Updated December 2007
Labor
& Same Sex Marriage
Scroll down for quotes from:
ACT Labor / VICTORIAN Labor & FEDERAL Labor
2007:
| VICTORIAN Labor |
New laws to mirror marriage rights for gay couples
(5/12) Article: Herald Sun | SAME-sex couples will enjoy many of the same rights as married couples under new State Government laws allowing gay and lesbian people to register their relationships.
The laws will give unmarried couples, including heterosexual de facto couples, more rights in cases of medical emergencies and property and life insurance entitlements.
The move follows controversial decisions by new Premier John Brumby to have laws drawn up to legalise abortion, and an agreement to allow genetically-modified crops to be grown in Victoria.
Debate on the new relationship laws next year is likely to be heated with many conservative MPs opposed to recognition of same-sex relationships.
Attorney-General Rob Hulls said registered relationships would not be a gay marriage or a civil union. .... "The Relationships Register will offer conclusive proof of a relationship with one certificate," Mr Hulls said.
Registrants would need to be at least 18, live in Victoria, be unmarried and be in an exclusive relationship.
The State Government decided to act after moves by Melbourne and Yarra councils to set up their own relationship registers.
"The Relationships Register provides a single coherent system . . . rather than a local government-based approach," Mr Hulls said.
Victorian Gay and Lesbian Rights Lobby co-convenor Stephen Jones welcomed the new laws. 
http://www.news.com.au/heraldsun/story/0,21985,22871853-661,00.html |
2007:
| ACT Labor |
 Fight goes on as Stanhope pushes same-sex ceremonies
16/05/2008 Australian Christian Lobby Newsletter | We were rightly encouraged last week to see the Rudd Government intervene to ensure that ACT Chief Minister Stanhope’s civil partnerships legislation did not contain ceremonies and celebrants mimicking marriage. He was also forced to remove other provisions including: lowering the age for his “civil partnerships” to 16 for both homosexuals and heterosexuals; something sure to raise the ire of any parent; and allowing interstate couples to take advantage of them, which was obviously calculated to permit a homosexual “marriage” spectacular in the ACT. The Federal Government also forced him to remove recognition of overseas homosexual unions.
However, in a move which shifts this fight very squarely to the ACT election, Mr Stanhope has set up his own ceremonies and celebrants outside the legislation, with the Deputy Registrar-General officiating at them. This is something which the Federal Government can’t stop because it is not part of the legislation. Mr Stanhope’s move is in calculated and direct defiance of the undertakings he was forced to give Federal Labor to avoid his legislation being overturned. It is a shocking example of the lengths to which he will go to impose his social engineering on the ACT and ultimately Australia, and of just how much he has forfeited his right to any credibility as a public leader.
Leadership’s currency is the legitimacy of example and it also demands loyalty in large measure, both up and down.
In Mr Stanhope’s case the most important area in which he is required to demonstrate example as a public leader in a civil society, is his willingness to subject his own ambitions and wants to the will of the people and the legitimate authority of his constitutional superiors in the Federal Government. With the Chief Minister failing to provide an example in this area, why wouldn’t anyone who disagrees with his laws for the ACT feel free to ignore or circumvent the ones they find objectionable?
Surely of all people Mr Stanhope realises that the basis of our civil society is not our fear of the law, but our respect for it. My maintaining the speed limit should not be because of my fear of getting caught, but my disciplining myself to observe the law whether or not the police happen to be on the road. It is my respect for authority, the heart of civil society.
Mr Stanhope’s claims of a mandate for his civil partnerships were never proven, despite calls by ACL for his Government to provide the evidence. His cynical attitude to and use of public consultation on this issue, have now been exposed as chronic within his government on a range of issues, as shown by several recent articles about an internal party document on the ACT Government’s election position which reportedly said: "The trick is to sell back-flips as responding to community concerns." Please click here  to read one of the reports.
Mr Stanhope’s arrogant abuse of power, his disregard for truth in government, and his failure to provide the example expected of a leader in a civil society now make his and his government’s fitness to govern – its moral and ethical credentials to govern - a central issue in the ACT election.
