Marriage is final hurdle for gay equality laws

Last weekend, the Queensland branch of the Australian Labor Party passed a resolution in support of same-sex marriage and called on the Gillard Government to end this Commonwealth discrimination.

Queensland Labor has now joined other ALP branches in Tasmania, South Australia, the ACT, the Northern Territory and Victoria in expressing this sentiment, putting further pressure on its Federal wing to recognise that it's on the wrong side of history.

This weekend, the WA branch will be debating the same question and looks set to pass a similar resolution as momentum for equality grows.

WA Labor has a strong history in this area. It tried three times in the 1970s and 1980s to decriminalise homosexuality, but all attempts were blocked by conservatives in the Upper House.

It's hard to believe now, but until 1989 male homosexuality was a criminal offence in WA and the penalty was 14 years in prison, with or without whipping.

This 110-year-old law was inherited from Victorian England and while it was not being used, its existence hung as a threat over the heads of gay men and sent a highly damaging message to the wider community.

This law had an impact on gay people psychologically by deeming them to be criminals and defining them as bad and dangerous. Many homosexual people feared for their safety or jobs and it pushed gay people deeply into the closet.

There were no anti-discrimination laws at this time - it would take another 12 years for that to happen.

Homosexuality was partially decriminalised in 1989, but the clumsy legislation was far from perfect and as a result the next 12 years would prove to be difficult for gay people.

WA now had the highest age of consent in the world at 21, there was no partnership recognition and it remained lawful to discriminate against us in employment, accommodation and the provision of goods and services. All the myths and propaganda about gay people were reflected in laws that defined us as subhuman or made us vulnerable to discrimination and powerless to redress it.

The breakthrough came in 2001 when attorney-general Jim McGinty pressed ahead with a package of legislation to repeal all the anti-homosexual laws that had evolved over the previous century. In their place would be an equal age of consent, anti-discrimination protections, access to adoption and the Family Court and de facto recognition for same-sex couples.

As we entered a new century, WA went from having some of the worst anti-gay laws in the world to having some of the best legal protections around. Despite the doomsayers claiming this "radical reform" would cost Labor the next election, the Gallop government was returned with an increased majority. Voters like leadership.

Friendly Atheist » Australian Government Wants to Make ...

In Australia we have very good anti-discrimination laws which prevent establishments from discriminating against people for any number of reasons…

However, in the state of Victoria, faith based groups have been pushing for an exemption to these laws, as they feel that they should have the right to discriminate against people on the basis of religion, marital status and gender.

Last week there was a vote in our Lower House of Parliament, and the amendment was defeated.

However, the majority party [took] an unprecedented step and actually reintroduced the vote… because one of the members was missing for the vote, and subsequently it was passed.

“When Christian organisations employ people, they look for those who will share the journey together,” says Rob Ward, State Director of the Australian Christian Lobby.

Ward cites the example of his own son who goes to a Christian school, and who has struck up a friendship with the school gardener, also a Christian. “Children often shy away from authority figures, but my son receives good pastoral care from this gentleman.”

Any group of people has the right to choose who they want to associate with and who they don’t. Normally, I oppose anti-discrimination laws, because I think bigots and racists should have the right to be bigots and racists. The one exception I take is when a group is receiving government money. I can’t fathom why any government would give any private group, especially a religious group, funding. But if you’re going to, that group doesn’t get to discriminate against any taxpayer, period.

Firstly, small comfort though it is, this is a law passed by the Victorian State Government, not the Federal Government.

More disconcerting is the trend towards this sort of thing in Australian Politics. Our Prime Minister, an Atheist, is allowing the opposition lead by a Catholic who dropped out of seminary, to drive debate in this country. The decision to send refugee children from Australia to Malaysia (a non signatory to the UNCHR) by the Government just shows how far to the right wing the Labor party have now stumbled.

We now have Conservatives in power in New South Wales, Victoria and Western Australia, so don’t be surprised if we see more discriminatory laws from down under.

I’m a Victorian and when I read this I almost puked. This attitude of “religious groups should be free to discrimiate because of their beliefs” is becoming a little too common.

Anti-discrimination legislation in Australia, a guide

Australian Anti-Discrimination Law, Text, Cases and Materials

New developments in employment discrimination law

Human rights in Australian law, principles, practice and potential

APAIS, Australian public affairs information service, a subject index to current literature