Same sex marriage
35 views | +0 today
Follow
Your new post is loading...
Your new post is loading...
Scooped by Ms Howard
Scoop.it!

4102.0 - Australian Social Trends, July 2013

4102.0 - Australian Social Trends, July 2013 | Same sex marriage | Scoop.it
more...
Ms Howard's comment, August 21, 2013 12:55 AM
Same sex couple statistics that may be useful....
Scooped by Ms Howard
Scoop.it!

Australia's divorce rates: the real statistics

Australia's divorce rates: the real statistics | Same sex marriage | Scoop.it
New figures show a big increase in people divorcing after 20 years or more of marriage. But it's not as big as some would have you believe
more...
No comment yet.
Scooped by Ms Howard
Scoop.it!

Media Release: Poll Confirms Marriage Equality A Key Election Issue For Young Voters

Media Release: Poll Confirms Marriage Equality A Key Election Issue For Young Voters | Same sex marriage | Scoop.it
Advocates say young Australians will be voting for candidates who support marriage equality following the release of a national poll showing young people rate same-sex marriage as a top priority for this election.
more...
No comment yet.
Scooped by Ms Howard
Scoop.it!

Labor mounts digital campaign for same-sex marriage - The Guardian

Labor mounts digital campaign for same-sex marriage - The Guardian | Same sex marriage | Scoop.it
The Guardian
Labor mounts digital campaign for same-sex marriage
The Guardian
Labor is hoping to use social media and the digital world to build momentum for change on gay marriage and force Tony Abbott into allowing a conscience vote on the issue.
more...
No comment yet.
Rescooped by Ms Howard from Littlebytesnews Current Events
Scoop.it!

Same-Sex Marriage Ten Years On: Lessons from Canada

Same-Sex Marriage Ten Years On: Lessons from Canada | Same sex marriage | Scoop.it
The effects of same-sex civil marriage in Canada—restrictions on free speech rights, parental rights in education, and autonomy rights of religious institutions, along with a weakening of the marriage culture—provide lessons for the United States.

 

Would recognizing same-sex relationships as marriages be much of a game-changer? What impact, if any, would it have on the public conception of marriage or the state of a nation’s marriage culture?

There has been no shortage of speculation on these questions. But the limited American experience with same-sex marriage to date gives us few concrete answers. So it makes sense to consider the Canadian experience since the first Canadian court established same-sex marriage a decade ago. There are, of course, important cultural and institutional differences between the US and Canada and, as is the case in any polity, much depends upon the actions of local political and cultural actors. That is to say, it is not necessarily safe to assume that Canadian experiences will be replicated here. But they should be considered; the Canadian experience is the best available evidence of the short-term impact of same-sex marriage in a democratic society very much like America.

Anyone interested in assessing the impact of same-sex marriage on public life should investigate the outcomes in three spheres: first, human rights (including impacts on freedom of speech, parental rights in public education, and the autonomy of religious institutions); second, further developments in what sorts of relationships political society will be willing to recognize as a marriage (e.g., polygamy); and third, the social practice of marriage.

The Impact on Human Rights

The formal effect of the judicial decisions (and subsequent legislation) establishing same-sex civil marriage in Canada was simply that persons of the same-sex could now have the government recognize their relationships as marriages. But the legal and cultural effect was much broader. What transpired was the adoption of a new orthodoxy: that same-sex relationships are, in every way, the equivalent of traditional marriage, and that same-sex marriage must therefore be treated identically to traditional marriage in law and public life.

A corollary is that anyone who rejects the new orthodoxy must be acting on the basis of bigotry and animus toward gays and lesbians. Any statement of disagreement with same-sex civil marriage is thus considered a straightforward manifestation of hatred toward a minority sexual group. Any reasoned explanation (for example, those that were offered in legal arguments that same-sex marriage is incompatible with a conception of marriage that responds to the needs of the children of the marriage for stability, fidelity, and permanence—what is sometimes called the conjugal conception of marriage), is dismissed right away as mere pretext. 1

When one understands opposition to same-sex marriage as a manifestation of sheer bigotry and hatred, it becomes very hard to tolerate continued dissent. Thus it was in Canada that the terms of participation in public life changed very quickly. Civil marriage commissioners were the first to feel the hard edge of the new orthodoxy; several provinces refused to allow commissioners a right of conscience to refuse to preside over same-sex weddings, and demanded their resignations. 2 At the same time, religious organizations, such as the Knights of Columbus, were fined for refusing to rent their facilities for post-wedding celebrations. 3

The Right to Freedom of Expression

The new orthodoxy’s impact has not been limited to the relatively small number of persons at risk of being coerced into supporting or celebrating a same-sex marriage. The change has widely affected persons—including clergy—who wish to make public arguments about human sexuality.

