As an openly gay woman in the public eye, Labor senator Penny Wong is all too familiar with the discrimination that same sex couples face on a daily basis. Hateful messages, verbal abuse, even assault. While she remains resilient, she’s fearful that a plebiscite on same-sex marriage will only make things worse.
Delivering the Lionel Murphy Memorial Lecture at ANU last night, the frontbencher argued that the non-binding, non-compulsory public vote proposed by the Coalition would “license hate speech to those who need little encouragement”.
“I don’t oppose a plebiscite because I doubt the good sense of the Australian people. I oppose a plebiscite because I do not want my relationship, my family, to be the subject of inquiry, of censure, of condemnation, by others. And I don’t want other relationships, other families, to be targeted either,” Senator Wong said.
The mother of two took aim at Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull and Attorney-General George Brandis, who she claims have bowed to internal pressure exerted by opponents of the cause.
“In supporting the plebiscite Mr Turnbull repudiated the position he had previously put to the party room and in the public domain. He now tells us that a plebiscite campaign will be conducted respectfully. These are the hollowest of hollow words,” she said.
“Not one straight politician advocating a plebiscite on marriage equality knows what that is like. What it is like to live with the casual and deliberate prejudice that some still harbour.”
They have failed, she argued, to take leadership on the issue, to acknowledge their role as elected officials and put the issue to a free vote in parliament.
“The Racial Discrimination Act and the Sex Discrimination Act were enacted without a plebiscite. State and Federal Parliaments have legislated on abortion, voluntary euthanasia and stem cell research without holding plebiscites,” she said.
“I want the Australian Parliament to fulfil the function laid down in the Constitution – to legislate on the matter of marriage – to remove discrimination against gay and lesbian Australians in the Marriage Act. That is Labor’s position.”
The government has budgeted $160 million to stage the nation-wide vote, and Prime Minister Turnbull has indicated that it will be staged before the end of the year.
“It will be held as soon as practicable and I’ll vote yes and encourage others to vote yes and I’m very confident it will be carried,” he told the ABC’s Q&A program on Monday.
Unlike a referendum, the vote is neither compulsory nor binding, meaning you don’t have to vote and the parliament doesn’t have to enforce the result. Instead it serves more as a poll that allows parliament to test the public’s response to a particular issue.
In contrast, Labor has pledged to introduce a marriage equality bill to the parliament within 100 days of being elected.
Top Comments
So democracy is only a problem when you think the debate might be messy? If you want gay marriage then have the courage to put it to a vote of the people or shut up. if you want a conscience vote in parliament, what happens if you lose? outrage? complaining? You demand the right to a democratic outcome but only using methods you think will win while opposing those that might lose.
Democratic outcomes are for things like having a republic and legalising marijuana, not deciding whether or not one couple's relationship is equal to another's. Why do people think it should be okay to be able to condemn same-sex relationships and not allow homosexual couples to marry?
Who gets to decide on subjects for democracy?
Isn't one of the main ideas of democracy the majority have their say?
Yes, that is the definition of democracy. But what we need to ask ourselves is if we consider it fair for a potential majority to tell people that their relationship is worth less than another couple's.
The Plebiscite isn't democracy. It's rampant populism and homophobia hiding behind a thin facade of a democratic process. A modern equivalent of the Emperor asking the mob to raise their thumbs to determined whether the Gladiator should live or die.
Worse than that the Plebiscite isn't actually a legal things. In Australia legislative power over marriage is vested in and only in the Parliament. Only the Parliament gets to decide. The plebiscite is just an opinion poll that everyone has to participate in and if they don't do it they get fined. It's an unnecessary formality that will cost in excess of $160 million - and ironically being pushed by the party who only a few years ago was telling us we needed to cut red tape and their was a budget emergency
My uneasiness is not so much gay marriage, after all does anyone REALLY care what two consenting adults do? I'm more concerned about what pornography and advertising is doing to children. The concern about marriage equality for me, is more around the issue of ethics in the making of babies by same sex couples. I think it at least needs some discussion. Everyone is ignoring it. We didn't have the discussions around donor sperm and now the world is seeing the problems.. rent a womb, donor eggs, sibling genetic donors... its a legal and ethical minefield that everyone is ignoring.
This is already available to both hetero and homosexual couples, as well as singles and isn't part of the same sex marriage debate.
....what does porn have to do with ssm?