Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.
 

Re: FW: Marriage Equality Australia

Expand Messages
  • edwardxderwent
    here are some of my thoughts on this subject and the circumstances under which this law was passed by the australian parliament. it may not be fully coherent,
    Message 1 of 5 , Sep 1, 2004
      here are some of my thoughts on this subject and the circumstances
      under which this law was passed by the australian parliament. it may
      not be fully coherent, as i am in the process of thinking my way thru
      this challenge.sorri, that's it's so long for a first post.(and, i
      guess this is of interest only to australians) ........

      1.it's a 'law'. passed by act of parliament. therefore one day in the
      future it can be 'unpassed'. i.e. repealed, superseded, whatever word
      people want to use, as i am sure that, one day it will.

      2.It changes nothing, merely confirming the status quo.

      3.Str8 marriage also has so many problems that you would think they
      could spend their (i.e. MP's) time better if they considered ways of
      assisting people to overcome those problems. But, I guess that would
      definitely get into the 'too hard' basket. Easier to be negative than
      positive.

      4.it reflects the particular mindset of john howard, who even tho he
      has had an out gay man (Christopher Pearson) among his speech
      writers, seems to be particularly homophobic. his attitude does not
      neccessarily seem to reflected in others in his party, with the
      possible exception of tony abbot, who to me leaves an impression that
      his homophobia is internalised. As some of you may know a former
      deputy prime minister (from the liberal party) is now an out gay
      man.rumours abound about harold holt also.

      5.i suggest that it's the lack of national organisation that is at
      the root of the few protest messages sent to any of the parties. most
      gay activity groups are state based, reflecting the fact that most
      progress in the past in australia, has had to be at state level. even
      the gay and lesbian immigration task force which deals with a federal
      issue, is organised on a state level. the state branches do not
      neccessarily co-ordinate.

      6.gay people can have a reasonable comfortable life in australia. my
      partner and i do. there is little biting inside our bellies to light
      a fire and make us 'do' something now. we both find reasonable
      acceptance at our work and living places. ( please note, that i did
      work long and hard with some gay groups in the past, notably the
      immigration task force mentioned in point 3)

      7.the ALP's support of the govt's bill, is being claimed as
      a 'political' manoeuvre, to prevent the issue of 'gay marriage' being
      used in the forthcoming election. they are promising to take a series
      of legislative and administrative actions to eliminate vestiges of
      discrimination in many areas.do we believe this ?(sincere question)

      8. this may be a good time for gay people to re-organise their
      political support. in the past, we have relied on the australian
      labour party to legislate positively on gay issues.of course,the ALP
      also includes a group of very conservative catholic politicians,
      usually with a trade union past, who are likely to vote against
      anything 'gay supportive' within the party room

      the australian democrats are clearly dying, tho it will be another 4
      years before they lose all their senate membership. This elections,it
      looks like their vote will collapse to the point where they lose all
      federal funding, and leave them without funding to run their
      organisation for the next few years.

      it seems the greens will inherit the previous supporters of the
      democrats. the greens are also gay friendly, not just in australia,
      but (i think) world-wide. their leader, senator bob brown, has shown
      himself to have 'balls' to use a common term. maybe, this is the
      political party that gay people could support and use in the future.
      current polls are indicating a support level as high as 12%.

      7. I think that mainland gay right groups have not learned the lesson
      of tasmania, where some years ago, an election was fought over the
      issue of continued criminalisation of gay sex. the tasmanian
      activists organised a speakers bureau, that, i suggest, effectively
      neutralised the RRR (rabid religious right) by inviting churches to
      have a speaker from the gay rights group visit their church and speak
      to the congregation on the gay point of view. i do not believe that
      once acquainted with the facts of the case, most australain
      christians would continue to oppose gay marriage.

      we have a great need for a national gay speakers bureau to educate
      people the same way. great tact is needed, for it is also my opinion,
      that the greatest hostility comes from those men (women seem less
      affected this way IMO) who have felt attraction for other men also,
      and are so horrified by this internal desire that they adopt an
      attitude of extreme homophobia. maybe, this is what led fred nile
      into leading a life more committed to opposing gay freedom, than to
      his consecrated task of serving christ.

