It’s 1916 in Australia. The beckoning shores of Gallipoli await the thousands of soldiers that are yet to die amongst the bloodshed. These same shores, are yet to provide the battle of the century, that will go down in history as “The Great War.” Meanwhile, Australian’s take to the polls, with the Labour government asking the people whether or not they support the proposal to conscript young Australian men overseas for service. This national debate marked Australia’s first non-binding plebiscite, however 51% of the population voted against the proposal, conveying majority views, values and an underlying conservative nature.
You’ve seen it before: the illustrious rainbow flag, with stripes of bright colours. The same-sex marriage flag. The issue of legalising same-sex marriage in Australia has been an issue that has divided the Coalition and the people for decades. To legalise this contentious issue, the government proposes a plebiscite: the direct vote of all the members of an electorate on an important public question.
Earlier in 2016, Malcolm Turnbull, Prime Minister of Australia pledged to hold a plebiscite on same-sex marriage in the current parliamentary term, despite the outcome not being binding on the federal Constitution. Today, as we get closer to a possible plebiscite on same-sex marriage, public attention is naturally focused on the merits of the arguments for and against change. But, before we each get our chance to have a say at the ballot box, critical
To conclude, it is very easy to criticize society. Humanity keeps failing to realize the mistakes they are making and Twain and Shakespeare help the readers see the mistake being made by humans over and over again. Through the criticism of the authors in Huckleberry Finn and Romeo and Juliet, one learns that the authors criticize what humanity has created by incorporating conflicts such as forbidden love, family feud, symbolism and irony. Humanity creates society and if humanity keeps doing wrong, the society will become worse. Why can authors criticize society very easily? Humans are becoming selfish and our society is being corrupted. This is the time to stop following what society does. Don’t follow the wrong things people do just because
Equity and respect for others are two of the main values that are instantly presented to the audience. Wong makes it clear that they are two beliefs of hers that are not displayed frequently enough in Parliament, as if same sex couples were in a world where they were treated with a sense of egalitarianism and respect, then gay marriage would be unquestionably legalized. Improvement is also a prominent theme displayed by the author, who utilizes quotes such as ‘marriage equality is both necessary and overdue’ (Wong, 2016) and ‘gay and lesbian Australians can vote, serve in the military, represent our country on the sporting field, teach in our universities, preside as judges, staff our hospitals, and be a member of the federal cabinet. Yet we cannot marry the person we love’. (Wong, 2016) These two quotations are clear demonstrations of the author’s conviction that Australia can be undoubtedly improved with the introduction of new laws that allow citizens of all sexualities to
Back in this time many Australians weren’t aware of the fight for same sex marriage and many strongly disagreed. However, now that America has passed the legislation in support of gay marriage, Australians now see this as a more achievable
Australia, as a secular nation, declares freedom for all citizens in its constitution. However, it appears for influence of Christianity is still prevalent in its political agenda. This Christian influence comes from Australia’s settlement in 1788. The underlying Christian influence affects the political agenda in many ways: 2 of which are marriage equality, and inequality for same-sex couples in adoption and surrogacy laws.
political debate over the decisive issue of gay marriage forces us to rethink our commitment to
This essay will be critically analyzing the social policy of same sex marriage using four Australian newspaper articles to demonstrate and examine how inequality through diversity and difference are present and experienced in the public domain. The essay will draw upon What ideological values and assumptions are present in both the newspaper articles and social policy?, What are the social justice concerns in relation to the current same sex policy?, concluding with a reflective component exploring where in relation to the social policy issue I am as a developing social worker.