Much speech that was permitted before same-sex marriage now carries risks. Many of those who have persisted in voicing their dissent have been subjected to investigations by human rights commissions and (in some cases) proceedings before human rights tribunals. Those who are poor, poorly educated, and without institutional affiliation have been particularly easy targets—anti-discrimination laws are not always applied evenly.  Some have been ordered to pay fines, make apologies, and undertake never to speak publicly on such matters again. 4 Targets have included individuals writing letters to the editors of local newspapers,5 and ministers of small congregations of Christians. 6 A Catholic bishop faced two complaints—both eventually withdrawn—prompted by comments he made in a pastoral letter about marriage. 7

Reviewing courts have begun to rein in the commissions and tribunals (particularly since some ill-advised proceedings against Mark Steyn and Maclean’s magazine in 2009), and restore a more capacious view of freedom of speech. And in response to the public outcry following the Steyn/Maclean’s affair, the Parliament of Canada recently revoked the Canadian Human Rights Commission’s statutory jurisdiction to pursue “hate speech.”

But the financial cost of fighting the human rights machine remains enormous—Maclean’s spent hundreds of thousands of dollars in legal fees, 8 none of which is recoverable from the commissions, tribunals, or complainants. And these cases can take up to a decade to resolve. An ordinary person with few resources who has drawn the attention of a human rights commission has no hope of appealing to the courts for relief; such a person can only accept the admonition of the commission, pay a (comparatively) small fine, and then observe the directive to remain forever silent. As long as these tools remain at the disposal of the commissions—for whom the new orthodoxy gives no theoretical basis to tolerate dissent—to engage in public discussion about same-sex marriage is to court ruin.

Similar pressure can be—and is—brought to bear on dissenters by professional governing bodies (such as bar associations, teachers’ colleges, and the like) that have statutory power to discipline members for conduct unbecoming of the profession. 9 Expressions of disagreement with the reasonableness of institutionalizing same-sex marriage are understood by these bodies to be acts of illegal discrimination, which are matters for professional censure.

Teachers are particularly at risk for disciplinary action, for even if they only make public statements criticizing same-sex marriage outside the classroom, they are still deemed to create a hostile environment for gay and lesbian students.10 Other workplaces and voluntary associations have adopted similar policies as a result of their having internalized this new orthodoxy that disagreement with same-sex marriage is illegal discrimination that must not be tolerated. 11

Parental Rights in Public Education

Institutionalizing same-sex marriage has subtly but pervasively changed parental rights in public education. The debate over how to cast same-sex marriage in the classroom is much like the debate over the place of sex education in schools, and of governmental pretensions to exercise primary authority over children. But sex education has always been a discrete matter, in the sense that by its nature it cannot permeate the entirety of the curriculum. Same-sex marriage is on a different footing.

Since one of the tenets of the new orthodoxy is that same-sex relationships deserve the same respect that we give marriage, its proponents have been remarkably successful in demanding that same-sex marriage be depicted positively in the classroom. Curriculum reforms in jurisdictions such as British Columbia now prevent parents from exercising their long-held veto power over contentious educational practices. 12

The new curricula are permeated by positive references to same-sex marriage, not just in one discipline but in all. Faced with this strategy of diffusion, the only parental defense is to remove one’s children from the public school system entirely. Courts have been unsympathetic to parental objections: if parents are clinging to outdated bigotries, then children must bear the burden of “cognitive dissonance”—they must absorb conflicting things from home and school while school tries to win out.

The reforms, of course, were not sold to the public as a matter of enforcing the new orthodoxy. Instead, the stated rationale was to prevent bullying; that is, to promote the acceptance of gay and lesbian youth and the children of same-sex households. 13

It is a laudable goal to encourage acceptance of persons. But whatever can be said for the objective, the means chosen to achieve it is a gross violation of the family. It is nothing less than the deliberate indoctrination of children (over the objections of their parents) into a conception of marriage that is fundamentally hostile to what the parents understand to be in their children’s best interests. It frustrates the ability of parents to lead their children to an understanding of marriage that will be conducive to their flourishing as adults. At a very early age, it teaches children that the underlying rationale of marriage is nothing other than the satisfaction of changeable adult desires for companionship.

