Towleroad - “250 Million Now Living in Places that Recognise Gay Marriage”

Towleroad is reporting some figures by Nate Silver on places that recognise gay marriage.  Unfortunately Australia (Big Fail) isn’t featured.

"The big spike you see in 2008 is California recognizing gay marriage through the courts, and then un-recognizing it through the passage of Proposition 8. Right now, it's possible to marry your same-sex partner in Buenos Aires, in Mexico City, in Ames, Iowa, and in Pretoria, South Africa, but not in San Francisco. With countries like Argentina and Portugal now recognizing same-sex marriages, however, the global trajectory has returned to its slow-but-steady upward pace."

[Source: Original Article]

Read More

Brisbane Times - “Argentina legalizes gay marriage in LatAm first”

Argentina on Thursday became the first country in Latin America to legalize same-sex marriage, following a landmark Senate vote carried live on national television.

The law, backed by the center-left government of President Cristina Kirchner, was adopted in a 33-27 vote after 15 hours of debate. In this majority Roman Catholic country, some had reservations, but the law passed. "It is a historic day," said ruling party leader Miguel Pichetto.

Opposition Radical senator Gerardo Morales said Argentine society has changed, stressing that the bill was aimed at guaranteeing the rights of minorities.

The law tweaks the legal code which no longer will refer to husband and wife, but rather to "the marrying parties".

Same-sex couples will have the same rights as heterosexuals in terms of adoptions, social security and family time.

Argentina became the first country in Latin America to give a green light to same-sex marriage nationwide. It followed, around the world, the Netherlands, Belgium, Spain, Canada, South Africa, Norway, Sweden, Portugal and Iceland.

[Source: Original Article]

Read More

The Age - “Same-sex couples still waiting at the altar for a basic right” by Tim Wright

FRIENDS and family flocked from all over to attend Jacqui Tomlins’ and Sarah Nicholls’ wedding in Toronto six years ago. The Melbourne couple, who had been together more than a decade, tied the knot shortly after a Canadian court declared marriage equality a constitutional right.

In the brides’ assessment, it was an oddly normal affair. The caterers, the party-hire people, the jewellers who provided the rings, all treated them just as they would have a heterosexual couple. Yet this public celebration of love and commitment caused a great commotion among social conservatives in Australia.

It is, in fact, the precise genesis of our nation’s ban on same-sex marriage, whose fifth anniversary the religious right will celebrate next month. So affronted were our political leaders by what the Canadian authorities had sanctioned, and so eager were they to preserve the moral order in Australia, that they hastily enacted this hateful law. Its passage was of such high priority that even anti-terror legislation before the Parliament was shoved to the side.

Greens leader Bob Brown, himself in a gay relationship, described it as an ugly manifestation of the Howard government’s "straight Australia policy" — a policy endorsed heartily by the Labor opposition. But five years on, the ALP appears much less comfortable with its traditionalist stance on marriage (even if the Prime Minister is avowedly wedded to it).

Earlier this week, the Tasmanian branch of the ALP caused a stir by adopting a policy in support of same-sex marriage. Federal Government backbenchers such as Louise Pratt and Trish Crossin have spoken publicly in favour of matrimonial equality, and Rainbow Labor — an internal ALP lobby group — is agitating for a change of policy at the party’s triennial national conference now under way.

But most Labor parliamentarians are still unwilling to criticise the mean-spirited same-sex marriage ban. The Government is clearly afraid of upsetting groups such as the Australian Christian Lobby and the Salt Shakers, which preach intolerance and employ fear as their weapon of choice. In our politicians’ appraisal, retaining the ban is the safe and easy option for now. But their silence in the face of this injustice is almost as harmful as the vicious rhetoric of the right-wing groups — who are busy organising to ensure the ban remains in place.

The Prime Minister, like most of his colleagues, has tended to rely on popular opinion to justify his objection to equal marriage rights. But a Galaxy poll released in June has him searching for a new line. It turns out that just 36 per cent of Australians agree with his position. Three in five of us now support marriage equality, and younger generations, who lack some of the prejudices of the baby boomers, overwhelmingly favour change.

The Government and its conservative allies are swimming against the tide of history. Around the world, courts and legislatures have started waking up to the senselessness and inhumanity of denying same-sex couples the basic right to marry — a right protected by international law. This is not just in progressive Scandinavia, but also in devoutly Catholic Spain, South Africa and half a dozen US states.

