Do You Like This Story?
121690284 NICOLA ROXON: Ive been to same sex weddings

Isn’t it time?

 

 

 

 

 

by NICOLA ROXON

Let me say from the outset that I have attended same sex weddings. They happen in Australia often.

For those who haven’t attended one, there are many things you will find familiar. There are vows, rings, thousands of photos and even confetti. There are proud parents and happy friends dressed up to the nines. They get followed by receptions with food and wine, dancing and embarrassing speeches.

What they miss is not love, or family, or commitment.

What such a ceremony lacks is a legal certificate that our Commonwealth Marriage Act currently prevents it from having.

So these weddings are unofficial – but that doesn’t stop them from occurring.

The status of homosexual Australians has changed dramatically over the past 40 years. A major part of this has been legal change. We’ve gone from laws that criminalise and lock up gays, to laws that protect their rights.

In the sweep of history, much of this change has actually been quite recent.

Our Government has a proud history in this area.

Three years ago this Labor Government changed 85 Commonwealth laws to remove discrimination and equalise treatment. This covered areas such as Medicare, social security and superannuation – changes that have a financial impact; changes that put government benefits on an equal footing, laws that properly acknowledge caring relationships.

Earlier this year I was proud to remove the impediments for same sex couples to obtain ‘Certificates of No Impediment’ for marriage overseas in the various countries that already allow same sex marriage.

Nicola Roxon2 300x224 NICOLA ROXON: Ive been to same sex weddings

Attorney General Nicola Roxen

I admit that I have always believed that these myriad of changes in our legislation were the priority for reform – the practical matters that benefited all Australians wanting to be treated fairly and equally. In fact, it was not long ago that many in the gay and lesbian community also had this view – wanting to ensure protection for all who were treated unfairly because of their homosexuality, not just those who wanted to marry.

But the course of this debate has changed. People’s views have changed. The symbolism of same sex marriage has grown. And action to remove other discrimination has now served to highlight marriage restrictions as an ongoing barrier to equality.

It is time for us to accept that a person’s love and commitment for another is a cause for celebration and recognition, not for exclusion or derision.

The critics of this Bill are concerned about the fabric of our society and our values. I personally don’t see how this Bill will do any of the things that they claim. There will still be the same number of same sex couples, and the same number of straight couples. The only change is that it will remove a legislative statement that straight couples can achieve a higher “status” of commitment than same sex couples.

In fact to me the values that this bill promotes are conservative values. It is saying that if you love someone, you should form a bond with that person for life.

I, for one, cannot and would not say that my love for my husband is stronger or better or more worthy of Government recognition than the commitment of our gay friends who want to take this step. And I certainly can’t see how their marriage would in any way diminish or affect ours.

This change would actually strengthen and encourage commitment. It would say that Australia promotes monogamous relationships. It is saying that we promote commitment, love and family. Ultimately these are the values that strengthen our nation’s social fabric.

I know people of good conscience can have a different view of such things and that social change can be difficult and confronting for many. In my electorate I am lobbied strongly in both directions – for and against this change.

Particularly because of this division, I thank the Prime Minister for having the good judgement to allow Members and Senators of the Government, of the Labor party, a conscience vote on this issue. She has shown that she understands the diverse views on this matter and is willing for people to express them. This is significantly different from the Leader of the Opposition who has banned the Member for Wenworth and Senator Birmingham – among others – from voting in favour of this Bill.

The Prime Minister’s decision, and ALP Conference’s support – has allowed me, as the Attorney General with carriage of the Marriage Act, to voice my opinion which differs from hers – and support this Bill.

I am not confident, though, that this will be the year that same sex marriage will become law.

I believe that will happen when both sides of politics allow their MPs a free vote on this issue.

And I do believe this change is inevitable – so it is a matter of if, not when, it is achieved.

Nicola Roxon MP is the member Gellibrand and is the Australia’s first female Commonwealth Attorney General. This post adapted from the speech she gave to the Australian Parliament as part of the same sex marriage debate yesterday.

The same sex marriage debate is currently before the Australian parliament. Where do you stand on the issue?