Religious Institutions’ Right to Autonomy

At first glance, clergy and houses of worship appeared largely immune from coercion to condone or perform same-sex marriages. Indeed, this was the grand bargain of the same-sex marriage legislation—clergy would retain the right not to perform marriages that would violate their religious beliefs. Houses of worship could not be conscripted against the wishes of religious bodies. 14

 


Via littlebytesnews
more...
Tom Hauck's comment, March 27, 2013 9:36 PM
I still say this whole argument is not about equality...because no matter what they get from us...they go after more... It's all about undermining our religious attachments because as long as our Judao/Christian bonds remain strong as with our country's foundation...then MArxism...Socialism...radical Islam...Sharia...these corruptions will not gain control of our society. But if we allow the Left to continue weakening and undermining our core religious beliefs...we will fall.... Every country in the world that has survived Communism or Marxism had to go through a period of destroying their religions...their faith in God had to be weakened and turned to a blind faith in government. That's how all tyrants achieved their goals and the Left is trying to achieve it here today....
littlebytesnews's comment, March 30, 2013 2:17 AM
I agree Tom, but how to stop it when you have Christians willing to sell their souls for votes and 'evolving' views because of pressure from the media, lobbyists, etc??
Billby's curator insight, November 18, 2014 6:21 PM

I believe that gays sho be able to marry if they choose and that God is compassionate enough to realise that it is ok

Scooped by Ms Howard
Scoop.it!

Tony Abbott describes gay marriage as the 'fashion of the moment'

Tony Abbott describes gay marriage as the 'fashion of the moment' | Same sex marriage | Scoop.it
Opposition leader says 'I'm not someone who wants to see radical change based on the fashion of the moment' (Tony Abbott describes same-sex marriage as a "fashion of the moment". Sigh.
more...
No comment yet.
Scooped by Ms Howard
Scoop.it!

Family Facts and Figures: Divorce - Australian Institute of Family Studies

Statistical information on divorce in Australia, Family Facts and Figures, Th eAustralian Institute of Family Studies.
more...
No comment yet.
Scooped by Ms Howard
Scoop.it!

Australian gay couple marry in NZ as same-sex marriage comes into force - ABC News (Australian Broadcasting Corporation)

Australian gay couple marry in NZ as same-sex marriage comes into force - ABC News (Australian Broadcasting Corporation) | Same sex marriage | Scoop.it
Two Australian men were among the first gay couples to marry in New Zealand this morning as same-sex marriage came into force.
more...
No comment yet.
Rescooped by Ms Howard from Gay News
Scoop.it!

NSW set to back same-sex marriage

NSW set to back same-sex marriage | Same sex marriage | Scoop.it
NSW could become the first Australian state to legalise same-sex marriage after an inquiry on Friday paved the way for fresh legislation that is supported by MPs across the political spectrum.

Via Pete
more...
No comment yet.
Scooped by Ms Howard
Scoop.it!

Gays in Russia Find No Haven, Despite Support From the West

Gays in Russia Find No Haven, Despite Support From the West | Same sex marriage | Scoop.it
Despite the breathtaking wealth and vibrant culture in its metropolises, Russia remains a country where discrimination and violence against gay people are widely tolerated. (#Didyouknow?
more...
No comment yet.
Scooped by Ms Howard
Scoop.it!

All parties gain from same-sex support - The Australian

All parties gain from same-sex support - The Australian | Same sex marriage | Scoop.it
All parties gain from same-sex support The Australian SWINGING voters' attitudes to gay marriage have shifted over the past two years, with the proportion "more likely" to support a pro gay marriage party or candidate up from 4 per cent to 20 per...
more...
No comment yet.
Scooped by Ms Howard
Scoop.it!

Macklemore - Same Love (Lyrics + Official Music Video)

Same Love feat. Mary Lambert on iTunes: http://itunes.apple.com/us/album/same-love-feat.-mary-lambert/id543948282 We support civil rights, and hope WA State ...
more...
No comment yet.