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 | ... | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17

2078 posts

Uber Geek

#399197 2-Nov-2010 16:06

tardtasticx:
BraaiGuy:

I think NZ, AUS etc is very lenient with its laws already. Unfair is what happens in most countries where being gay is considered illegal.

We're lenient with our laws? Do you think we should be saying "oh thank you mr law maker for allowing us to be who we are without the risk of being thrown in jail or killed because we prefer carrots to rug." Which would you rather say when introducing your partner, "he/she is my husband/wife" or "he/she is my life partner"

My view is that marriage is something that happens in a church (and not a registry office, garden etc).

I don't see anything wrong with using the term husband/wife though if you've had a civil union. Partner is such a stupid term as it sounds like you are in business with them. Life partner is just a clumsy fix.

Husband/wife or boyfriend/girlfriend is much more easily understood.

tardtasticx

3075 posts

Uber Geek

#399200 2-Nov-2010 16:09

jaymz:
tardtasticx:
BraaiGuy:

I think NZ, AUS etc is very lenient with its laws already. Unfair is what happens in most countries where being gay is considered illegal.

We're lenient with our laws? Do you think we should be saying "oh thank you mr law maker for allowing us to be who we are without the risk of being thrown in jail or killed because we prefer carrots to rug." Which would you rather say when introducing your partner, "he/she is my husband/wife" or "he/she is my life partner"

In a word (and my opinion), yes.

To be honest I am thankful that we live in a country that is more open than others. We have rules and laws that protect all people living in NZ.

Back to the original post, is the bigger issue marriage or child adoption? As I have mentioned earlier, there is nothing stopping a person adopting a child in NZ. As long as their meet the requirements of the state (income, criminal record, fines, etc).

Marriage between two gay people will come, it will just take time for people to change their views and then the laws.

Well the biggest issue I guess is marriage because without that we cant adopt children. If they allow gay marriage then we should then be allowed to adopt? So thats the biggest issue then

jaymz

1133 posts

Uber Geek

#399201 2-Nov-2010 16:11

To be fair, a person who is gay can adopt a child (as per my previous post)

The issue is if a gay couple is in a civil union only one person will have legal guardian status over the child.
Which in turn means a gay couple can adopt a child.

Marriage is another thing though. Unfortunately only time and peoples views changing will solve that one.

tardtasticx

3075 posts

Uber Geek

#399203 2-Nov-2010 16:15

jaymz: To be fair, a person who is gay can adopt a child (as per my previous post)

The issue is if a gay couple is in a civil union only one person will have legal guardian status over the child.
Which in turn means a gay couple can adopt a child.

Marriage is another thing though. Unfortunately only time and peoples views changing will solve that one.

Yeh we know that one person can adopt a child but thats not the point, the point is that a couple cannot adopt together and have joint guardianship of the child. That means that the other parent is left with the label of caregiver.

graemeh

2078 posts

Uber Geek

#399204 2-Nov-2010 16:16

tardtasticx: Well the biggest issue I guess is marriage because without that we cant adopt children. If they allow gay marriage then we should then be allowed to adopt? So thats the biggest issue then

I think there are two issues, one is that the adoption law is out of date and needs to be revised and the other is marriage.

bazzer

3438 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

#399207 2-Nov-2010 16:20

tardtasticx: We're lenient with our laws? Do you think we should be saying "oh thank you mr law maker for allowing us to be who we are without the risk of being thrown in jail or killed because we prefer carrots to rug." Which would you rather say when introducing your partner, "he/she is my husband/wife" or "he/she is my life partner"

You don't do yourself any favours with "arguments" like this. I'm referring to your preoccupation with textile floor coverings. It comes across a bit puerile.

Anyway, I know plenty of people who are not married and still refer to their S.O. as husband/wife, so why can't you? Why do you even want to be able to get "married", simply because you can't?

I think in the grand scheme of things, it's pretty good here. Sure there's an inequality, but I think you'll find it's rather immaterial to your day-to-day living. It's pretty hard to adopt regardless of your sexual orientation, and marriage/civil union? Who cares? I honestly think you'd be better off worrying about some of life's larger problems.

jaymz

1133 posts

Uber Geek

#399209 2-Nov-2010 16:23

tardtasticx:
Yeh we know that one person can adopt a child but thats not the point, the point is that a couple cannot adopt together and have joint guardianship of the child. That means that the other parent is left with the label of caregiver.

No worries, just wanted to get myself clear with it all :) - things were as clear as mud before!

