19 Mar 2013

Labor The True Opponents Of Gay Marriage

By Sarah Hanson-Young

The Greens have always supported a cross-party approach to marriage equality, and to suggest otherwise is an apparatchik's fever dream. Senator Sarah Hanson-Young replies to Neil Pharaoh

Marriage equality has found its time but, unfortunately, there is only one political party in Australia genuinely fighting for this essential social reform.

The Greens have been a strong voice for gay and lesbian Australians since we first formed. It was Bob Brown and Christine Milne who led the fight to legalise homosexuality in Tasmania over two decades ago and the first bill I ever introduced into the Senate, back in 2009, was a marriage equality bill. That was the first time marriage equality had been put before the Parliament.

Since then my colleague Adam Bandt and I have relentlessly pursued same-sex marriage reform, in both houses of parliament, and we will continue to do so until we win this fight. If it were up to the Greens, gay and lesbian Australians would have been able to marry the person they love many years ago but unfortunately, without support from either of the old parties, that hasn’t happened.

I have regularly called for a cross-partisan approach towards marriage equality and have consistently offered to co-sponsor bills with members of the ALP and the coalition since 2010. These overtures were rejected by Labor, who wanted to rush to an early vote on their own bill to get marriage equality off the agenda, despite the marriage equality movement’s wishes.

I worked closely with Australian Marriage Equality and the Coalition to establish a Senate inquiry into my marriage bill. The Labor Party was opposed to that inquiry but as a result of it we saw – for the first time – Greens, Liberal and Labor MPs working together towards the goal of marriage equality. I, again in conjunction with the advocates, sought cross-party sponsorship of a bill in the Senate, where it had the best chance of passing a vote. Again I encountered nothing but opposition from the Labor Party.

Yesterday’s vague allegations about Adam Bandt are the outpourings of a Labor apparatchik’s feverish imagination. The central claim – that Bandt “discovered” something, then acted in a certain way – is laughable. So devoid is the “allegation” of one shred of supporting evidence that even the Labor hack responsible for it felt compelled to put it in inverted commas. The record at the time showed that Bandt repeatedly and publicly called for co-sponsorship of the bill in the House and urged Labor not to fast-track the bill to a vote until there was more time to prevail upon Coalition MPs.

Because our bill remains alive and was debated again in the House yesterday, Liberal MP Kelly O’Dwyer could announce she personally felt comfortable with equal marriage. Labor MP Graham Perrett, who chaired the inquiry into the equal marriage bills, said yesterday he was pleased for the chance of further debate. Things are changing.

Being able to marry the person you want to spend the rest of your life with should be a universal right and should not be controlled by party politics. It has been disappointing to watch the Labor Party, so beholden to its bully boy factions, fail at every turn to take up the offers of a cross-party approach and genuinely support marriage equality in Australia. They are continuing to play politics, both internally and externally, and it is the LGBTI community of Australia who are continuing to suffer.

Often this sort of political maneuvering is done behind the closed doors of ALP factional bosses’ offices but in 2011 Joe de Bruyn, who is on the ALP national executive, placed his cards on the table for all to see. He told a meeting of the Australian Christian Lobby exactly how the right wing Labor factions would kill the party’s own marriage equality bill by making the Prime Minister vote against it, scaring other MPs into toeing the line. He said that the fight against same-sex marriage was an “ongoing battle that we can’t afford to lose”.

Well, because of the excessive power the Right has inside of the ALP, they didn’t lose. The Prime Minster voted against her own party’s bill, going against the party’s official policy position, and as the backbenchers lined up to fall in behind her the bill was defeated. It is so sad that such an important debate for so many Australians was killed off by the Labor factions at such a crucial time.

The Prime Minister has never explained to the Australian people why she opposes same-sex marriage and that has left a lot of people wondering what her actual position would be if it weren’t for the factions. Julia Gillard has failed to show any leadership on this issue while Tony Abbott is continuing to block coalition MPs from voting with their conscience.

