After months and months of pressure the bill was actually brought to a vote ... and was promptly defeated overwhelmingly in the Australian House of Representatives:
The House of Representatives has overwhelmingly voted against legislation that would have allowed same-sex couples to marry.
Just 42 MPs supported the private members bill put forward by Labor backbencher Stephen Jones, while 98 MP voted against.
... Prime Minister Julia Gillard and her deputy Wayne Swan voted against the legislation, while many of their Cabinet colleagues voted in support of the change.
... There are three other bills currently before Parliament that would have the same effect as Mr Jones's bill. It is unclear at this stage when they will be brought on for a vote. -- ABC News
27 Comments
Beautifully done.
I sometimes go over to the Prop 8 trial tracker website, I recall reading several of their blog posts boasting at great length how confident they are that these measures are going to pass. I wonder what their reaction to this is.
This is truly remarkable.
A good positive victory for decency, morality.
A good solid defeat for sodomy, immorality.
another win. Nov 6 will be interesting.
A temporary victory for KKK type bigots
(p.s. agreed lonesomerhoades)
The social left was very confident that this would pass.
While I strongly support the protection of traditional marriage, I find it detrimental for those who oppose gay marriage to encapsulate their sentiment in such a way that it paints all gays with a broad and stereotypical brush.
Not all straight couples are decent and moral, not by a long stretch. And I can guarantee that gay couples are not won over, or even encouraged to think about any position coming from someone who labels them as immoral sodomites. As much as I despise the current social emphasis on political correctness to the point of absurdity, I don't believe anyone can succeed in a two-way dialogue by opening with insulting rhetoric.
Remember that our gay neighbors are no less our neighbors: human beings deserving of respect and consideration--even when we disagree with them.
In Luke 10, when Christ answered the loaded question, "Who is my neighbor?" he illustrated his thoughts with the message of the good Samaritan (i.e., amazing acts of mercy shown toward a needy enemy) and concluded with, "Go and do likewise." The gay and straight communities may well be the new players in this sober parable.
Good Job
Now let us have that same victory here in the USA this November.
Extremists are about to be smitten with defeat. At the Supreme Court and the ballot box. The Pseudo- marriage Smack Down is coming, oh what a glorious day!
Leviticus -What planet are you living on. Obama is poised to win re-election. DOMA will be history by this time 2016.
Guys, calm down. This is no 'victory'. 5 years ago a vote would have been unthinkable. No it is in the realm of the thinkable. Advocates will not stop here. This is a stop along the way. Not permanent.
Glad to hear it. Well done, Australia. Nice to know that it's not just the United States that fights for traditional morality.
No kidding Paul? What do you think? That we're new to this game?
But anytime our children hear that opposite-sex couples are not the same as same-sex couples it is good for their education, and so a good day for us all.
The question is, why do gays and lezbos sleep poorly knowing that children are being taught that opposite-sex couples are not the same as same-sex couples? What's wrong with teaching a child about differences?
Wow, after reading these comments, I must say that you americans do not know ANYTHING about the politics of our country. First of all, this bill was EXPECTED TO FAIL, infact, the major newspapers here didn't even have this story as front page news when it did happen. Second, Australia is going in a similar path like you guys are where we are going state by state. Tasmania is expected to legalise SSM and so is South Australia.... SO next time you cheer on Australia and act like you know what's going on there, DON'T. Because you americans don't know anything about our country and your ignorance shows on websites like these...
And don't even try to argue with me because guess what.... AMERICA IS NOT AUSTRALIA, so please do kindly stay out of our politics and we will stay out of yours.
Common sense prevails among the Australian people to place the needs of children first, their right to have a home with a dad and a mom.
Is there a NOM-Australia, mate?
Yay Australia!!
@Zack No it was never going to pass: Aussie politicians are too smart to make the same mistakes the British, American and Canadian pollies make: i.e.: to back the rich progressives and Hollywood elite at the expense of we the people.
Oddly enough though, the PM was "appaulled" by a statement that homosexuality was as bad as smoking. Certainly homosexuality is not unhealthy like smoking but if u keep it up, you'll be "smoking" after you die....for eternity!
