When will NZ get equal rights for ALL citizens?

To post in this sub-forum you must have made 100 posts or have Trust status or have completed our ID Verification

Forums › Politics › When will NZ get equal rights for ALL citizens?

1 | ... | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17

3438 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 267

Trusted

#399231 2-Nov-2010 16:39

tardtasticx:
bazzer:
tardtasticx: Well why do straight people get married? its because they can.

But there's not any real difference between a "marriage" and a "civil union". Husband/wife tags are more or less social conventions. I don't believe there are any laws that prohibit the use of "husband" for civil union partners.

My wife and I were quite happy without being married until one day we decided we would do it. If "marriage" hadn't been an option to us, we would have quite happily had a civil union. Even if we had had a civil union (and we thought about it) there's not really any reason anyone at our wedding would have known the difference. I would still probably have told people we got married and that she is my wife, because functionally there's no difference.

yeh but you would no doubt find it annoying if you finally wanted to get married but discovered you couldnt, yet the people next door could simply because they like the opposite gender?

Like I said, I'd just get a civil union and get on with my life. At least that's what I think I'd do, no way to know for sure.

It's not as if homosexuals have to ride in the back of the bus. I think you'll find discimination is everywhere, it's not right but some things don't really warrant your time or worry, I think.

graemeh

2080 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 226

#399233 2-Nov-2010 16:43

bazzer: It's not as if homosexuals have to ride in the back of the bus. I think you'll find discimination is everywhere, it's not right but some things don't really warrant your time or worry, I think.

Perhaps they like it in the back of the bus, as long as there is no carpet

nate

6473 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 458

Retired Mod

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#399246 2-Nov-2010 17:13

tardtasticx: Being married makes the couple happy. Which is more important?

Depends. On a cultural level, Indian and Chinese mates of mine, their parents play a very important part in who they end up with. Happy parents = happy couple.

tardtasticx

3084 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 483

#399248 2-Nov-2010 17:15

nate:
tardtasticx: Being married makes the couple happy. Which is more important?

Depends. On a cultural level, Indian and Chinese mates of mine, their parents play a very important part in who they end up with. Happy parents = happy couple.

Also on a cultural point of view pretty much all cultures and religions ban homosexuality.

tardtasticx

3084 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 483

#399305 2-Nov-2010 19:02

"if I dont subscribe to your religious beliefs, I understand how you feel, but I dont want to be forced to live my life because it makes you uncomfortable in a certain way". Perfectly put. Said at 4:11 in the video

jtbthatsme

937 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 70

Trusted

#399360 2-Nov-2010 21:47

I think someone on the previous page pointed out there's two things in discussion here the right to marriage and the right to who can and who can't adopt a child.

A lot of people here have been saying a civil union and a marriage are basically the same and they are not that wrong to say that. At the end of said process you have announced that you have decided to dedicate your life to the one partner and the union whether it is marriage or a civil one is a indication of that.

I don't think anyone here other than maybe complete homophobes would point out to a gay couple who announced they are married that they were wrong and they only have a civil union.

Once you have had your ceremony of choice what is the important thing here the label it has or the devotion and commitment you have taken with one another???

Personally if i was gay and had gone through with a civil union i would not say this is my life partner or civil union partner. They would simply be introduced as my husband. It's only at very limited times where the differences are taken into consideration. Adoption can be seen as one of them but you can not say the law was written explicitly to discriminate against gay people.

Please correct me if I am wrong here but civil unions in NZ are quite a recent thing the laws around adoption are decades old so you can not say they were meant to discriminate against gay people at all. Does the law now come across as being one that discriminates against gay people. It can be taken that way as obviously some here view it however it is actually the civil union law that failed to address this and it something that can be fixed with a amendment to the law.

Maybe instead of all this complaining and bickering (or healthy debate dependant on how you read some of the comments) someone could put a submission through to their local MP (along with some signatures of course) as something that should be looked into as like a lot of people have agreed on the Adoption laws do need to be updated.

You wouldn't need to even have anything about the supposed discrimination of gay people in your submission. It could read as simple as

"We the undersigned believe that the adoption laws within New Zealand are out of date.
These can be interpreted to discriminate against some people and we would like like for the government to consider a review to give all New Zealanders equal rights to adopt."

Samsung

Shop now on Samsung phones, tablets, TVs and more (affiliate link).

Regs

4066 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 206

Trusted

Snowflake

#399407 2-Nov-2010 23:54

so whats the general consensus on a brother/sister couple? surely, if we allow same sex unions, then these unions should also be allowed? and then they should also be allowed to adopt? otherwise we're not giving equal rights to all citizens....