These are not party-partisan comments, the catalyst for them are his venomous criticism of and disregard for a Federal Labor Government. It is just a fact that while Mr Stanhope’s actions to create a non-legal pantomime outside the law will disappointment Christians, it is now part of a much bigger issue, and the fight goes on. |
| |
The ACT government has passed their Civil Partnerships Bill
13/05/2008 Saltshakers Media Release | The ACT government has passed their Civil Partnerships Bill - they removed the 'ceremony' component after the Rudd government threatened to override the Bill.
Although the ACT has taken ‘ceremonies’ out of their CP Bill, they have said they will allow an 'unofficial' ceremony to be held.
Ceremonies of themselves don’t make a marriage. The registration of the marriage by the state is what needs to be compared to the registration of relationships in civil partnerships/relationship registers - not the ceremony many Civil Marriages today have a simple signing and no ceremony.
ACT 'Civil Partnership' are now very similar to the Tasmanian and Victorian Relationship Registers. As we have said all along, it is not what they are called that is the problem – it is what they do. They give legal recognition to immoral, unnatural, and unhealthy relationships and present them as natural and normal.
Following the ACT decision, Federal Attorney-General Robert McClelland called on the remaining states to follow suit. So now we have our national government, that some people are congratulating, actively encouraging the normalisation and registration of homosexuality nation wide.
Yet there is NO evidence, anywhere in the world, that giving 'relationship registration' rather than 'civil unions' will stop the activists demands for same-sex marriage. |
Public gay unions unacceptable - McClelland
(7/02 AAP Article |
(7/02 AAP Article | CLAUSES in the ACT's civil partnerships bill that would allow gay couples to hold a public ceremony marking their union are unacceptable, Attorney-General Robert McClelland says.
"We think a civil unions register along the lines of Tasmania is appropriate," Mr McClelland told The Australian newspaper.
"The ceremonial aspects of the ACT model were inappropriate."
ACT Attorney-General Simon Corbell said this week the territory would not back from its plans to allow gay couples some form of ceremony.
"We will stand by our commitment to our community for the legal option for a ceremony - that is our position," Mr Corbell told The Australian.
|
Stanhope digs in on gay unions
(5/12) Cathy Alexander for The Canberra Times | Chief Minister Jon Stanhope says he will not back down on gay unions, and has warned his federal Labor colleagues against interfering in the ACT's business.
His strong stance is an early challenge to Prime Minister Kevin Rudd, who does not support gay marriage.
Mr Rudd can use his territory powers to quash the progressive ACT laws, as the previous Liberal administration did twice on ACT gay unions.
But Mr Stanhope made it clear yesterday he would brook no such intervention from the new Prime Minister.
"I expect my colleagues federally to accept [the legislation] ... I have to say I will be deeply disappointed if they don't," he said yesterday.
"We will do what we need to do to have it passed."
The ACT Government wants to allow ceremonies in which same-sex couples make a legal pledge to each other before an official. Such ceremonies are not allowed anywhere in Australia. Couples could come from other states to marry in the ACT.
Gay lobby groups have warned the bid could fail because Mr Rudd had opposed such ceremonies during the election campaign, saying marriage should be between a man and a woman.
... Mr Stanhope said the gay union issue was not just about equal rights for same-sex people, it was also about the ACT's democratic right to make its own laws.
His Government was elected on a campaign which included gay unions.
The people of Canberra had the right to decide on their own legislation.
http://canberra.yourguide.com.au/news/local/general/stanhope-digs-in-on-gay-unions/1098721.html |
Corbell to revive gay union Act
(5/12) Article: Canberra, Your Guide | The ACT has revived its bid to allow gay marriages now that the federal Liberal Party which twice blocked the plan is out of the way.
ACT Attorney-General Simon Corbell said yesterday he was optimistic the new Rudd government would not prevent the laws finally going through. With the change of government, gay unions in the ACT could become law early next year
... The proposed ACT laws would be among the most progressive in the country, allowing for an official ceremony in which same-sex couples give legal undertakings to each other before a third party. The Civil Partnerships Bill is already tabled in the Legislative Assembly.
The outgoing federal Liberal Government twice used its territory powers to quash attempts by the ACT to allow gay unions, saying such laws would undermine the institution of marriage.
Attorney-General Philip Ruddock overruled the ACT over gay unions in June 2006, and threatened to do it again in February this year, forcing the ACT to sit on its legislation until now.
The Liberals' disallowance of the ACT gay union laws sparked a debate about territories' rights, and prompted ACT Liberal senator Gary Humphries to cross the floor.