Hi Good News, not sure how we took a right turn into education.
I was making the point that, just as in several other countries, the road to equal marriage includes a stop along the way for a test vote or civil union etc. The fact that Australia had a vote is progress then, from that point of view.
I don't sleep poorly but I do worry about gay teens feel when they see and hear their own capabilities to love and care for another denigrated. Yes, there are differences but none that would preclude marriage as a civil equality.
@Paul,
There is no such thing as a "Gay." If you truly believed your proclivity was rational you would not be bastardizing language just so you can lend an appearance of acceptability to your depravity.
@ Paul,
Knowing that your call on Australia is right (though we can never know the future), I'm looking for the silver lining. Some young American's will hear that Australia said "no" by such a large margin, and the young guy won't understand why. He thought that all good western countries knew that marriages were for everybody. It will make him think. That is the good news. It will make him think, why is the man-woman union different, and why is this difference worthy of being signaled out in a society through the use of a unique word that names it. It will make him think on his own, and that's the only way he's liable to get his head out of the mess his country has gotten him into and where they're trying to keep him – that is keeping him from thinking.
Marriage is a label that you can put on anything you want. It is the man-woman committed union that needs a name. And it is this that is being outlawed – outlawing the naming of this union. Apparently the naming of this union in the town square will hurt your teens. Why? What's the problem. Believe me, this issue and why its coming about has little to do with trying to make people feel better.
@Aussie - I suggest you talk to ABC news then. They're the ones that had the article and decided what to print.
Trish said:
"Remember that our gay neighbors are no less our neighbors: human beings deserving of respect and consideration--even when we disagree with them."
The latter part of your sentence is reasonable. It invokes tolerance. That is, immoral sexual behavior is tolerated rather than condoned or elevated to preferential status.
The gay identity is a socio-political identity. It is not the defining feature of this or that human being. So I take issue with your referring to "gay neighbors" and "gay and straight communities" if by that you meant something that would invoke the racial analogue that has long-framed the pro-SSM narrative.
SSM is not marriage. And same-sex sexual behavior is not moral behavior. Society can tolerate both but there is no justification, none, for condoing nor for extending a preferential status to either.
Note that marital status is a special status. SSMers demand special status, not equal status, for the type of relationship they would metaphorically call "gay marriage". Yet from within the broad non-marriage category they demand special treatment of the gay type of relationship they have in mind.
They do this wherever SSM is being promoted -- in Australia at the local and national levels. The pro-SSM campaign is not much different there. We have seen its pro-gay bigotry already.
"A temporary victory for KKK type bigots"
- RC
I don't recall traditional marriage supporters shooting people who disagree with us as the KKK is known for doing.
On the other hand, there was recently a "gay marriage" activist who launched a KKK-style attack on the FRC building:
http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/lookout/family-research-council-shooter-chick-fil-corkins-170426728.html
So much for the "gay marriage" movement being as non-violent as the Civil Rights movement led by Dr. King.
The fact that lone victim in the shooting was Black also doesn't help the "Civil RIghts = gay rights" argument:
http://www.frc.org/washingtonupdate/the-summit-at-its-peak
So, gay marriage activists should look in the mirror before accusing others of bigotry and violent.
I am from Australia, and am glad about the recent result out of both the House of Reps and the Senate here in Australia.
RE Tasmania, this is expected to fail, as this bill shall be blocked.
Any other state in Australia who goes it alone with Marriage, is subject to a 'constitutional challenge' the Federal government has 'exclusive constitutional control' over the word Marriage.
@NIMBR Tha battle is not over because the states can introduce "Civil unions", South Australia and Victoria (theyre the liberal lefty states) will inevitably try to do that. We all know that civil unions are the first step toward the imposition of SSM through the courts, as well as undermining and mimicking marriage and making the gay lifestyle seem more acceptable.
I hope Aussies learn from the US, Canada, Denmark, Spain, UK, New Zealand, France and countless other countries and say NO to same-sex "unions", just like North Carolina did, overwhelmingly, in May!