      and, on a personal note... my partner of 14 years - shocked by this
      law, now wants to marry me, and suggests that we go to canada and do
      so. i'm still thinking this one thru... LOL








      --------------------------------------------------------------------
      --- In Exex-gay@yahoogroups.com, "Life Coach" <lifecoach@m...> wrote:
      > Hi
      >
      > Whether you feel that you would like to have your relationship with
      your
      > partner legally recognised or not......this Bill is an attack on
      the rights
      > of GLBT people here in Australia.
      >
      > If you feel the same as me could you follow the instructions on
      this email
      > and forward it onto others.
      >
      > Thanks
      >
    • Life Coach
      Hi Edward Thanks for such a well thought out and informative post. You have certainly highlighted our situation here in Aussie well. I’m sure though that
      Message 2 of 5 , Sep 1, 2004

        Hi Edward

         

        Thanks for such a well thought out and informative post. You have certainly highlighted our situation here in Aussie well. I’m sure though that those on the list from the US and other countries will relate…..the debate rages in the US still.

         

        Have you seen the recent HRC ad ……

         

        http://anon.newmediamill.speedera.net/anon.newmediamill.speedera.net/whatifv5.wmv

         

        Please continue to share more of your wisdom with us in the future.

         

        …congratulations on the proposal after 14 years….hehe

         

        Anthony

        Moderator and author of:

        'A Life of Unlearning -Coming Out of the Church - One Man's Struggle'

        To download Chapter 1 'The Confession' FREE click here.

        http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Exex-gay

        My sexual orientation is not a sickness to be healed or a sin to be forgiven. My sexual orientation is a gift from my Creator to be accepted, celebrated, and lived with integrity.

         

        -----Original Message-----
        From: edwardxderwent [mailto:edwardxderwent@...]
        Sent: Thursday, 2 September 2004 12:02
        To: Exex-gay@yahoogroups.com
        Subject: Spam Message:[Exex-gay] Re: FW: Marriage Equality Australia

         


        here are some of my thoughts on this subject and the circumstances
        under which this law was passed by the australian parliament. it may
        not be fully coherent, as i am in the process of thinking my way thru
        this challenge.sorri, that's it's so long for a first post.(and, i
        guess this is of interest only to australians) ........

        1.it's a 'law'. passed by act of parliament. therefore one day in the
        future it can be 'unpassed'. i.e. repealed, superseded, whatever word
        people want to use, as i am sure that, one day it will.

        2.It changes nothing, merely confirming the status quo.

        3.Str8 marriage also has so many problems that you would think they
        could spend their (i.e. MP's) time better if they considered ways of
        assisting people to overcome those problems. But, I guess that would
        definitely get into the 'too hard' basket. Easier to be negative than
        positive.

        4.it reflects the particular mindset of john howard, who even tho he
        has had an out gay man (Christopher Pearson) among his speech
        writers, seems to be particularly homophobic. his attitude does not
        neccessarily seem to reflected in others in his party, with the
        possible exception of tony abbot, who to me leaves an impression that
        his homophobia is internalised. As some of you may know a former
        deputy prime minister (from the liberal party) is now an out gay
        man.rumours abound about harold holt also.

        5.i suggest that it's the lack of national organisation that is at
        the root of the few protest messages sent to any of the parties. most
        gay activity groups are state based, reflecting the fact that most
        progress in the past in australia, has had to be at state level. even
        the gay and lesbian immigration task force which deals with a federal
        issue, is organised on a state level. the state branches do not
        neccessarily co-ordinate.

        6.gay people can have a reasonable comfortable life in australia. my
        partner and i do. there is little biting inside our bellies to light
        a fire and make us 'do' something now. we both find reasonable
        acceptance at our work and living places. ( please note, that i did
        work long and hard with some gay groups in the past, notably the
        immigration task force mentioned in point 3)

        7.the ALP's support of the govt's bill, is being claimed as
        a 'political' manoeuvre, to prevent the issue of 'gay marriage' being
        used in the forthcoming election. they are promising to take a series
        of legislative and administrative actions to eliminate vestiges of
        discrimination in many areas.do we believe this ?(sincere question)

