Skip to content Skip to main navigation


Part of the Canberra community
for over 30 years

Same Sex Civil Union legislation to be introduced today [Yesterday]

By johnboy - 29 March 2006 45

The Chief Minister has a media release out proclaiming that today he will introduce a Bill into the Assembly to create an institution of same-sex civil-union.

Mr Stanhope said feedback from the Government’s consultation process had indicated that many people would welcome the new laws. He was aware that some people would not welcome the move.

Now to someone like me this seems like a good compromise to end unfair discrimination against committed gay and lesbian couples while retaining “marriage” in its tradional sense.

But will this compromise actually satisfy either the pink triangle, or the old fashion poofter-haters in our society?

UPDATE: The SMH has picked up the story, via AAP.

FURTHER UPDATE: Liberal Bill Stefaniak is hearing his master’s voice (the catholic lobby) and has put out a media release in which he looks at reasons to oppose this without actually being brave enough to say he opposes it.

ANOTHER UPDATE: The Greens have weighed in calling Stanhope chicken for not going further, but mostly gibbering about their Tasmanian meltdown.

FURTHER UPDATE: A happy Chief Minister has put out another media release looking forward to the happy day his law comes into effect.

The Government expects the law to be passed in May, with the legislation commencing once the relevant administrative procedures and databases have been established. The procedure for entering into a civil union will require that a couple gives a month’s notice of its intention to an authorised celebrant. This means that the first unions to be formalised under the new law could take place as early as the middle of the year.

Once More With Feeling: The Canberra Times has come to the party pointing out that gay couples (or indeed anyone else) will be able to get a civil union at a younger age than a wedding. Interestingly the CT and Markus Mannheim are running hard with the Australian Christian Lobby’s angle.

What’s Your opinion?

Post a comment
Please login to post your comments, or connect with
45 Responses to
Same Sex Civil Union legislation to be introduced today [Yesterday]
Maelinar 4:29 pm 28 Mar 06

Well Duh.

I’m glad that you agree with me that the legislation to allow same sex relationships is a good thing.

You can now get your relationship FULLY and LEGALLY recognised. Go fill your boots.

I’m sure that you will continue to agree with me then, that displays of lewd conduct – regardless of by whom, is rather revolting and inappropriate really, and the powers that be should be given the authority and the means to move it on. This of course includes now, publicly displaying yourself in an inappropriate manner in protest that your union is not recognised (because it now is).

Mr_Shab 4:15 pm 28 Mar 06

You didn’t compare the size of your mortgage, RG.

Get the hell off wage-slave turf, ‘fore I cuts you.

RandomGit 4:10 pm 28 Mar 06

Now everybody unchill and get back to the witty slagging

-An unmarried dog named Sir Whinealot.

Mr_Shab 4:07 pm 28 Mar 06

Everybody chill!

Gay marriage and lewd behaviour in public are two separate issues. I might even argue that they’re diametrically opposed. Shall we divorce (ahem) them for the purpose of this article?

Good on Stanhope for getting this bit ‘o paper up in the assembly.

– An unmarried, but cohabiting straight white guy with a 250K mortgage.

toriness 3:19 pm 28 Mar 06

Maelinar – gosh what an angry self-righteous overly-defensive (don’t like getting your bottom smacked for saying the wrong thing?) “married, middleclass white person with a $300k mortgage” you are.

I am all of those attributes (within quotation marks) except “married”. Why is that – because I am expressly not permitted to under federal law because I am a female who has a female partner. This is despite the fact we have been together for a number of years, are monogamous, and for the record share our $300 mortgage. I’m not being a “pariah” either, all I want is my relationship FULLY and LEGALLY recognised so my partner and I have the legal protection and obligations which you enjoy as a matter of course. This government does something progressive to get that happening – and you just ridicule it because it’s not relevant to you. So yes that DOES say a lot about you.

It’s not about, as you so crudely put it, ‘rogering’ anyone or lewd conduct, it’s about recognition of committed relationships through civil unions – yet you resort to generalisations and stereotypes. And by doing so you reveal yourself as ignorant, uneducated and uncouth.

Ergo it is you who is unimportant in the grand scheme of things.


bulldog 2:34 pm 28 Mar 06

Onya Mael – I too am sick to death of being told that “I’m the one with the problem” and that I’m a homophobe every time I get my back up because some elemnets of the G&L community think of themselves as pariah’s. IMHO the only peole who think of them the G&L community as Pariah’s are elements of the G&L community.

I think Mael’s initial comment was founded in that a seemingly larger proportion of the G&L community act indecently in public – not everyone, and generally not the more mature crowd.