While the Rudd government did not comment yesterday on the ACT bid for gay unions, Mr Corbell said federal Labor had consistently stuck to its position that the registration of same-sex relationships was up to the states and territories.
He noted federal Labor had voted against the Liberals' decision to override the ACT gay marriage laws.
Mr Corbell said he was confident federal Labor would continue to hold its position on same-sex unions.
http://canberra.yourguide.com.au/news/local/general/corbell-to-revive-gay-union-act/1095913.html |
2007:
| FEDERAL Labor |
ACT civil partnerships defeated by Federal Government
05/05/2008 Australian Christian Lobby | Yesterday, the ACT’s Stanhope Government did a back-flip on its intention to introduce a form of homosexual marriage called civil partnerships. This would have allowed same sex partners to formalise their relationship in a ‘wedding’ ceremony presided over by a state-licensed official.
This has defeated a major attempt by the homosexual lobby to mimic marriage.
Thanks must go to Prime Minister Kevin Rudd who kept his pre-election promise to the Christian constituency to uphold marriage in law as between a man and a woman and to oppose any schemes that mimicked it.  |
Rudd on Q&A
23/05/2008 Australian Christian Lobby Newsletter | Prime Minister Kevin Rudd was last night given a grilling about homosexual marriage on the ABC’s new Q&A television program.
Up against gay activists in the studio audience (there appeared to be no-one else except Mr Rudd standing up for man-and-woman marriage), he held the line declaring his personal view as well as Labor’s policy position was that marriage was between a man and a woman.
Mr Rudd, reiterated Labor policy of removing discrimination against same-sex couples in terms of superannuation, taxation and the like through relationship registers which were not homosexual-specific and through reform of federal laws, announced recently.
He was also asked about his faith, the plight of the homeless, aboriginal welfare and a raft of other policy issues.
Click hereto view the ABC’s vodcast of Mr Rudd’s stint in the hot seat. |
Public gay unions unacceptable - McClelland
(7/02/2008 AAP Article | CLAUSES in the ACT's civil partnerships bill that would allow gay couples to hold a public ceremony marking their union are unacceptable, Attorney-General Robert McClelland says.
"We think a civil unions register along the lines of Tasmania is appropriate," Mr McClelland told The Australian newspaper. "The ceremonial aspects of the ACT model were inappropriate." ... Mr McClelland declined to say whether the Government was prepared to override territory legislation if the ACT defied the commonwealth and passed the bill. A relationship register differs from a civil union in that it encompasses a broader range of relationships, including non-intimate ones, such as carer relationships.
|
Rudd won't veto ACT gay unions
(6/12/2007) Daily Telegraph | THE Federal Government will not step in to veto ACT Government plans to legalise same-sex civil unions, Prime Minister Kevin Rudd says.
The Territory's last bid to give same-sex couples the same legal recognition as heterosexual couples was disallowed by the Howard Government last year, but Mr Rudd pledged to take a different tack.
Mr Rudd said it was Labor policy not to interfere with state and territory legislation.
"On these matters, state and territories are answerable to their own jurisdictions,'' Mr Rudd said in Brisbane.
"State and territory governments are elected to govern, they are accountable to their constituents.''
http://www.news.com.au/dailytelegraph/story/0,22049,22881002-5001028,00.html |
 Before the Federal Election 2007 political parties were asked the following question:
13. Marriage: Homosexual activists are seeking to achieve the same rights and privileges as married couples by having homosexual relationships specifically acknowledged in federal law. In the latest attempt at this, the Human Rights and Equal Opportunities Commission has recommended that the definition of de facto marriage be extended to include homosexual relationships and that the definition of parenthood be made gender neutral. In the interests of preserving the definition of marriage, would your Party reject these attempts by HREOC and instead redress any unreasonable discrimination through amendments to specific laws?
Source Link: http://www.australiavotes.org/policies/index.php?topic_ids=5#question1
Response by Australian Labor Party |
- Federal Labor does not support legislation to recognise same-sex marriage or civil unions.
- However, Labor agrees with the Australian Christian Lobby that same-sex couples should be able to share their finances and property with each other and in addition supports the removal of discrimination in areas such as taxation, superannuation and social security benefits.