        8. this may be a good time for gay people to re-organise their
        political support. in the past, we have relied on the australian
        labour party to legislate positively on gay issues.of course,the ALP
        also includes a group of very conservative catholic politicians,
        usually with a trade union past, who are likely to vote against
        anything 'gay supportive' within the party room

        the australian democrats are clearly dying, tho it will be another 4
        years before they lose all their senate membership. This elections,it
        looks like their vote will collapse to the point where they lose all
        federal funding, and leave them without funding to run their
        organisation for the next few years.

        it seems the greens will inherit the previous supporters of the
        democrats. the greens are also gay friendly, not just in australia,
        but (i think) world-wide. their leader, senator bob brown, has shown
        himself to have 'balls' to use a common term. maybe, this is the
        political party that gay people could support and use in the future.
        current polls are indicating a support level as high as 12%.

        7. I think that mainland gay right groups have not learned the lesson
        of tasmania, where some years ago, an election was fought over the
        issue of continued criminalisation of gay sex. the tasmanian
        activists organised a speakers bureau, that, i suggest, effectively
        neutralised the RRR (rabid religious right) by inviting churches to
        have a speaker from the gay rights group visit their church and speak
        to the congregation on the gay point of view. i do not believe that
        once acquainted with the facts of the case, most australain
        christians would continue to oppose gay marriage.

        we have a great need for a national gay speakers bureau to educate
        people the same way. great tact is needed, for it is also my opinion,
        that the greatest hostility comes from those men (women seem less
        affected this way IMO) who have felt attraction for other men also,
        and are so horrified by this internal desire that they adopt an
        attitude of extreme homophobia. maybe, this is what led fred nile
        into leading a life more committed to opposing gay freedom, than to
        his consecrated task of serving christ.

        and, on a personal note... my partner of 14 years - shocked by this
        law, now wants to marry me, and suggests that we go to canada and do
        so.  i'm still thinking this one thru... LOL








        --------------------------------------------------------------------
        --- In Exex-gay@yahoogroups.com, "Life Coach" <lifecoach@m...> wrote:

        > Hi
        >
        > Whether you feel that you would like to have your relationship with
        your
        > partner legally recognised or not......this Bill is an attack on
        the rights
        > of  GLBT people here in Australia.
        >
        > If you feel the same as me could you follow the instructions on
        this email
        > and forward it onto others.
        >
        > Thanks
        >




      • Graham Douglas-Meyer
        Sadly it is not a lack of coordination that prevented the GLBTI community from becoming voiciferous in regards the marriage ammendment law recently passed and
        Message 3 of 5 , Sep 1, 2004
          Sadly it is not a lack of coordination that prevented the GLBTI community from becoming voiciferous in regards the marriage ammendment law recently passed and ascented to wiithin 3 days of passage by the Govenor General (Himself, an arch homophobe.)
           
          Rather it was a real complacency and apathy attached to a general procrastination that got a quality 1200 submissions to the senate committee into Gay and Lesbian relationships.
           
          Strangely, this committee was run very differently to other such committees. Under normal circumstances a photocopied stack of the same submmission with different names and signatures would normally counted as one submission; no real effort going into it; effectively just a petition; this time they were counted as individual submission and actual G&L petitions were counted singularly. Hence the figures being quoted around parliament were dramatically skewed in favor of the fundamentalists.
           
          In the Liberal (badly named, conservative) government there are 30+ homophobic religious christian fundamentalists; as well as a number of sycophants. The arguement being put forward regarding this issue was mainly religious. Yet the issue is a civil matter; marriage is and has never been the province of any church; churches  may conduct weddings, but it is the state that marries them.
           
          My Husband and I were married in Toronto Ontario in March of this year. We were hoping that  we would at least be allowed to petition for recognition of our marriage under the Hague convention on foreign marriages; this has now been stalled while we check the constitutionality of this new law.
           
          The reason that The Labor party had the impression that marriage was not an important issue for the GLBTI community is due to a lack of consultation with G&L groups. Rather, the person responsible only consulted with the NSW GLRL who did not make it clear that they only represented the feelings of their linited number of members (not even their actual state.) They had the belief that because they didn't consider marriage important in their lives then it wasn't relevent in any other Gay person's life; They revel in the limelight of politicians believing they are a representative voice.
           