Sales Engineer
Snowflake
www.snowflake.com

about.me/nzregs
Twitter: @nzregs

Elpie

1304 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 272

#399416 3-Nov-2010 00:33

There's no such thing as equal rights where it comes to marriage. Same sex couples cannot marry, but then nor can any couples who are forbidden from marrying:

A man may not marry his

(1) Grandmother:

(2) Grandfather's wife:

(3) Wife's grandmother:

(4) Father's sister:

(5) Mother's sister:

(6) Mother:

(7) Stepmother:

(8) Wife's mother:

(9) Daughter:

(10) Wife's daughter:

(11) Sons' wife:

(12) Sister:

(13) Son's daughter:

(14) Daughter's daughter

(15) Son's son's wife:

(16) Daughter's son's wife:

(17) Wife's son's daughter:

(18) Wife's daughter's daughter:

(19) Brother's daughter:

(20) Sister's daughter.

A man may not marry his—

(1) Grandmother's civil union partner

(2) Grandfather's civil union partner

(3) Mother's civil union partner

(4) Father's civil union partner

(5) Son's civil union partner

(6) Daughter's civil union partner

(7) Grandson's civil union partner

(8) Granddaughter's civil union partner

(9) Civil union partner's grandmother

(10) Civil union partner's mother

(11) Civil union partner's daughter

(12) Civil union partner's granddaughter.

The same kind of restrictions apply to women.

So, the moral of the story is - if you think you might like to marry your partner's child sometime in the future, don't get married and don't have a civil union

oxnsox

1923 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 138

#399487 3-Nov-2010 09:10

So ultimately it's a legal issue...
In that the law does not recognise certain types of relationships. And this being again, ultimately, because of defining or redefining where any assets may be distributed in the event that a partnership (of any type) is dissolved.

Because in the street I live nobody goes from door to door in the middle of the day, or night, spying on what folks are doing in there own homes and predefining what sorts of relationships they are in.

And it's pretty much the same in most communities all over the world. Just because the state says something is illegal, does that stop it happening.

tardtasticx

3084 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 483

#399799 3-Nov-2010 19:54

c71931f: Everyone has equal rights in nz.

/thread

You didnt even read my OP

kyhwana2

2572 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 233

#399846 3-Nov-2010 21:24

Regs: so whats the general consensus on a brother/sister couple? surely, if we allow same sex unions, then these unions should also be allowed? and then they should also be allowed to adopt? otherwise we're not giving equal rights to all citizens....

This is a thing that the bigotted religious right in the US brings up ALL THE TIME so they don't seem bigoted.

Really. You're really going there? REALLY?

Dell

Shop now for Dell laptops and other devices (affiliate link).

tardtasticx

3084 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 483

#399849 3-Nov-2010 21:32

kyhwana2:
Regs: so whats the general consensus on a brother/sister couple? surely, if we allow same sex unions, then these unions should also be allowed? and then they should also be allowed to adopt? otherwise we're not giving equal rights to all citizens....

This is a thing that the bigotted religious right in the US brings up ALL THE TIME so they don't seem bigoted.

Really. You're really going there? REALLY?

These two are in no way common. What soever. Everyone knows that. The bigots look like idiots when they say stuff like this

Regs

4066 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 206

Trusted

Snowflake

#399923 4-Nov-2010 00:14

tardtasticx:
kyhwana2:
Regs: so whats the general consensus on a brother/sister couple? surely, if we allow same sex unions, then these unions should also be allowed? and then they should also be allowed to adopt? otherwise we're not giving equal rights to all citizens....

This is a thing that the bigotted religious right in the US brings up ALL THE TIME so they don't seem bigoted.

Really. You're really going there? REALLY?

These two are in no way common. What soever. Everyone knows that. The bigots look like idiots when they say stuff like this

how about an actual arguement as to why there is a difference? are you saying its not 'natural' for a same-family-unit couple? - if you take a look at the animal kingdom, you'll see plenty of evidence that it is...

i'm not bigoted against gay/lesbian at all - just playing devils advocate here....

Sales Engineer
Snowflake
www.snowflake.com

about.me/nzregs
Twitter: @nzregs

bcourtney

652 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 27

Trusted

#399929 4-Nov-2010 00:20

Regs:
tardtasticx:
kyhwana2:
Regs: so whats the general consensus on a brother/sister couple? surely, if we allow same sex unions, then these unions should also be allowed? and then they should also be allowed to adopt? otherwise we're not giving equal rights to all citizens....

This is a thing that the bigotted religious right in the US brings up ALL THE TIME so they don't seem bigoted.

Really. You're really going there? REALLY?

These two are in no way common. What soever. Everyone knows that. The bigots look like idiots when they say stuff like this

how about an actual arguement as to why there is a difference? are you saying its not 'natural' for a same-family-unit couple? - if you take a look at the animal kingdom, you'll see plenty of evidence that it is...

i'm not bigoted against gay/lesbian at all - just playing devils advocate here....

Plain and simple - incest is illegal in this country. Homosexuality isn't.

Regs

4066 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 206

Trusted

Snowflake

#399931 4-Nov-2010 00:23

bcourtney:
Plain and simple - incest is illegal in this country. Homosexuality isn't.

but homosexuality *used* to be illegal, until they changed the laws. gay marraige is not legal, but we're asking for it to be so. the 'simple' arguement suddenly becomes more complex..

Sales Engineer
Snowflake
www.snowflake.com

about.me/nzregs
Twitter: @nzregs

1 | ... | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17