.

From Troy’s Jan08 Legislative Assembly “intention to seek consent for candidacy” posting:
Insofar as economic issues go, I tend to lean to the party’s right whereas on other issues, such as the environment, I’d be on the party’s left. So I’d be an economic ‘dry’ and also socially progressive. It’s the libertarian side of me I guess.

Anyone feel like checking if they can convince Troy Williams to come along?

Putting the equal rights aside (fully support you on that) why on earth are you pushing for such a ridiculous institution. Marriage is a piece of paper. It doesn’t make or break a relationship and unless you’re religious, it shouldn’t matter a rabbits fart.

Point of semantics – if the relationship is recognised (by a signed document or whatever) then it is no longer “de facto”, it’s “de jure”.

“de facto” literally means that the marriage-like relationship exists as a fact, despite the absence of legal documentation to that effect.

Isn’t that called a defacto relationship?

Given that gay people aren’t currently able to marry it would be nice for more recognition of their defacto status. However the notion that someone can live with you for a ‘short’ period of time and then claim ownership over your hard earned assets isn’t all fun and games either.

Everyone should have some choice over whom they consider to be a ‘life partner’. Be able to live with someone for 5 years and NOT be considered ‘defacto’ if that’s what they want.

If you can’t afford or don’t want to get married but want all the legal standings of a defacto relationship in the meantime I believe there should be a legal document, printed off the net for ten bucks, ie. like a will, that ANYONE can sign to recognise a defacto relationship between two people.

I’ve heard of people being afraid to move their friend into a house they’re paying off in case things turned sour and they went after part of it in a false defacto claim …

And it’d stop some deadbeat boyfriend who moved into your paid off house for 6 months trying to go after it when you realise that he’s a deadbeat… Maybe you don’t want that type of relationship ‘recognised’ : P

will be happoer when the notion of all marriage/civil usions etc is abolished, and that any relationship can be recognised regardless

I was curious

isn’t curious a sub genre as well 😛

Just teasing 🙂

Re: transgender vs transsexual. I was curious (I don’t know the diff either) so I wiki-ed it – it appears there is some overlap between the terms. To be safe say “transpeople”.

People who have “transitioned” should be refered to as a “man” or “woman”.

Spare us yer stereotypes. Not all homosexuals are queens.

I love how the alleged press release says it’s a “peaceful protest”. Well of course it is people!

I’d love to see a bunch of mincing queers bending their wrists like John Inman, protest ‘violently’.

wouldn’t they be called mongosexual VY ?

(… sorry, couldn’t resist!)

What about people who’s sexual organs are located on their foreheads, like Astrojax?

I only believe in gay marriage when both chicks are hot.

are both the chicks hot?

Crikey – They’d probably get confused and end up in Afghanistan… : P

No, I’m sure we have enough of our own lunatic religious retards that will turn up on the day!

I wonder if the Westboro Baptist Church Topeka, Kansas) will protest at the rally and tell all those who participate that they will go to hell.

Transgender are those who identify as a different gender and may be on hormones and the like, but who have not had the op to make the bits the right shape.

Transexuals are those who have had the operation.

At least, that’s how I understand it. Someone feel free to correct me.

(and no there is no place for the word ‘don’t’ in my sentence!)

I am god!

Yeah but everything Tom Cruise says and does is wrong. Two wrongs make a…. : P

Be careful what you wish for. I read recently that the stats for same sex divorce is even higher than heterosexual marriage.

But if you want all the crap that goes along with marriage, more power to you.

But God (Tom Cruise?) says it’s wrong! 😉

JD114 – no better or worse than anywhere else. I dunno why people percieve that they are in danger when they find out a gay man is within their midst. Not like they are going to rape you. And as far as I go – what people do behind closed doors, as long as it does not effect me, wether gay or straight, is none of my god damn business. My gay mates are mates first, gay second… Ya dig ? being gay is a non-issue unless you are insecure/worried etc.

JD114 – Not if you are straight, no. Obviously.
I’m sure the people who are not straight might pick up though : )

For anyone this may assist, money paid to a ‘dependent’ including an ‘interdependent’ is tax free.

However (and this applies to ANYONE with kids and or an ex marriage etc) you should make a current 3 yearly? ‘BINDING death nomination’ as superfunds just take anything else (ie preferred beneficiaries) as a pretty suggestion as to where your money should go – and it may go to your ex.

If they don’t offer a binding death nomination or you want your money to go to a non-dependent (child over 18, your mum etc), leave it to your estate and let your will deal with it.

Sounds like a good place to pick up. Not.

While offtopic, and not actually about humans getting married to humans with similar\different\exotic bits…
What -is- the difference between transgender and transsexual then?
*had assumed gender and sex were respectively a cultural\social identity and a biological identifier*

Ooops I screwed up, being ‘interdependent’ does actually fall under the ‘dependent’ definition as an additional ruling they brought in a few years ago. But same sex couples still don’t meet the spouse definition.

Although the superannuation rules are not as fair and ‘equal’ fortunately there is an ability for same sex couples to claim super under an ‘interdependent’ relationship.

Definition can be found on form such as these:
http://www.ngssuper.com.au/cms/default/Template_Resources/PDF/Change_of_Details_Form.pdf

Still, it would be nice for the govt to recognise same sex couples as ‘dependents’. In the same way someones kids or husband/wife would be recognised…

Perhaps simbo meant ‘in to sex’ not ‘inter sex’!!! Anyway, I’ll be there .

I have mates who have been together in a homosexual relationship for plus 10 years. Thye have children from former marriages. It saddens me that as much as they love eachother as much as I love my wife, they are not afforded simple civil liberties such as what a regular married or defacto couple are entitled to such as enduring power of attorney and access to their partners superannuation should a death occur.

Funnily enough though – if they were sneaky they could both get simgle parent allowance regardless of the fact that they have group bank accounts. being gainfully employed in nursing and the APS neither of them do that. Not saying that it does not happen….In any case, I support gay rights. The bible and judicial system are archaic and legislation should be changed to reflect current society.

Thank you

No doubt Resistance and the ISO will turn up with their usual 4000 placards about 4000 different issues – none of which will relate to the event at hand!

Correction (sorry to any people I may have offended by my ignorance)

Intersexual:
1) Adjective:
Biology. Having both male and female characteristics, including in varying degrees reproductive organs, secondary sexual characteristics, and sexual behavior, as a result of an abnormality of the sex chromosomes .

2) noun:
An individual displaying such characteristics.

Nope, still don’t get it. Sounds like transgender.

Their bits and hormones have been brought into line with what they feel their bits and hormones should be?
*is also unsure what an intersex does*

simbo, you and your friends have my full support in the pursuit of basic rights. Could you please explain for us uneducated folk what exactly defines someone as ‘intersex’.

Despite the inevitable gags, innuendo and cries of disappointment at a headline to this article that won’t even grab Jessica Wright’s attention, I wish the supporters of this rally the very best.

Who’ll be bringing up the rear?

Would like to join you but i’ll be washing my hair.