I _____, take you ______, to be my wedded wife/husband. To have and to hold, from this day forward, for better, for worse, for richer, for poorer, in sickness or in health, to love and to cherish 'till death do us part.
I want to get married one day. My only hurdle is getting someone to propose to me. My friends Mat and Stu might also like to get married one day. They have a much greater hurdle: legal recognition.
Same sex marriage is currently legal in 10 countries, of which Australia is not one of them...yet. Same-sex marriage has been on the political agenda in Australia for several years, as part of the broader debate about the legal recognition of same-sex relationships (1). Legislation now exists in four states (and the ACT) that provides for the legal recognition of relationships that may include same sex unions. However at a federal level, there remains a significant difference between the treatment of same-sex and heterosexual relationships in relation to the institution of marriage.
Until recently, both major political parties in Australia have opposed same-sex marriage. This changed in December 2011 when the ALP party conference voted “to ensure equal access to marriage under statute for all adult couples irrespective of sex who have a mutual commitment to a shared life” (2). Aww. Unfortunately the Liberal Party leader remains opposed, despite his sister coming out publicly as a lesbian (3).
This year Labor MP Stephen Jones has announced that he will present a private member’s bill to allow same-sex marriage. There is no information about the details of this bill, but it is thought to be similar to the Green’s bill in 2010. This would involve replacing the current definition of marriage
“the union of a man and a woman to the exclusion of all others, voluntarily entered into for life”
With this one:
“Marriage means the union of two people, regardless of their sex, sexuality or gender identity, voluntarily entered into for life.”
Should the Australian parliament finally legislate to allow same-sex marriage, this could very well be constitutionally challenged in the High Court à the argument being that the parliament doesn’t have the power to define marriage. Oh it is all just so complicated.
We do know there are alternative forms of relationships recognition (defined below)
Presumptive de facto recognition – a couple living together on a genuine domestic basis who are not legally married or related by family.
Registered Relationships – similar to the above but you get your relationship put on an official register who provides conclusive proof. The register criteria differs by state.
Civil Unions – similar to registered relationships from a practical and legal perspective, but it tends to permit a greater level of formal ceremonial and symbolic recognition. Only ACT and QLD have this legislation.
But arguably, these are not the same as marriage on many different legal fronts (including Wills, the division of assets and interstate recognition). But the real difference is perhaps not one rights, but of something more symbolic. There is something about the ceremonial aspect of marriage that carries social connotations, often culturally significant.
Personally I am for same sex marriage. I believe that every individual has the right to marry, regardless of their sexual orientation. As a society we must treat people as equals, and to recognise and respect the equality of a commitment between people regardless of their gender.
(1) Same-Sex Marriage, May Anne Neilsen, Parliamentary Libarary, Department of Parliamentary Services, 10/2/12
(2) “Labor votes in favour of gay marriage”, The Age, 3/12/11
(3) “Abbott supports sister - not gay marriage”, Sydney Morning Herald, 8/4/2012
No comments:
Post a Comment