Australia’s decision-makers, meanwhile, continue to fawn over a small minority of electors who are rapidly dwindling in number — men and women who see gay relationships as somehow inferior to their own and unworthy of legal or social recognition. Every so often, we hear them in the media calling homosexuals promiscuous or sick.

Labor claims in its new draft policy platform, which is due to be adopted tomorrow, that it has "always stood for equality", that it opposes "all attempts to divide Australians by pandering to prejudice". Yet that is precisely what it’s doing. Same-sex marriage is not an item on some radical gay agenda. It is a basic human right, and it’s beyond time the Government recognised it as such.

Jacqui’s and Sarah’s marriage, and same-sex relationships in general, should offend none of us. Surely we, as a nation, are mature enough to allow all people, regardless of their sexuality, to get married.

One day, of course, the forces of love will prove more powerful than the forces of fear.

But for now, we are left standing at the altar. Waiting, patiently, for equality.

Tim Wright is a spokesman for Equal Love, which will hold a rally for same-sex marriage at Federation Square tomorrow at 1pm.

[Link: Original Article]

Read More

MCV - "Relationships and the Law"

Gay marriage, same-sex entitlements, lesbian parents: Australia is in the midst of an important and sometimes confusing debate about legally recognising same-sex couples and their families.

MCV has prepared this special feature to guide you through your rights in state and federal law.

Our guide has been prepared by Australia’s most respected gay human rights advocates and academics. It also includes links to further information.

MARRIAGE

Same-sex marriage is presently recognised in the Netherlands, Belgium, Canada, Spain, South Africa, and, in the USA, in the states of Massachusetts and California.

However, the Australian Marriage Act was amended in 2004 to prohibit any recognition of same-sex marriage in this country.

Some constitutional experts believe the states can enact same-sex marriage laws but this has not yet happened.

If you plan to marry overseas make sure you understand local law. For example, visitors can easily marry in Canada, but it is much harder to obtain a divorce than in Australia.

You should also be aware that your marriage will not be legally recognised when you return to Australia.

Despite opposition from both major parties, support for same-sex marriage is relatively high in Australia (57% according to recent polls).

If you would like to contribute to the campaign for same-sex marriage visit Australian Marriage Equality

CIVIL UNIONS

There is no national civil union scheme in Australia although such schemes do exist at a state level.

There are civil union registries in Tasmania and the ACT. Victoria will have a registry by the end of this year.

These registries provide couples with a way to immediately access all available relationship entitlements in state law, and soon federal law; and to prove their relationship entitlements if challenged in situations like medical emergency.

Registries also provide personal relationships with the official, symbolic recognition of government, and through it, society.

Australia’s registries recognise same and opposite-sex couples, as well as companionate partners in Tasmania and Victoria.

Couples should contact their local Registry of Births, Deaths and Marriages to find out how to have their civil union registered.

Couples can also enter a municipal civil union in Sydney and Melbourne, or a British civil union at a British Consulate. These unions can provide evidence of the existence of a relationship in some circumstances, but they confer no legal rights in Australian law and are largely symbolic.

ACT - City of Sydney - Tasmania - Relationships Tasmania - City of Melbourne - City of Yarra

DE FACTO COUPLES

Australian federal law gives married and opposite-sex de facto couples the same legal rights and responsibilities.

The Federal Government is currently extending the definition of de facto partner to include same-sex partners across all federal laws, beginning with superannuation in mid-2008 and ending with social security in mid-2009.

Other areas where relationship entitlements will be extended include taxation, immigration and workplace entitlements.

All Australian states and territories give opposite-sex de facto couples the same legal rights and responsibilities as married couples. They also give same-sex de facto couples the same entitlements in areas like wills and intestacy, property division and state taxes and pensions.

Parenting rights are not yet extended to same-sex partners in Victoria, NSW, Queensland and South Australia.

Definitions of what constitutes a de facto relationship differ between the states. With the exception of Tasmania there is usually a requirement that de facto partners live together for a certain period before qualifying for relationship entitlements.

Human Rights & Equal Opportunity Commission

YOU AND YOUR CHILD

Laws dealing with family and children are split between state and federal governments.

Some states, including WA, Tasmania and the ACT, allow co-parents in same-sex relationships to adopt their partner’s children. WA and the ACT allow same-sex partners to adopt children relinquished by other people.

Most states allow women in same-sex relationships to access IVF and other fertility services. The exception is Victoria where reform is expected soon. Some states including WA, the ACT and the NT allow co-mothers to be deemed legal parents of children born through fertility treatment. Reform is expected soon in NSW, Victoria and Tasmania.