          Even when the state groups got together to form the Equal Rights Network the whole organisation was prevented and hamstrung from lobbying for Gay marriage because this group didn't see it as important.
           
          Until individuals in NSW got off their butts and started their own protest, and they saw the fact that many G&L people in their state did think it was an issue that they fell in with the bleating and tried to once again steal the limelight; too little too late.
           
          We weren't just sold out by the Labor party we were sold out by those who revel in the belief that they are representative.
           
          The majority of the 1200+ positive submissions from organisations like Marriage Equality Australia; Gay and Lesbian Equality WA (GALEWA); The Marriage centre; Family Planning Australia as well as individuals like Damian and Myself were actually of quality and substance in favor of recognising G&L marriage.
           
          I'm sorry to say it But, may Howard etal Rot in Hell.
           
          Graham
        • edwardxderwent
          graham, i appreciated your comments on the issue of access to marriage benefits for gay couples. gotta say, that like others i have not been excited by the
          Message 4 of 5 , Sep 3, 2004
            graham,

            i appreciated your comments on the issue of access to marriage
            benefits for gay couples.

            gotta say, that like others i have not been excited by the subject,
            thinking that we have been making progress toward equality, and
            already having access thru the de facto laws to most of the 'rights'
            important to me.

            so now it's all something to think carefully about...




            --- In Exex-gay@yahoogroups.com, "Graham Douglas-Meyer"
            <gdouglas@i...> wrote:
            > Sadly it is not a lack of coordination that prevented the GLBTI
            community from becoming voiciferous in regards the marriage
            ammendment law recently passed and ascented to wiithin 3 days of
            passage by the Govenor General (Himself, an arch homophobe.)
            >
            > Rather it was a real complacency and apathy attached to a general
            procrastination that got a quality 1200 submissions to the senate
            committee into Gay and Lesbian relationships.
            >
            > Strangely, this committee was run very differently to other such
            committees. Under normal circumstances a photocopied stack of the
            same submmission with different names and signatures would normally
            counted as one submission; no real effort going into it; effectively
            just a petition; this time they were counted as individual submission
            and actual G&L petitions were counted singularly. Hence the figures
            being quoted around parliament were dramatically skewed in favor of
            the fundamentalists.
            >
            > In the Liberal (badly named, conservative) government there are 30+
            homophobic religious christian fundamentalists; as well as a number
            of sycophants. The arguement being put forward regarding this issue
            was mainly religious. Yet the issue is a civil matter; marriage is
            and has never been the province of any church; churches may conduct
            weddings, but it is the state that marries them.
            >
            > My Husband and I were married in Toronto Ontario in March of this
            year. We were hoping that we would at least be allowed to petition
            for recognition of our marriage under the Hague convention on foreign
            marriages; this has now been stalled while we check the
            constitutionality of this new law.
            >
            > The reason that The Labor party had the impression that marriage
            was not an important issue for the GLBTI community is due to a lack
            of consultation with G&L groups. Rather, the person responsible only
            consulted with the NSW GLRL who did not make it clear that they only
            represented the feelings of their linited number of members (not even
            their actual state.) They had the belief that because they didn't
            consider marriage important in their lives then it wasn't relevent in
            any other Gay person's life; They revel in the limelight of
            politicians believing they are a representative voice.
            >
            > Even when the state groups got together to form the Equal Rights
            Network the whole organisation was prevented and hamstrung from
            lobbying for Gay marriage because this group didn't see it as
            important.
            >
            > Until individuals in NSW got off their butts and started their own
            protest, and they saw the fact that many G&L people in their state
            did think it was an issue that they fell in with the bleating and
            tried to once again steal the limelight; too little too late.
            >
            > We weren't just sold out by the Labor party we were sold out by
            those who revel in the belief that they are representative.
            >
            > The majority of the 1200+ positive submissions from organisations
            like Marriage Equality Australia; Gay and Lesbian Equality WA
            (GALEWA); The Marriage centre; Family Planning Australia as well as
            individuals like Damian and Myself were actually of quality and
            substance in favor of recognising G&L marriage.
            >
            > I'm sorry to say it But, may Howard etal Rot in Hell.
            >
            > Graham
          Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.