Australia is becoming more and more isolated in the international community as it fails to act on same-sex marriage, but there is light on the horizon. This campaign has come such a long way because of the hard work of advocates in the community and while the politicians of the old parties have failed them up until now, it is inevitable that they will soon prevail.

Log in or register to post comments

Discuss this article

To control your subscriptions to discussions you participate in go to your Account Settings preferences and click the Subscriptions tab.

Enter your comments here

This user is a New Matilda supporter. guywire
Posted Thursday, March 21, 2013 - 14:25

I could be the greenest of Greens but one thing is patently obvious unless I am demented... which is also a possibility.

Marriage is generally a quasi religious affair. All the major religions want their particular god to sanctify their choice. But the gods are usually standing firm. We must know that the big guy up there, he don like nuthin but two (each of the opposite sex) and at least 9 months later - if possible - a rug rat to confirm their moral choice. No ifs no buts

If we dont like gay marriage, same sex marriage, or other perfectly OK ways of declaring love publicly, we should just find a god/gddess who might be inclined to bless our choice rather than trying to change what a Pope has declared to be acceptable to our particular god. Or even just throw a party which marks the event

However on reflection the issues involved at least give those without a tangible mission, some hope for a fight... a good ol punch up to prove that we are good, right, moral, and formidable. For if we choose this fight we must be stronger than the god or the Pope to prevail and hope that we can hold our nerve.

Without the blessing of a god, 'Marriage' is a common law event, which probably predates conventional modern marriage. An event which is just as tall as the conventional marriage with the added mystique of difference.

My apologies for a circumventional approach.

hojuruku
Posted Thursday, March 21, 2013 - 20:20

The greens support gays above god under law. That is religious organizations place of worship, unexempted from the anti discrimination board, whilst the gays and their gun carrying accolytes the GLLO special gay police remain exempt from the act to "lawfully discriminate" with extreme prejustice. See my youtube channel with the same nickname for the proof. Gays qbove god under law, brought to you by the greens. Type meet your greens sydney star observer into google and see their true agenda to legislate religious practices. So it will be a hate crime if a mosque refuses to celebrate anal unions aka sodomy? Who's hate crime. State sanctioned religious persecution from the greens. Freedom of thought and religion is in the same sentance from the un declaration of human rights. It also says men and women may marry not men and men and women and women. But the confused gay supremicist lobby that doesn't want to be held accountable on the same anti-discrimination laws says its about equality and human rights. Hypocrites. Well do you want to be equal spunks. End special gay police with their pink triangle nazi symbolism, and make gays equal before the law so for example a gay hr manager could be sued for building up his hareem(no legal lawful discrimination). When the first mosque is sued under this greens gay marriage/discrimination reform double whammy, guess who will be copping a fatwah death order. Not hard to imagine really. I am an australian refugee due to gay police. See 60c nsw crimes act, that makes it a crime now to even know you have been discriminated agaist by the elite homonazi enforcers. See beatproject.org.au too see the special gay court(adb) is being used to harrass and fine police for not allowing gay public sex in your childrens parks right now. Who runs that? Green left editor rachel evans, formally a man before the appendage was cut, but we can say it isn't far removed from the greens.

Elbert
Posted Friday, March 22, 2013 - 13:43

What a load of c**p from Hojuruku who predicts the disasters that will result from same sex marriage will start society on the slippery slope to total collapse of civilization. He's clearly a fan of the previous pope who declared that same sex oriented people pose a greater threat to humanity than wars or global warming.

Twenty years ago the Decriminalisation of homosexual acts was going to destroy civilization, i recall. Instead it has made our cities more peaceful and less dangerous for 10% of the population.

