Comments on: Not quite civil unions in Australia

By: M-H

M-H — Sun, 29 Apr 2007 01:38:26 +0000

We can only hope that the Labor Party grasps the nettle on this issue. They have proved cowardly in the past. As an ageing lesbian I am apprehensive over what what the future could hold if either of us had to go into care – the other would almost certainly lose her(our) home.

By: Mr Bagel

Mr Bagel — Sat, 28 Apr 2007 17:52:56 +0000

If only John Howard was as good at Governing as he is at self promotion and publicity. The 100 million in upcoming advertising certainly helps most voters forget the [http://www.truthoverboard.com/story1.html, – sorry for slanted ref]

Its interesting that this has been so low key, I see it as a real step forward, albeit a fairly conservative and slow to come event, never the less, its progressive in recognising not all relationships are necessarily based between ‘couples’.

Shalom Aaron
[Australia]
Mr Bagel
Visit Mr Bagel

By: Stentor

Stentor — Sat, 28 Apr 2007 14:24:38 +0000

This is an issue on which party alignment has reversed in Australia with Labor converting from centralism to federalism over the past thirty years and the Liberal (=conservative) party going the other way.

I think this has happened in practice in the US, for similar reasons, although the parties are loath to admit it in their rhetoric, because the Democrats hold out hope of recapturing the federal government while the Republicans fear that admitting their authoritarian side will cost them support from their “small government conservative” and racially anti-progressive base. The exception would be the same-sex marriage issue, where federalism gives Democrats a way to dodge having to take a position (“let the states decide”), while the GOP is quite clear on the importance of a national constitutional amendment to protect the country from rogue states like Massachusetts.