- Labor supports the development of nationally consistent, state-based relationship legislation based on the Tasmanian legislation which has no ceremony or celebrant and doesn't mimic marriage.
|
|
Oppose registration of same-sex relationships (State & Federal)
Labor: Policy – “Labor will ensure that all couples who have a mutual commitment to a shared life do
not suffer discrimination because they are not married. Labor will take action to ensure the development
of nationally consistent, state-based relationship recognition legislation that will include the opportunity
for coup les who have a mutual commitment to a shared life to have those relationships registered and
certified. This legislation will:
■ Be based on the scheme that has existed in Tasmania since 2004 and that the Victorian government
has announced its intention to introduce;
■ Not create schemes that mimic marriage or undermine existing laws that define marriage as being
between a man and a woman.” ALP Platform: Ch 13, No 16.
At http://www.alp.org.au/download/now/2007_national_platform.pdf
Kevin Rudd has affirmed this position in correspondence and at the ‘Make it Count broadcast on 9
August 2007: “Our party's policy in response to that is, we do not support the first which is same sex
marriage. We do not support the second, which is civil unions. We are, however, prepared to embrace
the possibility of relationship registers as they exist at the state level. And I understand that a number of
the churches represented here have themselves put forward submissions on this matter as well”.
(Supporting statements for Christian Values Check List
Federal election November 2007 - sent out by Saltshakers)
|
Preserve marriage - Oppose same-sex marriage
Labor Platform: Voted for the Marriage Amendment Act in 2004. However there is no specific statement
affirming marriage in their Platform – they say they will “Not create schemes that mimic marriage or
undermine existing laws that define marriage as being between a man and a woman.” ALP National
Platform, Ch 13, No 16. However the ALP supports Relationship Registers
(Supporting statements for Christian Values Check List
Federal election November 2007 - sent out by Saltshakers)
|
Promotion and support of marriage over de facto co-habitation
Labor: Platform Ch 12, 70. “Labor believes that family law should apply in a consistent and uniform
way to de-facto relationships across Australia.” And Ch 13, No 16 “Labor will ensure that all couples
who have a mutual commitment to a shared life do not suffer discrimination because they are not
married.” At http://www.alp.org.au/download/now/2007_national_platform.pdf
(Supporting statements for Christian Values Check List
Federal election November 2007 - sent out by Saltshakers)
|
 May 2007: From
a Saltshakers Mailing
"... The
Labor party is committed to equality
for gay men, lesbians and same sex
couples and, if elected, will remove
provisions which discriminate on the
basis of sexuality.
That means ending discrimination in
the areas of taxation, superannuation,
social security benefits, the Medicare
Safety Net, immigration, veteran's
entitlements and all other areas (aside
from the Marriage Act). All practical,
day-to-day discrimination faced by
the gay and lesbian communities will
be removed from our laws.
At
the party's National Conference in
May, Labor formally committed to a
nationally consistent system of state-based
relationship recognition. The scheme
will cover a range of non-marital
relationships including same-sex relationships,
de facto heterosexual relationships
and certain carer relationships.
These
schemes would simply act as a means
by which any de facto couple could
register their relationship for the
purposes of recognition by government.
Such
schemes are not civil unions or gay
marriage. There is no ceremony involved,
and they would not come under the
marriage power in the Constitution,
nor affect the definition of marriage
in the Marriage Act 1961 as "a voluntary
union entered into by a man and a
woman to the exclusion of all others,
for life".
Only
a Federal Labor Government can deliver
on law reform that allows gay and
lesbian individuals to be treated
with the same justice and dignity
that they not only are entitled to,
but that is already afforded to every
other member of the community.
In
May 2007 Saltshakers asked the question:
How can anyone
justify saying that and then DISCRIMINATE
by NOT giving them equal 'rights'
to marriage, IVF and the adoption
of Children?
What does "all other areas" really
mean? |
Labor
backs legal rights for same-sex couples
Sydney
Morning Herald / Mark Davis Political
Correspondent, April 28, 2007
"LABOR has backed a national
scheme to legally recognise same-sex
relationships after a divisive debate
at its national conference in which
opponents of the scheme warned that
it would demean marriage and the family
and hurt the party's electoral prospects.
The ALP conference voted by a clear
majority in favour of national legislation
like Tasmanian laws, which allow same-sex
couples to register their relationship
and secure legal recognition of their
relationship in areas such as property
rights and superannuation benefits.."
