Pro-gay marriage protest hits Parliament

Print

Thu, 20 Oct 2011 3:59p.m.

Currently, same-sex couples can get a civil union but cannot get married and as a couple, cannot adopt children but individually, they can

Currently, same-sex couples can get a civil union but cannot get married and as a couple, cannot adopt children but individually, they can

By Lloyd Burr

Hundreds of people descended on Parliament this afternoon in a bid to convince the Government to legalise same-sex marriage and allow same-sex couples to adopt children.

Currently, same-sex couples can get a civil union but cannot get married and as a couple, cannot adopt children but individually, they can.

Today’s protest was organised by Joseph Habgood, president of the Legalise Love campaign, and made its way from Wellington’s civic square, along Lambton Quay and up to Parliament.


  • Click on the video tab to watch extended footage of the march

Mr Habgood says for many of those who turned up, it was their first march and says he was pleased with the turnout and support.

He says gay marriage is becoming “less and less of a controversial issue” and “recent polling shows six out of 10 New Zealanders support it”.

“The most common response from people is, ‘What? Isn’t it already legal?’ Sure, people don’t know what the law is, but it speaks to the fact that people really think that the law should be the other way and they are surprised by the fact that it’s not.”

Mr Habgood says the current law is a barrier to diversity and acceptance.

“We are here today because the symbolism of Parliament saying that all love is not equal is unacceptable and incredibly dangerous because that message filters down through society and manifests itself in supremely ugly ways,” he says.

Labour MP Maryan Street says Labour, which introduced civil unions when they were last in Government, has unfinished business when it comes to the issue.

“We would like to take the public with us on these issues. We think the time is right, the number of young people coming along and picking up these issues shows us that there is a new generation with a different approach to these things.

“So as social opinion shifts, we would like to go with that social opinion and lead it if necessary.”

Ms Street says she knows Labour’s plans will be met with opposition. 

“Family First will not agree with us on these matters but when you focus on the care of children and who is best able to provide the best quality care for children, then most New Zealanders get that, they understand that and they don’t polarise into extreme positions,” she says.

“It’s about equality, it’s about safety, particularly for young people growing up and it’s about dignity. Those are the very basic positions that the Labour Party has on gay rights.

The protest also had the support from Fionnaigh McKenzie from St Andrews on the Terrace who says she looks forward to “celebrating another milestone in our country’s history when we achieve equality for non-heterosexual New Zealanders”.

“As a Christian, I believe we must challenge all forms of injustice, including discriminatory laws. We can create a more inclusive society where all families are supported and given equal opportunities,” she says.

Mr Habgood says with support from the church, “it is clear that homophobia is quickly running out of hiding places”.

3 News

Become a fan of 3 News on Facebook and on Twitter.

Post a Comment

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


(Won't be published)



Comments

28 Oct 2011 10:55a.m.

Clarke wrote:

Have to remember here that John Key and National have an anti homosexual agenda. When asked if he would further the gay rights cause John Key replied categorically.... No. Dont worry he did qualify it by adding, I wont make anything worse for them, but I wont advance the cause either.

26 Oct 2011 09:30a.m.

tdog wrote:

like I said in earlier comments, state can do what it likes, but no matter what state calls it, it wont be marriage.

25 Oct 2011 10:48p.m.

Daniel wrote:

It seems so antiquated that people are still trying to push the same old tired extremist religious views on these issues. Their gods can do whatever they please, but fundamentally this is a legislative matter. It's a contract between two people and the state essentially (in terms of marriage) or moderation (with respect to adoption), and like all laws should be equal regardless of sexual orientation of the two involved. Beyond that people (and their churches or whatever) can be left to make of their union what they will - just like the many people who are together as defacto partners who don't feel the need to go through the formality. Anyway, marriage can't be all that sacred when they end in devoice more often than civil unions break up currently; and they can be entered into by two people who don't love each other as long as they are of different genders, while two people who do love each other can't if they are the same gender.

24 Oct 2011 02:30p.m.

Joel wrote:

Good on you all you who were brave enough to get out there and stand up for what we deserve! Never let the voices that seek to crush our resolve and spirit deny us what should be ours already. We live in a strong, !SECULAR! democracy where we are all free to be exactly what we want to be. Fanatics will try to tell us that our love is wrong, indecent or an affront to god, but this is irrelevant. We seek not to destroy "family values" or degrade the moral standing of our communities, we seek only the same rights under the law that those currently elligible to marry are party to. Civil unions deny us many rights that are enjoyed and expected by straight people who can be married. Religious institutions that donot agree with our stand for the same rights need only turn their cheek, our country and indeed our legal system isnot influenced by any religion, it is a set of rules which are changed and ammended more frequently and complexly than many New Zealanders know. The same right that allows us to strive to end this intollerance grants power to those who wish to oppose us to speak and voice their own. I would have our country no other way. However, as citizens of this country and people protected by the Bill of Human Rights, we cannot be discriminated against for any reason, be it race, morals, religion, colour, disability or sexuality in all its glorious forms. Yet we are being discriminated against when my love is not deemed worthy to be bestowed the same rights as that of another. Fight for your rights LGBT. Listen not to the spouting of religious verses that donot belong in a debate on our common law. Take no heed to the names that they call us in our search for freedom. Be proud, be strong and hold your ground. Extend your hand to those who hate you and donot withdraw it even if they choose not to accept it. We march with love in our hearts and hope in our minds. Take your parnter by the hand and accept nothing less than equality.