The Family Court allows child custody disputes to be resolved if the parents are in a same-sex relationship. Disputes over child support and property division are still resolved in state Supreme Courts, but reform is also imminent.

Only the ACT recognises surrogacy arrangements between surrogate mothers and same-sex couples. Surrogacy is available in other countries such as the US, but these arrangements are not automatically recognised in Australia.

None of the other countries with which Australia has adoption protocols allows same-sex partners to adopt their children.

Victorian Gay & Lesbian Rights Lobby

Myths and facts about civil unions

Myth: The registries we have in Australia are second-rate civil union schemes.
Fact: Australia’s state registries grant a wider range of rights to a wider range of couples, and with greater ceremonial recognition than most overseas civil union schemes including in the UK and Europe.

Myth: Registering a relationship is like registering a dog.
Fact: A relationship is registered in the same way as a birth, death or marriage: on a register, in a registry, by a Registrar.

Myth: A state relationship certificate has less legal standing than a marriage certificate.
Fact: A certificate guarantees immediate and incontestable access to all relationship rights, just like a marriage certificate.

Myth: A registry is a poor substitute for marriage.
Fact: Registries were never intended as a substitute for marriage for same-sex couples, but to sit alongside marriage as a way to recognise a wider range of partners who can’t or don’t wish to marry.

Myth: Existing registries don’t allow couples to have ceremonies.
Fact: Registries are designed to allow couples to have their relationships recognised in the manner of their choosing, either with a formal ceremony or without.

[Link: Original Article]

Read More

The Age - "Gay 'husbands' to test their marriage in court " by Farah Farouque

In a legal first, two Melbourne gay men who married in Canada are planning to apply to the Australian courts to have their union recognised at home.

Jason McCheyne and Adrian Tuazon, both Australian citizens, flew to Canada last month and exchanged wedding rings and vows in a civil ceremony at Toronto's city hall.

Mr McCheyne, 33, and Mr Tuazon, 30, are now preparing to mount a court challenge, probably in the Family Court, to have their same-sex marriage validated in Australia.

The Brunswick couple, who identify themselves as Christians, say they are not "radical political activists".

Until they met met six years ago, neither had "come out" as a homosexual. But now they are determined to achieve formal recognition of their union and refer to each other as "my husband".

"We see marriage as a lifetime commitment - just like everyone else," Mr McCheyne told The Age. "We are a family now. We are very traditional in that sense."

The couple, who plan to have children, say they want be considered equal to their heterosexual married friends. "We wanted to marry both as a statement to ourselves and to the community," said Mr Tuazon.

Although gay couples now hold their own informal "commitment ceremonies", Australian law makes no provision for same-sex marriage.

Prime Minister John Howard is strongly opposed to the idea, and the ALP has also shelved an amendment to the party's platform that would have given gay unions equal legal status to married heterosexual couples.

Greens leader Senator Bob Brown, who is gay and supports same-sex marriage, wished the men well in their legal challenge.

Mr McCheyne and Mr Tuazon married in Toronto in the province of Ontario, where courts ratified same-sex marriages in June last year. As there are no residency requirements, gay couples from around the world are flocking to Canada to achieve their marital ambitions.

A Melbourne-based lesbian couple, Jacqui Tomlins and Sarah Nichols, believe they were the first Australians to take advantage of the laws when they married in August last year.

"Our wedding was held at a lakeside cottage just north of Toronto, the service performed by a Unitarian minister," Ms Tomlins said.

"We had vows, betrothal, signing, exchange of rings, food and Australian wine, speeches, dancing, two brides on the wedding cake, and registered with David Jones bridal service."

The validity of overseas gay marriages has not yet been tested in the Australian courts.

Family law expert Professor Regina Graycar, of Sydney University, said: "I wouldn't be so confident that a court would recognise such marriages, but I wouldn't rule it out."

Victorian Gay and Lesbian Rights Lobby co-convenor David McCarthy acknowledged that it was a "grey area", but the group supported the move to have overseas marriages recognised. "It's a battle that has to be had," he said.

Bill Muehlenberg, of the Australian Family Association, said validating gay unions would "radically revolutionise" marriage. "If we gave in on this one, we might as well give the whole game away," he said.

Mr McCheyne and Mr Tuazon, with their matching white gold bands, naturally beg to differ.

[Link: Original Article]

Read More