Comments

Comment Guidelines : Imagine you’re at a dinner party. Different opinions are welcome but keep it respectful or the host will show you the door. We have zero tolerance for any abuse of our writers, our editorial team or other commenters. So if you’re rude, mean-spirited, snarky, aggressive, defamatory or bitchy, your comment will be deleted (so will any replies to the original comment – so don’t bother arguing with rude people, instead just hit the ‘alert moderator’ button).
And if you’re offensive, you’ll be blacklisted and all your comments will go directly to spam. Remember what Fonzie was like? Cool. That’s how we’re going to be – cool. Have fun and thanks for adding to the conversation…

Use your profile to comment: Or, comment as a guest:
(Max file size is 150kb & jpeg's only - if you need help resizing go here »)

35 Comments so far

  1. Jeanette

    Is anyone actually against gay marriage? I have never actually heard anyone openly say that gay people should not marry. I’ve only ever met people who really support it, or people who couldn’t care less so we may as well have it. Maybe people against it just don’t speak out, probably because they don’t want to be identified as homophobic weirdos? Are there really normal, educated, ordinary people who are against it?

    GD Star Rating
    loading...
    • jaq1792

      You’re very lucky if you haven’t heard anyone say that. I’m from a very small town and whilst the younger generation here almost fully support it, I’m afraid the GEN X’s aren’t as open-minded.

      GD Star Rating
      loading...
  2. Jen

    how about we repeal the Marriage Act altogether and stop legislating peoples’ personal relationships? now that’s a debate that’s worth having.

    GD Star Rating
    loading...
  3. B

    Error in last sentence: should be “when, not if”

    GD Star Rating
    loading...
  4. mabol

    Its sad that there is still such an obvious discrimination against same sex relationships in our legal system – even a lot of people who think that they are pretty open and supportive of gay relationships – don’t realise how they are treating them with a different status. Marriage equality will remove the formalised prejudice and will be a good start in changing peoples perceptions.

    Religious institutions can decide who is able to be married within a religious marriage. However clearly religion as a whole does not only support marriage between a man and a woman – because for starters many religions support marriage between a man and a woman – and another woman and another… Marriage is common across many different cultures with many different arrangements. In a secular society given that there is no universal meaning to marriage – there is no good reason to discriminate.

    Thanks Nicola Roxon for your thoughtful speech.

    GD Star Rating
    loading...
  5. Daniel

    I sometimes disagree with your policies Ms Roxon (they scare me a little, e.g. 2yr data retention) but I certainly like your intentions and I am for marriage equality and agree with this article.
    My two siblings AND myself are all homosexual and in long-term, monogamous and committed relationships. Whilst I do not believe in god or religion and I wasn’t even baptised, I do believe that religion (as backward as it may seem at times) can serve as a foundational backbone for ethics in our society.

    I recognise that some people have differing views on the matter. I know that most same-sex newlyweds will honour the practice and uphold the status of marriage, but I too worry that a few may ruin it for the many, that there will be a backlash once people, who aren’t so certain of marriage equality, see that it is happening.

    It’s no secret that some gay men can be swingers at times and do like to party. So whilst I absolutely hope that this change does come, I hope that its achievement does not come without a sincere adoption and respect by all who wed. I hope same-sex couples realise that whilst they also achieve the right to marry, it does not come without commitment to one another and the children they may have. I hope they can strengthen the currently battered status of marriage where couples marry and divorce shortly after. I hope they prove wrong all those who doubt marriage equality.

    I wish religious followers wouldn’t forget the most fundamental and foundational principles of their faith, of harmonious love and happiness for all. Marriage (at least in Australia) has evolved from being just a club controlled by religious leaders to a right for all members in society and when it makes that leap, it is not up to the churches to dictate the rules but up to the government, up to our leaders, up to the electors – the people.

    P.S. “And I do believe this change is inevitable – so it is a matter of if, not when, it is achieved.” I may have misread something behind this, but don’t you mean “….matter of when, not if, it is achieved.”

    GD Star Rating
    loading...
  6. Daisy

    For it.