Congratulations and thanks Adam Bandt and Sarah and the Greens for being the only decent, trustworthy, thoughtful, rational and far-seeing politicians in the country.

hojuruku
Posted Friday, March 22, 2013 - 15:29

I'm agnostic and ruled by logic more than faith. Elbert doesn't know me. Even stephen pickells host of sydneys only gay radio show denounced the greens beloved GLLO gay police on air and added he supports my cause against gay supremacy in my fight for equality. See my youtube channel for that interview and many more. My favorite was on the Vinny Eastwood show with my father as he described the GLLOs as psychopaths. The Greens own Lee Rhiannon MLC who was first to put gay marriage legislation in NSW parliament said 60c was a "draconian terrorism legistlation" (see her press release against 2002 police and other law enforcement officers bill) and added in hansard only the most corrupt police would use 60c nsw crimes act to provide a running cover for their prior criminal actions. She was right. Only the most corrupt police used this law, the gllos. Yes its a crime to know a secret gay cop is gay, the way nsw police have in practice applied the country's first outlaw motorcycle gang legislation. 60c is the crime of obtaining true personal information on a law enforcement officer. fred niles voted for the law because its rumored his daughter ran off with a bikie. You can't pigeonhole me in his crowd. So the greens have dropped their own former social justice and human rights agenda against this law, because since 2002 they have found it empowers gay apartheid authoritan homosexuals with guns that must investigate a hetrosexual if a homosexual points the finger. If gays think they are too special for the regular police and need their GLLO justice perverters, they will never be equal. Never!

This user is a New Matilda supporter. dazza
Posted Friday, March 22, 2013 - 15:55

I am a member of The Greens, I am also a supporter of GetUp!, but I have been somewhat ambiguous about this marriage busilness.. I do NOT support Marriage, period.   To me, it is a religious anachronism, really nothing to do with modern living.  People have progeny, far too many of them, without having to be married. 

Yes, I realise that there are millions of humans, brainwashed and controlled from early life, who follow religious precepts, and give ..marriage..some sort of religious fervour, then, usually, withn 7 years, they are bitterly divorced, and any progeny are left at the door of the State, too often. 

As I have said before, those out there who need to have a LEGAL right to say they are a couple, should be able to have a Civil ceremony if they wish, with Legal ramilfications, but leave the damned religious trappings out of it.  We all know that these days, lots of 'straight' people are indeed having a Civil Ceremony, NO RELIGION, and quite happy about it. 

That would, I am sure, make the religious nutters much happier, cause the furore to die away, and let us all settle down to contemplating  a future  ruled by The Mad Monk as PM and his Team of Nutters.  That is horrifying enough as it is, as a Queenslander suffering under the JackBoots of ReichFuhrer Newman, giving lots of indications of what life will be like under the Mad Monk. 

As for La Gillartine, she votes against Gay Marriage beause she is the  puppet of Religious Right Wing factional heavies, and for some reason thinks that making them, the Christian Right, the Islamic Right, happy and perhaps voting for her.  She is in for a rude shock.  Their vote is firmly in the pocket of the Mad Monk.  He is ONE OF THEM!

 

hojuruku
Posted Saturday, March 23, 2013 - 00:18

Finally someone I agree with here. Dazza!

