Found this via Sarah and Gam. Funny stuff.
Robert McClelland on The 7:30 Report defending the moves to remove discrimination from federal legislation that allows gay de facto couples the same rights as straight ones - but no actual marriage.
KERRY O'BRIEN: ... decision to remove discriminatory practice from Commonwealth laws so de facto same sex relationships will now be legally recognised, but not formal same sex marriage. I'm just curious to know what the logic is in that discrimination, if you like, that difference, because surely it is fundamentally discriminatory?
ROBERT MCCLELLAND: The logic is essentially Labor Party policy. We went to the election ..
KERRY O'BRIEN: That's not necessarily logical.
ROBERT MCCLELLAND: ... with a - but, we're honouring the election commitment. We're removing discrimination from some 100 pieces of legislation that have real practical significance to people in same sex relationships. In terms of the issue of recognition of relationships, we favour and positively favour and indeed encourage all states and territories to implement a uniform system of registration of relationships that are in existence whether they be same sex or close personal relationships. Indeed, the policy was based on the Tasmanian model. We positively encourage all states and territories to do that. But what we don't support - and again, consistently with our policy - we don't support a measure that mimics marriage. We ...
"...a measure that mimics marriage." Because you can't really be married! There is no providing of the sprog! Even straight couples who don't spawn aren't really married! Besides, everyone knows there is no real love between gay couples! They merely think they're in love but they'll eventually come to their senses and realise that they are actually attracted to the opposite sex! It's just a phase! It's AGAINST GOD!
ROBERT MCCLELLAND: The system of registration essentially recognises a relationship that is in existence. The system that is proposed or has been discussed as being proposed in the ACT would be a system that would, as a result of a ceremony, create a legal relationship which essentially is something akin to the traditional concept of a marriage.
KERRY O'BRIEN: But the mere fact that you use the word "mimic" to describe that could imply for some that you're essentially looking down your nose at it.
ROBERT MCCLELLAND: People in same sex relationships are entitled to - for too long they've been discriminated against. I think that's accepted across the political spectrum happily today. In terms of the issue of marriage, both parties supported during the course of the last 18 months or so legislation that defined marriage as being between a man and a woman. It was the policy of the Labor Party before the election ...
KERRY O'BRIEN: Yes, but I'm asking you why it's not discriminatory to say that a same sex couple can't engage in that ceremony legally but a man and a woman. Why isn't that discriminatory under law?
ROBERT MCCLELLAND: Well, we - what you are talking about is providing a positive system of recognising at law a relationship that is in existence as a result of the registration of that, as is occurring in Tasmania and as is occurring in Victoria. That is something that is appropriate because it actually recognises something that is in existence. What we don't support is legal measures that create a relationship that is akin to marriage.
KERRY O'BRIEN: I'm still not sure why that's not discriminatory, but I think that's where we're gonna have to leave it.
Man, I love Kerry O'Brien.
2 reasons to click here:
It's cos of all the hard right union bosses* from the macho trades that still haven't worked out that two women or two men legally bonding is no threat to their own hetrosexuality.
Their time will pass soon.
*The ALP conference where broad policy is agreed to has 50% union participation so it tends to skew for things like this.
And let's not forget that any major party that is in power is going to be beholden to the Christian right.
Post a Comment