Link: http://www.smh.com.au/news/national/labor-backs-legal-rights-for-samesex-couples/2007/04/28/1177459995793.html |
Labor's
Supports Same Sex Register at National
Conference
 Saltshakers
Reported in early May that The National
Conference of the Australian Labor
Party, passed a motion to support
the establishment of relationship
registers for homosexual and heterosexual
couples. Homosexual lobby groups wanted
the ALP to promise to actually establish
a national register, but the Party
only agreed to support the establishment
of state-based registers.
Labor
backs legal rights for same-sex couples
Sydney
Morning Herald / Mark Davis Political
Correspondent, April 28, 2007
"LABOR has backed a national
scheme to legally recognise same-sex
relationships after a divisive debate
at its national conference in which
opponents of the scheme warned that
it would demean marriage and the family
and hurt the party's electoral prospects.
The ALP conference voted by a clear
majority in favour of national legislation
like Tasmanian laws, which allow same-sex
couples to register their relationship
and secure legal recognition of their
relationship in areas such as property
rights and superannuation benefits.."
Link: http://www.smh.com.au/news/national/labor-backs-legal-rights-for-samesex-couples/2007/04/28/1177459995793.html
REGISTRY
FOR GAYS: ALP
by Harley Dennett, SSONET,
|
 "Shadow
attorney-general Joe Ludwig explained
to the delegates the policy would
not enable gay marriage or civil unions.
“There is no ceremony involved, and
they would not come under the marriage
power in the Constitution,” he said.
“These schemes would simply act as
a means by which any de facto couple
could register their relationship
for the purposes of authentication
by government.”
Link: http://www.ssonet.com.au/display.asp?ArticleID=6484 |
Sexual
Vilification
 “For
the past six years Labor MP Tanya
Plibersek has held the electorate
of Sydney. An active supporter of
the LGBTI community, Plibersek tried
to convince the ALP not to support
the coalition’s same-sex marriage
ban. Along with colleague Anthony
Albanese, she got a promise
out of Mark Latham to remove all other
legislation which discriminates against
same-sex couples from federal law
if they win the election.
Plibersek
says that if re-elected she will ensure
the commitments Labor made will be
a priority. She has also been asked
by shadow health minister Julia Gillard
to be responsible for making sure
the health department takes into account
specific gay and lesbian health issues
in their policies.
From
Sydney Star Observer News:
http://www.ssonet.com.au/display.asp?ArticleID=3623 |
(13
August 2004) Sexuality Vilification
- Labor Policy
“A Latham Labor Government will ensure
that gay and lesbian Australians are
given legal protection from discrimination,
harassment and vilification.”
Original Link: http://www.alp.org.au/policy/otherkeypolicies/samesexreform.php
Note: This page no longer exists. |
From
Senator Ludwig’s speech (main speech
for Labor) in the Senate on the Marriage
Amendment Act, 13 August 2004 :
Senator
LUDWIG (Queensland) (2.03 p.m.) —
. . . Extracts … “Let me recap on
Labor’s major commitments. The recent
focus solely on same-sex marriage,
as covered by this bill, has largely
ignored the extensive commitments
Labor has made to ensure that loving
and caring relationships within the
same-sex community are acknowledged
and respected.
 Labor is committed to pushing ahead
with the reforms it prioritised in
consultation with representatives
of the gay and lesbian community well
before this Howard government bill
was even raised.
Only Labor will immediately introduce
antidiscrimination laws based on sexuality
and introduce protection from harassment
and vilification.
Only a federal Labor government will
deliver to same-sex couples equivalent
status to heterosexual de facto couples,
following an audit of all Commonwealth
legislation similar to exercises already
conducted by many state and territory
governments.
The
purpose of the audit is to identify
where, among the thousands of pieces
of Commonwealth legislation, discrimination
against same-sex couples exists. Labor
will then amend legislation to remove
discrimination against same-sex couples
in all areas such as taxation, social
security, superannuation and immigration. |
all, that requests,
prayers, intercession and thanksgiving be
made for everyone- for kings and all those
in authority, that we may live peaceful
and quiet lives in all godliness and holiness.
3 This is good, and pleases God our Savior,
4 who wants all men to be saved and to come
to a knowledge of the truth." (1 Tim 2:1-4)
|
