VIDEO: Round two - What MPs think of gay marriage
Tue, 31 Jul 2012 6:53p.m.
Labour MP Louisa Wall’s same-sex marriage bill is likely to have its first reading in Parliament next month and MPs are slowly hinting how they will vote.
This morning, 3 News asked a number of MPs how they will be voting.
Of those who were asked, here’s how they stand:
In the ‘No’ category is Finance Minister Bill English, Housing Minister Phil Heatley, Courts Minister Chester Borrows and fellow National MPs Eric Roy, Colin King
In the ‘Yes’ category is Social Development Minister Paula Bennett and Labour MP Parekura Horomia.
In the ‘Haven’t read the bill/undecided/unanswered’ category is Economic Development Minister Steven Joyce, Police Minister Anne Tolley, National MPs Sam Lotu-iiga, Shane Ardern, Simon O’Connor and Kanwaljit Singh Bakshi, and Labour MPs Clayton Cosgrove and Damien O’Connor.
Post a Comment
Before commenting, please take the time to read our moderation guide
(Won't be published)
29/08/2012 11:24:11 a.m.
Time for Phil Heatley to front up with his reason to why he opposes the bill?..
We all have a reason for the Gay marriage a GO AHEAD and as long as they don't interfere with life in general..
Read the news and comments where you may find to how most felt toward Gay marriage or face the facts that gay people do exist..
Perhaps Phil Heately prefer to see gay people behind bars for committing adultery..
This Housing Minister legalized the prostitution act of evil and has the cheek to opposed against Gay Marriage..
Rethink or get real Pal..
28/08/2012 10:38:29 p.m.
"All i know saying gay marriage is easy"
exactly HOW is it any easier than a hetero marriage??
given the divorce rates in hetero marriage are around 50%, it doesn't sound like marriage is easy, period, and it has nothing to do with the genders of the partners involved.
"sullying the true meaning of Marriage"
the true meaning having come from what source, exactly?
if you say anything relating to Abrahamic or biblical tradition, then you're flat wrong, given that marriage apparently means many different things, even in THAT tradition. Many of the historical leaders even in the bible had concubines they called wives, some numbering in the 100s.
so traditional marriage is polygamy?
face it: you have NO basis to say what should and should not "define" marriage.
28/08/2012 2:35:37 p.m.
Gay marriage if you are serious about it and love one another for the right reasons will yes. But if you getting married becos of the wrong reasons it may be best to rethink why. All i know saying gay marriage is easy but when you define the word marriage is it really what you want. Only those that enter into this phase know their own answer.
26/08/2012 5:21:04 p.m.
CRAIG YOUNG. I agree. Sickness and depravity found in the likes of Capill and some religious people are perfect examples of the very bad in our society along with that of the life style led by same sex couples.
Clean living people can not excuse any of the actions by these types of people nor accept their behaviour, let alone agree to them sullying the true meaning of Marriage.
26/08/2012 12:45:51 p.m.
Craig Young wrote:
I find marriage opponent claims amusing. Whatever conservative religious sects say, why should their word be law? Some US polygamists and Pentecostal snakehandler sects justify their practises by reference to religious 'tradition', as did Southern US Christians during the American Civil War, Nazi anti-Semites playing on Lutheran and German Catholic traditions and South African white Reformed Churches during the apartheid era.Sorry. "Traditions" can be brutal, abusive and dysfunctional. Not good enough. Incidentally, if we're throwing these labels around, Denise, why did many fundamentalist NZ activists campaign against criminalisation of spousal rape back in the early eighties? And again, what about Graham Capill, Catholic clergy pedophiles and the children they've raped? If you people want to talk about sickness, then look in the mirror.
25/08/2012 8:43:18 a.m.
GARY. I see you have things back to front again, some people never get it right. Must be some queer disease you have or perhaps a disorientation of sorts that's common among a minority of people who have an inferiority complex and take out their frustration on those who don't agree with their disturbed point of view.
24/08/2012 11:28:35 a.m.
PAORA first your 95% figure is incorrect! But someone as blind as you never looks to find the truth? Just because something is law today does not mean it will remain law forever especially if that law shows bias and wrongs a large part of society. Remember law is made by man not God and constantly changes and corrects to work best for all in society. But then again you fear change and avoid facts and science since these disprove your old outdated beliefs and nonsense. I am sure if you pray hard enough you will get your wish or is that when you see a shooting star? no, is it when a black cat crosses your path? sorry I get lost with all these superstitions!
22/08/2012 4:50:26 p.m.
Gary. There's non so blind as those like you who cannot see. Your inverted way of viewing historic facts twisted to mean something completely different to reality only shows how far people such as yourself get lost in their own distorted way of thinking. Hear this. Marriage as currently defined by 95% of the world means one man and one woman as a couple, legally joined to form a family. Nothing more, nothing less.
Those like yourself trying to alter this accepted concept, are the ones trying to force the change. Get your facts right next time please.
22/08/2012 2:40:27 p.m.
Sorry IMAN you have it round the wrong way. Marriage has constantly changed throughout history. A law change by government to give all equal rights does not force you to change your cherished beliefs or alter what your marriage means to you. What you are trying to force onto others is that it will and therefore these people should be denied equal rights on that basis alone! The church neither created nor owns marriage or God for that matter and has no right to make any such claim as that would be deceitful!
22/08/2012 2:15:09 p.m.
Right on Iman. People like 'Matt' have no idea of the historic relevance and true meaning of what Marriage is to most Married people in New Zealand today.
Marriage as we know it is a fundamental structure of our current society.
The proposed changes are an attempt to re-engineer the status and structure of family life in New Zealand and in the process, defile the historic meaning of what Marriage is and should be.
Prime Minister John Key has labelled the Labour-led Opposition the "devil beast"...
Shamed National MP Aaron Gilmore has given a teary final speech in Parliament....
Police had to physically push anti-poverty protestors back after they tried to b...
What began as a protest for more pay has morphed into a battle against cheap bur...
Embattled National MP Aaron Gilmore has resigned....
Copyright © 2013 MediaWorks TV. All Rights Reserved.