ACT Chief Minister John Stanhope has obviously lost all patience with Cuddly Ruddly's constant stonewalling on civil unions. And about time too. How ridiculous, as Stanhope says, to be lecturing the Chinese about riding roughshod over human rights in Tibet while he's doing the same back home in Canberra.
"I have hopes that a Prime Minister and a Government capable of advocating for the basic rights of the Tibetans will - must - comprehend the justice of formally extending each of those same basic rights to folk back home," Mr Stanhope said.
Let it be said loud and clear - Labor has nothing to lose from endorsing civil unions or even gay marriage. There would be some short term pain - the self-styled "Christian" lobby would have a ball for a few weeks - but the honeymoon period is the time to get that over with.
Thereafter, as has happened everywhere else in the world, the vast majority of people would just shrug their shoulders and move on.
Quite why Kevvy can't get his head round that is beyond me, unless it's because it's too far up Shopworkers union boss-for-life and arch-ultra-Catholic Joe de Bruyn's arse. Our shiny new PM makes a big thing about keeping election promises - and both before and after the election he said he'd let the ACT pass their civil unions act if they wanted to, and slammed Howard for interfering - but when it comes to gay rights he's happy to break this one.
"We know that what the ACT is attempting to do is no more than to extend to same-sex couples equality with other Canberrans, under ACT laws," said Stanhope. "Not commonwealth laws: that would require a national bill of rights. Just ACT laws ... in the community to which they contribute, and to which they belong."
Unfortunately for the men and women in the ACT who desire recognition of and respect for their long-term "enduring primary relationships, efforts by the ACT Government to deliver these things have been thwarted", he added.
"The evidence suggests the rights of a significant number of Canberra's men and women cannot be guaranteed by my Government, because of church disapproval," he said. "This in a nation that has committed ... to a separation of church and state."
At least we've been spared the ludicrous sight of 'flying registrars' haring from civil union to civil union in their little on-the-spot registration vans, as the ACT proposed when Ruddly told them they couldn't have registrars at the ceremonies.
It's also past time for the state premiers to scrum down and push back the feds on this one: tell them firmly their nonsensical notion of a web of state based schemes ain't gonna fly. Bite the bullet and remove the tumour on the Marriage Act put there by the last government, Kevvy. It'll hurt for a while but that will pass. Spend a little of your vast political capital and goodwill where it will do some good.
And thereafter let nature - in the form of court cases for the recognition of overseas same-sex marriages and unions - take their natural course to justice.
Or is Australian social policy nowadays made in Rome rather than Camberra?
"I have hopes that a Prime Minister and a Government capable of advocating for the basic rights of the Tibetans will - must - comprehend the justice of formally extending each of those same basic rights to folk back home," Mr Stanhope said.
Let it be said loud and clear - Labor has nothing to lose from endorsing civil unions or even gay marriage. There would be some short term pain - the self-styled "Christian" lobby would have a ball for a few weeks - but the honeymoon period is the time to get that over with.
Thereafter, as has happened everywhere else in the world, the vast majority of people would just shrug their shoulders and move on.
Quite why Kevvy can't get his head round that is beyond me, unless it's because it's too far up Shopworkers union boss-for-life and arch-ultra-Catholic Joe de Bruyn's arse. Our shiny new PM makes a big thing about keeping election promises - and both before and after the election he said he'd let the ACT pass their civil unions act if they wanted to, and slammed Howard for interfering - but when it comes to gay rights he's happy to break this one.
"We know that what the ACT is attempting to do is no more than to extend to same-sex couples equality with other Canberrans, under ACT laws," said Stanhope. "Not commonwealth laws: that would require a national bill of rights. Just ACT laws ... in the community to which they contribute, and to which they belong."
Unfortunately for the men and women in the ACT who desire recognition of and respect for their long-term "enduring primary relationships, efforts by the ACT Government to deliver these things have been thwarted", he added.
"The evidence suggests the rights of a significant number of Canberra's men and women cannot be guaranteed by my Government, because of church disapproval," he said. "This in a nation that has committed ... to a separation of church and state."
At least we've been spared the ludicrous sight of 'flying registrars' haring from civil union to civil union in their little on-the-spot registration vans, as the ACT proposed when Ruddly told them they couldn't have registrars at the ceremonies.
It's also past time for the state premiers to scrum down and push back the feds on this one: tell them firmly their nonsensical notion of a web of state based schemes ain't gonna fly. Bite the bullet and remove the tumour on the Marriage Act put there by the last government, Kevvy. It'll hurt for a while but that will pass. Spend a little of your vast political capital and goodwill where it will do some good.
And thereafter let nature - in the form of court cases for the recognition of overseas same-sex marriages and unions - take their natural course to justice.
Or is Australian social policy nowadays made in Rome rather than Camberra?
No comments:
Post a Comment