    GD Star Rating
    loading...
  7. Jay

    Financial equality is not equality. I’d be interested to know if the governement is benefiting financially from the changes because I sure as hell don’t know how I am better off. Many couples without kids owned two properties. Wow – no we get to pay capital gains tax! Need unemployment? – you don’t qualify anymore because your partner works. How many millions has been raked in to date from these changes….family bonus etc…sorry you don’t qualify for those….

    GD Star Rating
    loading...
  8. Kylie

    Nicola you are a great woman. If only all polititians would do what is right rather than pandering to a population who think discrimination is ok.

    GD Star Rating
    loading...
  9. sparkie

    where do I stand….totally for same sex marraige. This is marraige under the law nothing to do with religous sanctioning of marriage

    GD Star Rating
    loading...
  10. ipomenscarlet

    Nicola Roxon has a lot of class.

    I’d like to see her and a few other decent politicians (like Penny Wong and Kelly O’Dwyer) form a third party with Malcolm Turnbull as leader.

    All sorts of sensible things might happen!

    Ipomen Scarlet

    GD Star Rating
    loading...
    • CBR

      That would never, ever, in a million years happen. Nicola Roxon is a HUGE statist. She believes in data retention, for goodness’ sake. She is completely opposed to pretty much everything Turnbull and O’Dwyer stand for.

      And furthermore, it’s not Decent Politicians vs All The Other Bastards. There are many, many politicians who are genuinely decent people, and who want to do the right thing – by their country, yes, but also by their Party who supports them.

      GD Star Rating
      loading...
  11. elle

    Wow. My respect for Nicola Rixon has further increased after her Australian Story and this article. I am so bored of having this debate..just bloody get on with it and make it legal for God’s sake!

    GD Star Rating
    loading...
  12. Rosie86

    I clearly remember JG putting this issue to a conscience vote at the Labor National Conference to ensure that the Government could simultaneously pretend they support same sex marriage AND make sure it never got through Parliament to appease Labor Right.

    You did not have to do that. You could have just proposed a bill and it would have passed with the support of the Greens through both Houses.

    I understand the pragmatic reality of politics, and I have a lot of admiration for Nicola Roxon. But pretending to support gay marriage whilst simultaneously ensuring it won’t see the light of day under this Government is a bit much for me.

    Thumbs down.

    GD Star Rating
    loading...
    • Ursula

      You are a breath of fresh air, Rosie86.

      GD Star Rating
      loading...
  13. Simba

    Yay Nicola Roxon! Now if only the Liberal party would open up their minds and jump on board. Come on Abbott, allow a conscious vote! Stop letting your personal religious opinion get in the way. What happened to separation of church and state???

    GD Star Rating
    loading...
    • Bradley

      It will certainly be very interesting to see which Labor MPs vote in favour of this proposal when it hits parliament and which Liberal MPs will cross the floor.

      GD Star Rating
      loading...
  14. frogette

    Nicola, you are fabulous. That is all.

    GD Star Rating
    loading...
  15. Deb

    Finally a politician saying something I feel proud of. I’ve been incredibly happy in my marriage for 15 years and it saddens me that my brother who is gay and is in a long-term relationship is denied the chance to declare the same level of commitment in a public, legal context. Why? In all of the arguments that have been presented so far, I’ve yet to see a single reason for denying gay people the right to marry that isn’t ultimately based on fear and prejudice. Prejudice is always ugly and never more so than when discriminating against people who simply want to celebrate finding love.

    GD Star Rating
    loading...
  16. I actually think it’s quite outrageously hypocritical that Centrelink and the ATO recognise same sex de facto relationships, and make people declare them to get social security benefits, tax them as a couple the same way a married couple is taxed, yet won’t let them get married!!!

    Yes – I do know that people who are in heterosexual de facto relationships are subject to the same rules, BUT they have the option to get married!!