I had a read up about transfer of marriage between states (over in the US) and unfortunately you can't get through that loop hole either. (it may be different in NZ)
but over there, a civil union is transferable to other states that don't allow it (for example the minimum age for a civil union being 16 in on state and 17 in another, the union will still be legal in both states)

However marriage does not fit the bill, a marriage that is legal in one state and not in another cannot be passed though. Meaning you can't get married in a state that allows gay marriage and then move to another and expect it to be still legal.

Backblaze

Backblaze Unlimited Backup. World’s easiest cloud backup. Get peace of mind knowing your files are backed up securely in the cloud (affiliate link).

tardtasticx

3075 posts

Uber Geek

#399211 2-Nov-2010 16:23

bazzer:
You don't do yourself any favours with "arguments" like this. I'm referring to your preoccupation with textile floor coverings. It comes across a bit puerile.

Anyway, I know plenty of people who are not married and still refer to their S.O. as husband/wife, so why can't you? Why do you even want to get "married", simply because you can't?

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

graemeh

2078 posts

Uber Geek

#399215 2-Nov-2010 16:26

tardtasticx:
bazzer:
You don't do yourself any favours with "arguments" like this. I'm referring to your preoccupation with textile floor coverings. It comes across a bit puerile.

Anyway, I know plenty of people who are not married and still refer to their S.O. as husband/wife, so why can't you? Why do you even want to get "married", simply because you can't?

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

Not true, it's to make their parents happy

bazzer

3438 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

#399219 2-Nov-2010 16:30

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.

tardtasticx

3075 posts

Uber Geek

#399220 2-Nov-2010 16:30

graemeh:
tardtasticx:
bazzer:
You don't do yourself any favours with "arguments" like this. I'm referring to your preoccupation with textile floor coverings. It comes across a bit puerile.

Anyway, I know plenty of people who are not married and still refer to their S.O. as husband/wife, so why can't you? Why do you even want to get "married", simply because you can't?

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

Not true, it's to make their parents happy

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

graemeh

2078 posts

Uber Geek

#399224 2-Nov-2010 16:34

tardtasticx:
graemeh:
tardtasticx:
bazzer:
You don't do yourself any favours with "arguments" like this. I'm referring to your preoccupation with textile floor coverings. It comes across a bit puerile.

Anyway, I know plenty of people who are not married and still refer to their S.O. as husband/wife, so why can't you? Why do you even want to get "married", simply because you can't?

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

Not true, it's to make their parents happy

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

No, the whole marriage ceremony is usually for the parents (in particular the mothers).

Just being together makes the couple happy.

tardtasticx

3075 posts

Uber Geek

#399225 2-Nov-2010 16:34

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?

Klipspringer

2385 posts

Uber Geek
Inactive user

#399226 2-Nov-2010 16:35

tardtasticx:
jaymz:
tardtasticx:
BraaiGuy:

I think NZ, AUS etc is very lenient with its laws already. Unfair is what happens in most countries where being gay is considered illegal.

We're lenient with our laws? Do you think we should be saying "oh thank you mr law maker for allowing us to be who we are without the risk of being thrown in jail or killed because we prefer carrots to rug." Which would you rather say when introducing your partner, "he/she is my husband/wife" or "he/she is my life partner"

In a word (and my opinion), yes.

To be honest I am thankful that we live in a country that is more open than others. We have rules and laws that protect all people living in NZ.

Back to the original post, is the bigger issue marriage or child adoption? As I have mentioned earlier, there is nothing stopping a person adopting a child in NZ. As long as their meet the requirements of the state (income, criminal record, fines, etc).

Marriage between two gay people will come, it will just take time for people to change their views and then the laws.

Well the biggest issue I guess is marriage because without that we cant adopt children. If they allow gay marriage then we should then be allowed to adopt? So thats the biggest issue then

Dont agree there. To some, and myself included I would rather see gay marriages happening than gay people being given the right to adopt. Two totally different things.

lyonrouge

1993 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#399230 2-Nov-2010 16:36

Elpie:
bcourtney:
chiefie: Personally, I think marriage is overrated these days... It is more on ceremonial value than it seems. Civil union is more appropriate/sufficiently suitable to recognise two people's life in unity.

And yet, the topic of this thread (from the OP) states that it is NOT enough

In fairness, all he said is that there is inequality (which I don't think any reasonable person can disagree with) and used adoption as an example.

I don't believe he realised that adoption is a poor example since that ancient 50-odd year old law discriminates against everyone who doesn't have an ancient 1950's style marriage. As to marriage, well it is still discrimination. A heterosexual couple can choose to marry or have a civil union. A gay or lesbian couple don't get that choice.

Is this true? I'm of the understanding that regardless of orientation, after an arbitrary period of time (3 years?) you get no choice.

1 | ... | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17