24 Oct 2011 10:01a.m.

Shanae wrote:

"The bible says "if a man should lie with another man he should be put to death". Homosexual people want a marriage in line with that sacrament which means basically you accept that you should be put to death." Nope, only if you take all of what's in the Bible seriously. I certainly accept no such notion, I find it utterly ridiculous. "... then legal for consenting adults. Soon you will want it compulsory." Haha, what? How paranoid are you mate... I mean seriously, do you honestly think that, and do you realise how irrational and bizarre that idea is? "It is the silly liberal views that are breaking down the family unit and it is from this flows the low value placed on life and morals." Low value placed on life and morals? I'm sorry, but from the sounds of what you wrote (and please do correct me if I have misinterpreted you) but it is YOU that seems to think that people deserve to be put to death just for having sex with someone of the same gender. I would say that places a low value on the lives of all gay, lesbian and bisexual people who have ever been sexually active with someone of the same sex, and also on the lives of every heterosexual person who has ever experimented sexually with the same gender - irrespective of whether an individual is a good person or not. Makes you a fine one to talk about morals, because reasonable people nowadays find that suggestion absolutely abhorrent.

24 Oct 2011 01:22a.m.

Shanae wrote:

@ diehard: "when i was growing up we used to use gay as a happy word but the homosexuals ruined that word so much we dont use it anymore the same way" *depressing orchestral music in a minor scale plays in the background* "thy want to have gay marriage what nxt gay people marrying a dog because its in our heart get real" Eh, what? Who on earth wants to marry a dog? I sure don't, nor do I want to marry any other non-human being/thing for that matter. Crikey, the way in which people like yourself come out with wacky ideas like that, and yet you think that we're the weird ones... "get a life" Sure thing.

24 Oct 2011 12:57a.m.

Shanae wrote:

@tdog: "well religion aside, maybe this will get you thinking, if everyone followed your way and paired off being gay..." Um, but not everyone is "following my way". Because you know, the majority of people are heterosexual and therefore have no interest in a same-sex relationship. I don't see how it is an issue that a minority of people are gay or bisexual. "The human race would be extinct within 120 years. Its the way we are made we are supposed to pair off with the opposite sex." I would say that it's the way the majority of people are made - clearly the likes of myself aren't. Therefore it's the way it's supposed to be for the MAJORITY of people. I don't see why it's necessary or "right" for EVERYONE to be heterosexual. I agree with you that it's necessary that the majority of people are heterosexual for ease of continuing of the human race, but I really don't see how it's so wrong that a minority are non-heterosexual. And in any case, what is it that you expect from people who have no sexual or romantic feelings for members of the opposite sex - you want us to be in heterosexual relationships for the purpose of procreation, because someone says "that's how it's meant to be"? I'm sorry, but I don't see how that is the "right" thing to do at all. You're not living as an honest person if you are deceiving the person that you are with when you know full well that you're not into them in the way that the other person deserves. Ultimately neither person is going to be happy in such a relationship, and I don't think it will make for a stable family environment, especially if/when the whole thing collapses. "Its funny I think gay people wouldnt even be able to be gay without straight people giving birth to them." Indeed. So, at the end of the day it's heterosexual people like yourself that are responsible for the fact that non-heterosexual people like me exist. I'm sure you find this very distressing. Ah well, at least you know who to blame now anyway, LOL.

23 Oct 2011 04:55p.m.

Preacher wrote:

@David. Part of the problem is that religious organisations around the world are being forced to recognise and conduct ceremonies for people who practice against their beliefs. I completely agree with you on Church and State, we have no business playing with politics. However we do have a responsability to stand up and point out the error of your ways, though we should do so providing the evidence not mere dogma or religious retoric. Having said that we shouldn't throw a hissy fit just cos you ignore us ;) God gives you the choice and we need to respect that. Something sadly we have long forgotten it seems.

23 Oct 2011 03:52p.m.

key wrote:

Come on NZ.Catch up with the modern world.This is 2011 not 1911.I am straight but lived in Berlin where being straight is nearly the minority.This orientation has been around since man started.We are still living in Country Calendar days.

22 Oct 2011 11:01p.m.

James Gollan wrote:

Marriage is a holy union between a man and a woman.I am sorry but I do not feel liberal enough that the sacrament should be debased by homosexual "marriages" The bible says "if a man should lie with another man he should be put to death". Homosexual people want a marriage in line with that sacrament which means basically you accept that you should be put to death. Sorry it started off as a stoning offence, then a hanging offence, then large prison terms, then legal for consenting adults. Soon you will want it compulsory.It is the silly liberal views that are breaking down the family unit and it is from this flows the low value placed on life and morals. Rug and pillow biters I hope you realise you have got it as well as you are going to get it