    GD Star Rating
    loading...
    • alyssakt

      Years ago when I was at Uni and receiving Austudy I remember that because I had a female flatmate, no issue was raised over how much financial support I could be getting from the person I lived with. If I’d had a male flatmate at the time I would have had to prove that he was not my partner. At no point was it considered on those forms that I may be in a lesbian relationship.
      THAT is wrong.
      But I agree with you, Whippersnapper, everyone under the same laws deserves the same rights!

      GD Star Rating
      loading...
      • SAME!! I lived with 3 girls in 2006 and then with my best friend for 3 years following. I never ever EVER was asked about my relationship with her.

        My male friend was living in a house with 5 other flatmates, one of which was his boyfriend, and he was only questioned about his “relations” with the female members of the house.

        Think all of this changed in 2009 – the year after I finished uni.

        GD Star Rating
        loading...
  17. vivacious

    Excellent article Nicola. I personally can’t understand the arguments against marriage equality but I do respect that people have different views and I really respect the PM for allowing people to exercise their own conscience on this issue. I hope the bill passes but I suspect it won’t. Still it is only a matter of time and in the future I suspect people will look back and wonder at what all the fuss was about.

    GD Star Rating
    loading...
  18. Elle.

    I’m a total Nicola Roxon fan girl. This is why.

    GD Star Rating
    loading...
  19. Bradley

    As much as I support same sex marriages, I would disagree with the point that Ms Roxon makes about thousands of same sex marriages taking place in Australia.

    Legally, they are civil unions rather than marriages. Marriage between a male and a female is legal. Currently, and please let it change soon, marriage between male and male, female and female is illegal.

    So actually, Ms Roxon, you have not been to a same sex marriage in Australia.

    GD Star Rating
    loading...
    • Anonymous

      What makes them civil unions Bradley? I think Nicola is referring to unofficial marriage celebrations.

      GD Star Rating
      loading...
      • Bradley

        When Nicola actually says that she is referring to unofficial marriage celebrations…I will withdraw the term “civil union”.

        Unofficial marriage celebration is a little OTT, don’t you think ? Let’s quit the nitpicking and both look toward the marriage celebrations being legally official, eh ?

        GD Star Rating
        loading...
  20. Bradley

    I would love to be a guest at a gay wedding !

    I sincerly hope that I don’t have to wait too long for and invitation.

    GD Star Rating
    loading...
    • Neeks

      Whenever this subject comes up I always hope I get invited to the biggest, bestest, gayest wedding ever. Because fun! And love! And progress!

      GD Star Rating
      loading...
      • Bradley

        Neeks….may we both be guests at the same wedding !

        GD Star Rating
        loading...
  21. Neeks

    I have to laugh at the “Gay marriage will destroy the fabric of society” type comments. It is as if gay marriage has never been made legal anywhere on earth before. If you want to know what the effect of legalising gay marriage is then just take a look at the countries that already have marriage equality. Has Sweden imploded? Has the Netherlands broken out into civil war? Have all the people of Canada suddenly become heathens? Have all the traditional man/woman marriages in Belium broken down because they are somehow less sacred? No. No they haven’t.

    GD Star Rating
    loading...
  22. Sarah

    This line – “I, for one, cannot and would not say that my love for my husband is stronger or better or more worthy of Government recognition than the commitment of our gay friends who want to take this step. And I certainly can’t see how their marriage would in any way diminish or affect ours.”

    Exactly how I feel.

    It drives me bonkers every time people argue marriage is a religious institution. I understnad the history of the institution of marriage but the fact is I can get married and I am athiest.

    So if the term marriage refers to a union sanctioned by religion, the Government should pull out of the space and only regulate civil unions – for all.

    So everyone can have a civil union recognised and then if you want to have your civil union performed in a church and call it a marriage as well, go for it.

    GD Star Rating
    loading...
    • jamilarizvi

      That was my favourite line too. Altogether an outstanding contribution to the debate from Nicola. I loved this speech.

      GD Star Rating
      loading...

So, we have $1000 to give away... oh, would you be interested? Well step right this way.

To go in the draw to win, just LIKE us on Facebook, enter your email address and tell us in 25 words or less why you love reading Mamamia.

Close this popup



Full Terms & Conditions