Now – IMHO – acting indecently is an act of idiocy whether you’re gay or straight – so why can’t we call an idiot a idiot anymore? Because they happen to be gay? Being gay is incidental to whether you’re a idiot (or act like a idiot) or not.

Now this article is not about who’s an idiot or who is a homophobe – it’s about recognising same sex unions. yay – more power – good on you – I’m genuinely pleased for you all.

Now Sonic needs to pull his finger out and start running the city.

Note that all the “idiots” that appeared in the above were drafted as “fuckwits”, however I didn’t want overuse of an indecent term to cloud my meaning. Rest assured, however, that the sentiment remains.

Maelinar 1:34 pm 28 Mar 06

I thought about it for a moment, and – well get fucked really.

If I decide I want to roger my wife like a fertile rabbit, I have to wait until I get home, behind closed doors, behind closed curtains to be completely within the constraints of public decency. Outside those conditions, I do so at my own risk of having somebody take offence, make a complaint, and next thing I know I’ve got somebody knocking on my door asking me to come down to the station for an explanatory interview. (Although this has never occured to me).

Allow me to continue; running around half naked, carrying on like – well a gay person really, is not normal either.

Allowing me to continue; Even though I’m not saying that YOU personally do these actions, it is certainly a recognisable steriotype. I’ll forward all of your denials to the Sydney Mardi Gras committee for rebuttal. You may also remember that the Canberra G&L brigade wanted to have their own little pseudo mardi gras here in Canberra as well, although I am unaware if it ever went ahead at all, or they decided to brave that scary, windy 3 hour trip to Sydney instead.

Now let’s get back to what I said; like everybody else seems to be able to manage, I don’t care.

Perhaps now we might be able to see enforcement against anti-social behaviour such as public indecency, as the reason for protest has been removed.

Turn off your “I’m gay and everybody is out to get me” blinkers for one second and you might realise that my commentary was actually about equalising rights.

As it stands, I can handle a few gay people getting up to lewd conduct as a demonstration of the inequality of the situation, but there ain’t any inequality any more is there ?

You’ve probably got more rights as a gay person than I do as a married, middleclass white person with a $300k mortgage. Get over yourself, you’re not important.

Ari 1:31 pm 28 Mar 06

A different perspective on this issue can be found at Canberra blogger AlanZoe Brain’s site.

Apparently Stanhope’s Government is less flexible regarding Zoe’s transsexual status than the big, bad conservatives up on the hill.

toriness 1:09 pm 28 Mar 06

I was just down at the Assembly to see the tabling of the legislation and hear Stanhope’s speech. It was a great occasion and myself and the others there who witnessed it applauded Stanhope.

Regarding some of the comments here in this forum – this historical event may not mean much to some people, perhaps you already have the right to marry and your relationship is fully recognised by Federal and State/Territory governments, but for myself this is a big step in the right direction and maybe you think it’s not as important as beautifying Civic West or approving a dragway but for others, such as myself, it is momumentous. Your dismissive comments in particular, Maelinar, are far more a reflection of yourself (you might want to think about that a moment) than a true statement about the ‘gay crowd’.

johnboy 11:41 am 28 Mar 06

Well when he puts our a media release about roads we all yawn and can’t be arsed covering it.

So us facile meeja are as much to blame as the big cahuna.

barking toad 11:35 am 28 Mar 06

Bio Reserve – that’s the one. The fuck?

And yeah, the mayor can make law about gay unions, but I think the punters would prefer some other issues higher on the agenda.

johnboy 11:07 am 28 Mar 06

Are you referring to the ABC story on Bio-reserves?

I ignored it because it made no sense.

to be fair to Mr. Stanhope this is an issue the ACT can make law for so it’s within his purview.

barking toad 11:01 am 28 Mar 06

These are the sorts of issues that excite the mayor – he’s not interested in running the town and looking after the locals. International statesmen don’t get involved at that trivial level.

And, speaking of gay things, what the fark is this hippie agenda that jimmy gentleman is heading up that involves the ACT and that pillar of international strength the United Nations? Can’t find it on the crimes excuse for a website but I caught some of it on radio samuel this morning. He sounded embarassed about it.

RandomGit 10:54 am 28 Mar 06

Bring it on says I.

Maelinar 10:21 am 28 Mar 06

As long as they can keep their willies in their pants, like everybody else seems to be able to manage, I don’t care.

Perhaps now we might be able to see enforcement against anti-social behaviour such as public indecency, as the reason for protest has been removed.

Although I’m sure the gay crowd will find a new reason to make a song and dance about, since carrying on like a dandy with a loudspeaker seems to be normalised standard practice.

1 2 3

Related Articles

CBR Tweets

Sign up to our newsletter

Copyright © 2017 Riot ACT Holdings Pty Ltd. All rights reserved. | |

Search across the site