Like what you've read?

On Line Opinion is the only Australian site where you get all sides of the story. We don't
charge, but we need your support. Here�s how you can help.

  • Advertise

    We have a monthly audience of 70,000 and advertising packages from $200 a month.

  • Volunteer

    We always need commissioning editors and sub-editors.

  • Contribute

    Got something to say? Submit an essay.


 The National Forum   Donate   Your Account   On Line Opinion   Forum   Blogs   Polling   About   
On Line Opinion logo ON LINE OPINION - Australia's e-journal of social and political debate

Subscribe!
Subscribe





On Line Opinion is a not-for-profit publication and relies on the generosity of its sponsors, editors and contributors. If you would like to help, contact us.
___________

Syndicate
RSS/XML


RSS 2.0

Parliamentarians should have a conscience vote on gay marriage

By Rodney Croome - posted Monday, 1 November 2010


Politicians are now hearing support for the issue from people beyond the LGBTI community and beyond the inner city.

The federal election campaign highlighted this, with the issue being raised in regional and suburban forums. Encapsulating this shift was the exchange on the ABC's Q&A between Tony Abbott and the middle-aged, Liberal-leaning tradie Geoff Thomas speaking out for equality on behalf of his gay son. In response, some unexpected public figures spoke out for equality.

Tasmanian Liberal candidate, Cameron Simpkins, declared his support for marriage equality and called for his Party to have a conscience vote on the issue. Former Labor leader, Mark Latham, said he was wrong to endorse the same-sex marriage ban in 2004. Commentator Derryn Hinch publicly said he'd changed his mind too.

Advertisement

The federal election also showed that supporters of equality are not all talk. In inner city seats in Sydney and Melbourne there was an unprecedented shift in support away from sitting Labor members to the Greens. A shift would have occurred with or without marriage equality, but we can safely assume marriage equality played an important part in making it as large as it was.

If I'm right, if the staring game is coming to an end and people in both major parties are looking for a way forward, what options will they, and should they, consider?

The best way forward would be for one or both major parties to endorse marriage equality, and pass legislation with Green support.

But, of course, this is also the least likely.

A more likely but much less desirable option for Labor is a national civil union scheme as a substitute for marriage equality (by civil union I mean all those types of formal relationship recognition – including civil partnerships and relationships registries - that are not marriage).

I have no doubt this will emerge in the next few weeks or months as a possible "compromise". But it is a compromise that will suit no-one. The religious right will see it as "gay marriage by the backdoor" and campaign hard against it. Same-sex partners will also not accept it.

Advertisement

Australia is in the fortunate position of coming a bit late to the marriage equality debate. We can see what has happened in places that have gone down this path. Inquiries into the operation of civil unions schemes in Britain and the US show that civil union partners do not enjoy the same rights, recognition or respect as married partners, even when the law says they should.

The international experience also has a bearing on the argument that civil unions are a step towards marriage equality. Six years after civil unions in the UK and New Zealand, and despite friendly noises from Britain's ruling coalition partners the Liberal Democrats, full equality is as far off as ever in these two countries. Indeed, a strong argument can be made that civil unions have actually blocked the path to full equality by entrenching a second-class status for same-sex partners in the law and society.

I'm not against civil unions as such. They serve a useful purpose as an alternative to marriage for couples – gay and straight - who want a certificate and a ceremony without the cultural connotations and expectations of marriage. This is why I have been a strong supporter of such schemes at a state and territory level. But at a federal level, where there is marriage legislation that is clearly discriminatory, the situation is very different.

  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. Page 2
  4. 3
  5. 4
  6. All

This is an edited version of a speech given at Curtin University on October 27, 2010



Discuss in our Forums

See what other readers are saying about this article!

Click here to read & post comments.

160 posts so far.

Share this:
reddit this reddit thisbookmark with del.icio.us Del.icio.usdigg thisseed newsvineSeed NewsvineStumbleUpon StumbleUponsubmit to propellerkwoff it

About the Author

Rodney Croome is a spokesperson for Equality Tasmania and national advocacy group, just.equal. He who was made a Member of the Order of Australia in 2003 for his LGBTI advocacy.

Other articles by this Author

All articles by Rodney Croome
Related Links
Full version of speech

Creative Commons LicenseThis work is licensed under a Creative Commons License.

Article Tools
Comment 160 comments
Print Printable version
Subscribe Subscribe
Email Email a friend
Advertisement

About Us Search Discuss Feedback Legals Privacy