I've been pushing the same agenda. Yeah let's make everyone equal under the law. Let's have marriage licenses like the USA, where anyone and anything can get a license to get married (only once of course to one other party). In Australia a government certified witness must go to a religious ceremony and rubber stamp it. If you fully seperate church and state like all good liberatarians want then what goes on in anything religious would be out of the scope of the anti-discrimination board (aka homosexual staffed special gay court plugged on the front page of beatproject.org.au that uses it to harras police for stopping gays using "beat zones" and pedoophiles baiting children into the park at night with those lude toilet wall drawings) to continue to sue churches, mosques and other religious organizations for not providing equal services to gays, simply because everyone can get a marriage license to be "married", they just can't be married anywhere they want, like they think they can have their underage gay teen sleepovers.... I heard that hetrosexual people have "dogging" which is public sex, but because they are not gay, they can be "lawfully discriminated against" (gay exemption from the act) - so the Anti-Discrimination board only fights for gay public sex, not hetrosexual public sex. Beatproject mailing list even mandated uploading your geo-tagged gay porn to squirt.org so if you have a strong constiution you could see just exactly what the gay lobby and anti-discrimination board wants going on in your local park. Now moving on, the Gay lobby has already go the right to sue church owned charities as granted by the supreme court, in the case of wayout vs bretheren in Victoria. I captioned the ABC coverage of it as "Church camp sued for not allowing underage gay teen sex talk and gay MENtors sleepover
" on my youtube channel. So the Green's push to non-exempt religious organizations completely from the ADB (whilst keeping homos exempt to "lawfully discriminate")  means they want have control over what goes on in the places of worship as well. It could be very dangerous for a church or mosque to refuse a homosexual's demand for a "equal marriage". Imagine the money the likeys of Gary Burn's could make saying "gay marry me or PAY!". BTW I got him fined $3500 for a fictatious PVO against John Sunol. He believed we were working together when I had no contact with him. The judge ruled him to be a paranoid queer, and he had his first loss in court where his fees had to be paid out of his own pocket. Lovely. But I haven't obtained the Victory I want. Destroy 60C NSW Crimes act, based on the proven history it's been misued by tip of the gay spear, the GLLO gay police - to infact make it a crime to know they are gay, hence secret gay police. My name is on a Search Warrant signed by Magistrate Clugston of Balmain with 60C NSW Crimes Act on it, in relation to crime of complaining against the prior criminal actions GLLO gay police pictured here.  Wayout vs Brethren and the case law that stems from that shows the Greens' cover story to allow catholic boys to hold hands and kiss on lunch break is a fraud. They already have the power to bring up cases against church charities and schools. The real agenda is part of a two part step plan for the gays who spend all day on twitter attacking anyone who understands that what goes on church is not in the pervue of the special gay court to live out their fantasy of dominating or destroying the good work done by those dedicated to give their time, effort and finances to charities staffed by like minded believers in doing good.

I wonder if they will use new gay anti-villifcation laws against me for being against the gay supremacists Apartheid Australia and fighting for REAL gay equality. Government owned charites and leftist run NGO's are so corrupt. I guess I could just pretend to be gay, and say "your honor is self loathing a crime". Better to pretend to be gay than be ass raped in prison for 5 years for not respecting gay executive power. The more competition from religious and secular charities to help the disadvantaged the better I say, but of course the gay lobby is against helping poor people. For example Amnesty International NSW Leader Senthorun Raj (also leader of the Gay and Lesbian Rights lobby @senthorun) has no problems with a poor mentally handicapped aboriginal teen from Port Macquarie being accused of 60C NSW Crimes act, for merely making a one line comment about a police officer's sexuality on facebook. (60C - 5 years jail). The ABC News coverage of the incident aws where they got a homosexual former ABC producer "stilgherian" to come on and say "facebook knows you are gay before you do", then ABC Katya Quingly brings up the topic of what would happen if Hitler had access to social networks, alleging the boy was as bad as him. It's no secret why the gay lobby hates blacks, because we all know Aboriginals want their land and their tribal law for their land back. Many aboriginal nations punished homosexuality with... well you go look it up, it isn't pretty. Racist Homonazis, against human rights (i.e. "Everyone has the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion; this right includes freedom to change his religion or belief, and freedom, either alone or in community with others and in public or private, to manifest his religion or belief in teaching, practice, worship and observance.").I don't get it why the gay lobby is chanting "Gay Rights is Human Rights" when they try and implement state sanctioned religious persecution and interference. Oh don't call me a white supremacist because I'm a race mixer (oh they hate that) and they are not happy about me plugging a book called the Pink Swasticka. You did know that Hitler rose to power by doing is public speaking in a gay bar didn't you? Another famous homonazi! Hitler also has a history of relgious perseuction. If only these gay bigots could see what they are bigots. Do I need to quote the definition. Oh why not I'll go out with that.

Bigotry is the state of mind of a bigot: someone who, as a result of their prejudices, treats other people with hatred, contempt, and intolerance on the basis of a person's race, gender, sexual orientation, gender identity, national origin, religion, language, socioeconomic status, or other status.