Lobby groups such as Marriage Equality Australia and the NSW Gay and Lesbian Lobby Group were instrumental in securing equal rights for homosexual de facto couples, and are currently campaigns for the legislation of same sex marriage. Despite a galaxy polls show that 63% of Australians were in favour of same-sex marriage (‘Majority of Australia supports same-sex marriage’, January 201, SMH), the law has refused to acknowledge it, enacts the Marriage Act Amendment (2004) to stipulate the definition of marriage as being between a ‘man and a women’. However, former PM Kevin Rudd has acknowledged the movement of same-sex marriage, promising to enact it if he were to be re-elected (PM promises legislation of same-sex marriage, August 2013, SMH). As such, it can be seen that although the law has been slower in recognising same-sex marriage, it is still able to reflect contemporary societal values and issues, thus achieves a just outcome for those in same-sex relationships, protecting the individual rights to
It can be argued that marriage equality is the paramount issue for lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender and intersex (LGBTI) in Australia, and worldwide. The push for marriage equality has been at the forefront of debate for many years, especially in Australia, where same-sex couples are still unable to marry under Australian law. Despite the recognition of same-sex matrimony in
Power overlaps between interest and political groups and as a result, political decision-making is reached through negotiation and compromise (Manley 1983). Indeed, when examining the progressive debate concerning the legal recognition of same-sex relationships in Australia, the perception that power is bartered through interest groups becomes highly plausible through the lens of classical pluralist theory. There are competing visions of diversity in Australia, and behind
The issue of whether or not gay marriage should be accepted in Australia has been largely debated in politics and among the general public for a while now, and it seems as though it will remain a continuous issue for some time to come. The majority of Australians are currently split over whether the traditional view of marriage being solely between a man and a woman should be preserved, or whether this view of marriage is out-dated and should be redefined in order to allow gays the right to marry. The Australian Labor Party was also divided on this issue at a recently held federal conference. In the opinion piece “Welcome, gays, to… what?” (published in the Herald Sun in December 2011), Wendy Tuohy contends in a supportive tone, that gay
Australia’s Senate and House of Representatives recently rejected bills to accept homosexual marriage in Australia. Labor MP Stephen Jones and Labor Senator Trish Crossin have both put forward a bill to gain marriage equality with both bills failing to pass through to the governor general (House of Representatives – 98-42, and
For Australian law to be effective it must be dynamic so it can reflect changing societal views, which law reform can help attain. A significant area of recent social change is the acceptance of same-sex relationships in Australian society. To mirror this, current law reforms have been somewhat effective in achieving just outcomes regarding the recognition of same-sex relationships in Commonwealth law. The combination of official recognition of same-sex relationships to an extent, attempts at removing discrimination in legislation, and the delay of justice denotes this. Considering the achievement of justice and the protection of individual’s rights, it is evident that law reform has significantly improved recognition of same-sex relationships, but there are more essential responses that need to be enacted.
The political aspects of whether same-sex couples should be allowed to federal and government recognized marriages are a very complex issue. There are basically two sides to the political argument of whether same-sex couples should be allowed to marry. On one side are the liberals who feel that marriage is a civil right that should be denied based on the basis of a person's sexual orientation. On the other side you have conservatives who feel that marriage is an institution in which should only constitute one man and one woman. In this report we are going to examine how the issue of same-sex marriages are affecting our current political environment, how politics is affecting the movement for
Same sex- marriage is still the topic of many peoples conversation across the country. Citizens, divided by politic party, are very passionate about how they feel about it. The president didn’t approve of it at first, but now he finally accepts same- sex marriage, the Judicial System uses its power to dictate to the States, forcing them to accept same- sex marriage. Both houses of Congress continue to debate what marriage means.
As society has revolutionized and with democratic ideology denominating has the western world, liberation and equality campaigns stemming from “third sector” (Keane 1998) lobbying groups, stand as a key component to the operation a “civil society”(Keane 1998). Carrying an objective to influence legislators or regulatory agencies, these political advocacy groups play a critical role in the operation of a healthy liberal democracy. In contemporary society, the notion of Same-sex marriage has polarized public opinion worldwide and is recognized as one of the most controversial non-economic issues to ever confront the Australian