Catholic ALP senator says 鈥榥o鈥� to marriage equality push
Former parliamentary secretary for social inclusion Senator Ursula Stephens will vote against same-sex marriage.
Writing on her personal blog, Stephens said she had received lots of correspondence about the issue following a Greens motion to canvass constituents鈥� views, but she said most people who contacted her oppose same-sex marriage.
鈥淚 am a practising Catholic and support the view that marriage should be between a man and a woman,鈥� Stephens wrote. 鈥淲hile many same-sex couples tell us their relationship is identical with marriage, [most] constituents who have contacted me on this subject believe that marriage is definitely not the same as a relationship between a couple of the same sex. I have given this matter serious thought, and while I respect those whose opinions differ from mine, I intend to vote against a change to the legislation should it be introduced.鈥�
Stephens served in the social inclusion role under then Prime Minister Kevin Rudd. She attracted controversy when, at a Christian anti-gay marriage breakfast, she left out part of a prepared speech that included sentiments that the Rudd Government believed people were entitled to respect, dignity and the opportunity to participate in society and be protected by the law regardless of their sexuality or marital status.
These people that have “Come up” to Ursula Stephens to say that that they don’t support Same-Sex Marriage should come out to the Western Suburbs any other Suburb to see how same-sex couples live.
Not all Gay/Lesbians want to be tarred with the same brush as the Gay/lesbains on Mardi Gra who frolick down Oxford street with fake tan up their arse covered in Glitter or their arse hanging out for the world to see will carrying on like a big Twat,Hetro’s clearly teach their Kids “Son,see what they look like,all the gays” and yet another young generation is taught “What to look out for” and step back from.
Ursula Stephens should take a step into an everyday gay/lebian couples home and see that were like every other family and just want a fair go.Thanks
How many of us have written to our local MPs or any government ministers about same sex marriage?
Instances like this remind us that there are plenty of people within the government who won’t stand up for us and there are also plenty of Christians making submissions to politicians arguing against same sex marriage.
Don’t be complacent and think that this is just going to happen without us doing much. Sending even a short letter to politicians is enough to get their attention and let them know that we really do want this change.
I wonder if she did canvass her constituents at all or just those that called to her to help deal with their own pressing issues.
It beggars belief that some people are against the idea of gay marriage based on the perceived views of a few Sydney queens. Not everyone shares the same ideology when it comes to relationships and what rules are put in place and practised. To each there own.
For myself and my long term partner we find that we prefer to be in a monogamous relationship, that is not to say that is everyone’s cup of tea. I know a few straight married couples that prefer to have open relationships, more power to you if that’s what floats your boats. I just say lets get on with on it, lets get this archaic practice of denying homosexuals the right to marry changed. What goes on in between your sheets is nobody’s business but your own.
wow is that my bad spelling noooooooooo its my sticky keyboard shouldnt have spilt that glass of red
ok it really hard to find words to discribe how our polaticians are holding us back from the rest of the world get with the program pols and follow in the footsteps other countries who have the balls not to let any religious group dictate how the rule am i dreaming or did the law and religion part ways centuries ago.. dont make me embarrsed to be austalian
I wonder where she stands, as a practicing catholic, on the widespread criminal molestation of young boys within the catholic church and the church’s role in covering it up?
The part that disturbs me the most is that there was a “Christian anti-gay marriage breakfast”. Is no meal safe from hate?
Could someone please tell Senator Ursula Stephens it is not the Catholic Party but the Labor Party.
Imposing her conservative brand of Catholic morality on the population is a gross violation of Human Rights and against the principles of the Labor Party, and the oath she took as a political representative of Australia. We have a right to be free of her faith. Even so Millions of Catholics support Same-Sex Marriage and understand what equality is.
President Kennedy was struggling with people like Ursula Stephen, who at the time did not want people of a different skin colour having any equal rights, as some religious leaders fought to keep the segregation of people on the basis of skin colour. He addressed them.
鈥淚 believe in an America where the separation of church and state is absolute, where no Catholic prelate would tell the President (should he be a Catholic) how to act and no Protestant minister would tell his parishioners for whom to vote, where no church or church school is granted any public funds or political preference, and where no man is denied public office merely because his religion differs from the President who might appoint him or the people who might elect him.
I believe in an America that is officially neither Catholic, Protestant nor Jewish, where no public official either requests or accepts instructions on public policy from the Pope, the National Council of Churches or any other ecclesiastical source, where no religious body seeks to impose its will directly or indirectly upon the general populace or the public acts of its officials, and where religious liberty is so indivisible that an act against one church is treated as an act against all. 鈥�
by John F. Kennedy (Catholic)
September 12, 1960
I went to Stephens blog, and the comments are off. I can just imagine the opinionated bigotry on display. What do these straight constituents she mentions even KNOW about a gay relationship anyway? This is why Labor cannot be trusted along with the Liberals. They have no intention of ending their elitist heterosexual agendas. What a disgrace, i dont care if she is a practicing “Catholic” either.
