• Full Story

Homosexual 'hang ups' behind opponents

Email
Print

Homosexual 'hang ups' behind opponents

3News NZ

Louisa Wall spoke to the Select Committee today (file)

Louisa Wall spoke to the Select Committee today (file)

By Laura McQuillan

The Labour MP leading the charge on gay marriage says she believes "hang ups" over homosexuality, especially among older New Zealanders, are behind opposition to her marriage equality bill.

Louisa Wall gave the opening submission on her Marriage Amendment Bill to parliament's government administration select committee today.

Ms Wall says despite homosexuality being decriminalised 26 years ago, a section of society "still has a residual issue about homosexuals and homosexuality".

"I think one of the motivating factors for the opponents against this bill is that fact that they still haven't acknowledged or appreciate that homosexual New Zealanders have the same rights and privileges as non-homosexual New Zealanders," she told the select committee.

Ms Wall said it was a "generational issue".

"For younger New Zealanders, the issue of marriage equality is one where they actually can't see what the problem is. So for them it is about principles of equality and non-discrimination. They haven't got the hang ups over Homosexual Law Reform that I believe some older members of New Zealand society have."

Ms Wall says marriage is a "right of citizenship", and her bill would remove the discrimination in marriage law.

"There are a number of people who contend that homosexual New Zealanders should be satisfied with civil unions, and what my bill essentially seeks is for them to have the choice."

She dismissed concerns her bill would "redefine marriage" or that it would force churches and marriage celebrants to take part in homosexual marriages.

The law would simply be a change at the state level, where the marriage licence is granted, she said.

Ms Wall also disputed the argument that allowing gay marriage is a "slippery slope" to polygamy, incest and bestiality, pointing out those are all covered by the Crimes Act.

NZN

Post a Comment

Before commenting, please take the time to read our moderation guide


(Won't be published)



Comments

8/05/2013 4:40:41 p.m.

Daniel Lang wrote:

It has to do with the rights of Ministers to perform what ceremonies they want to perform and not perform the ceremonies, for whatever reason, that they do not want to perform. Otherwise their beliefs will be undermined and their human rights will not be granted. Do we want to fine people for sticking up for their rights, like they do to Ministers in some States in America that choose not to perform ceremonies for same sex couples? I think not.

12/11/2012 5:38:32 p.m.

frank wrote:

I don't care much for Ms Walls attitude toward the senior citizens of NZ,she must think we a load of idiots,bigots,and have hang ups whatever that means.well let me tell you Ms Wall the elderly of this country are most likely the ones who paid the medical bills when you were born,the bills for your education and helping to pay your wages in parliament for all the work you do,you hardly earn it. you say this is a human rights issue when you know very well it is not.The european court of human rights said there no human rights involved get that through head, the best thing parliament could with this piece of junk is trow it on the tip. AGEISM IS A NASTY THING I THINK YOU SHOULD BE REPORTED FOR YOUR ATTITUDE TOWARDS SENIOR CITIZENS .

10/11/2012 7:42:30 a.m.

Ian wrote:

@ Daniel Lang, this issue has nothing to do with christians. Im sick and tired of churches sticking their nose in where it doesnt belong. this is about the right every person has to be treated equally regardless of their race, sex, or sexual preference. Christianity does nothing but judge and discriminate against anyone who doesnt agree with them. They do a lot of talking about love and peace but very rarely practice what they preach

8/11/2012 7:52:03 p.m.

Daniel Lang wrote:

Of course other people apart from ministers can perform wedding ceremonies, however I think this issue is controversial enough from the viewpoint of Christians, that corresponding legislation needs to be introduced to ensure that ministers will never have their human rights and beliefs undermined under this bill. Catholics do, it's just the other more mainstream churches that do not own a large percentage of international property that are being compromised when something such as this crops up. Furthermore, I think legislation should disallow Ministers from marrying people that have previously been married. This is consistent with Catholic beliefs but, more importantly, biblical doctrine and just because people are Christians, does not automatically mean that their beliefs should be compromised.

8/11/2012 3:25:11 p.m.

Craig wrote:

Honestly, do even conservative Christians think lesbians and gay men are going to dress in cardies or dated bad seventies polyester, don platform shoes, dumb down and hammer on fundamentalist church doors demanding to be married by some obscure fundamentalist sect that waves its hands about a lot and distributes strange childrens videos about animated vegetables? Get real!

8/11/2012 2:40:23 p.m.

Ian wrote:

This is a human rights matter, religion has no place interfering with this issue

8/11/2012 1:11:31 p.m.

Kerry wrote:

Its just religious nuts and homophobic bigots that are against this. this is a simple matter of common sense, get with the times people

8/11/2012 12:45:40 p.m.

Richard wrote:

This is typical, on one habd we have a prime minister who simply says the word "gay" and theres a huge outrage about discrimination and then when someone tries to do something that will help end the discrimination people still winge. Allowing gay marriage will have no effect on anyone except those who will be getting married so whats the problem? The only problems are 1) Religion, which has no business interfearing in any political issue, or any moral issue for that matter, especially the Catholic religion. and 2) idiots who cant get over the fact that gay people are born that way and are exactly the same as everyone else. We are no longer living in the dark ages and people need to wake up to the fact that this doesnt concern anyone except the people who are getting married. The church needs to keep its nose out of this issue

8/11/2012 10:01:58 a.m.

Kathy wrote:

@Daniel, there are numerous alternatives to being married by a priest, their are marriage celebrants who have absolutely no religious leanings. There is also registry offices, as a christian I have no problem with homosexuals being married. Marriage was never a christian institution to begin with, infact the first church (roman catholic church) initially refused to acknowledge marriage at all. I think some christians get hung up on their prejudices which shows that they have a truely long road in front of them if they ever want to enter the kingdom of heaven. Judge not least ye be judged was one of Gods tenents to his people, so as a christian I have no right to judge these people for what they want. Infact I applaud them for wanting to make this level of committment to one another. Christians who say this is wrong, are not christians at all.

8/11/2012 9:30:21 a.m.

Alex wrote:

Daniel, not all people who conduct marriages belong to a religious organisation.