To PETER,
Not only the Good-Catholics, but also the Athiest NIMBRs also hold those views.
Although most NIMBRs would support Civil unions.
To Shaey,
Most of those issues should be solved by having legalised Civil Unions. You do not need the word Marriage just to get those rights.
What I hear is that a lot of people, Catholics, Athiests and etc, are suportive if ‘Civil Unionships’ or legalised ‘Civil Partnerships’ as many people do support many of the things you want. They just see the word Marriage is more of a cultural thing than a civil rights thing.
THE NO BRAINER IS
Civil Rights & Civil Matters = Civil Unionships & Civil Partnerships
and actually it isn’t THEY, its US… we’re all people.. “We are all walking each other home.” Withholding rights to some people, hurt all people. Its astounding to me that we aren’t way past this sort of discrimination.
I am catholic too. But that doesn’t give me the right to decide what marriage is for someone else. Their life, their business. It is neither Godly, nor Catholic… to withhold dignity from people.
ahhh RIGHT…..so tell me ….how do these people in the ‘required’ man/woman dynamic KNOW that a same sex commitment/relationship is NOT the same as a marriage/relationship between same sex couples??
the question begs to be asked/answered….
have they been in one? tried it?
lol
Good on her, she has the right to say what she wants, get off her back.
However – and this is important – Shaey’s points argue very well the case against her.
Again, why do prissy Sydney mafia queens, and I am down here at the moment so I know them, get on a bandwagon, I don’t want gay marriage but for other reasons, but just get on with it and continue lobbying and ignore Pell and others. Down here you give too much attention to such fools. I am 100% against it, but agree with Shaey’s view.
Why am I against it. Because of Sydney based queens tell me I have to get married and be monogamous because I won’t get STI’s (yeah right), we need to be clean to the hetro community (offensive but that is what gays down here use) and I have to live this picket white two poodle, one man existance, and then go out and get a woman to carry my child, to feel equal. If I disagree with that then you get called a dirty diseased slut, mostly by those that are in the slings at the SOPs partnered or not.
The only way I will support gay marriage and equality is when the Mardi Gras politically correct Sydney queens let me and my future partner make the decisions to be monogamous or open without the assumptions monogamy equals no STI and no longer being branded a slut, yet when single you can put it in everyone in town. But, it seems gay and lesbians want to moralise your life. Until monogamy is left out of the gay marriage arguement you have my 100% opposition and again you should all spend less time with people like that lady being against it and more time lobbying.
I think that Ursula Stephens is the biggest Hypocrite yet. Social Inclusion is for EVERYBODY – especially the minorities and the people shoved to the side and ignored. What gives her the right to say that I am not allowed to marry my partner in a symbolic ceremony, linking my life to hers for eternity, not allowed to be the mother to my children (not biological), and to get custody if she dies, not allowed the same treatment in regard to superannuation, birth certificates, death, housing and any other event that can affect a couple. And believe me, anyone saying that we have all the same rights now without marriage is either totally ignorant or a lying, hetrosexual who is scared that they will catch gay geerms. Its the 21st century people, not the 1600’s. We all need to start jumping up and down and lobbying, writing letters, petitions, talking to the media, getting discrimination stories in the papers and tv.
Ursula Stephens is the former social inclusion minister, not the current one. We now have Tanya plibersek who supports gay marriage. So good riddance to Ursula, whose views are anything but inclusive, and well done to Tanya for supporting the cause. By the way, who is the Liberal social inclusion spokesperson, and what do they think? I find it hard to believe every single Liberal MP is united behind homophobia, there must be at least a few who support the LGBT community …..
Human rights should include everyone.She is not being asked to suffer some personal damage because people want human rights. Those people who think their views should be paramount over others need a wake up call
The people who oppose same-sex marriage invariably never say what they actually do support for gay and lesbians.
If her reasoning is religious, then she’s forcing her views on the rest of the nation, and that’s disgusting.
If we want to win this issue, and I do, we must keep up the pressure. Exactly what to do is not an easy question. But we can not leave it all to GetUp alone.
Catholics will be our main problem. Put your thinking caps on. Unite on this issue. It is worth it…
The social inclusion Minister – what a load of bull. an oxeymoron if I’ve ever seen one.
I heard this woman speak at the LGBT conference in Sydney last year.
She skirted around the social and emotional wellbeing of LGBT people and how social acceptance or the lack there of is detremental to our community.
I hope when she is sitting back in her armchair in the last days of her life reflects on how foolish she was when she could have made a real difference to peoples lives.
It would be interesting to see the actual content of the submissions made to this MP – after all, they should be available udner FOI?
Whilst there are always going to be variations between different electorates, it is amusing that most of those held by “practising” Catholics always seem to fail in supporting same-sex marriage.
A Catholic wouldn’t lie about the true position of their electorate, would they?
Unusual definition of social inclusion. I am a feminist myself but hope Ursula Stephens makes sure her husband’s dinner is ready when he comes home.