June 2007: CCL called on the federal Attorney-General to end discrimination against same-sex couples and families in Australia. CCL welcomes the Human Rights and Equal Opportunities Commission's report which identified 58 pieces of legislation that violate the rights of gay and lesbian Australians.

Read more about the Federal Discrimination against same sex couples in Australia.

Read how the majority of Australians support same-sex marraige and an end to discrimination against gays and lesbians in Australia.

CCL supports same-sex marriage

Sydney (Wednesday, 27 October 2004): At the Annual General Meeting of the NSW Council for Civil Liberties, the following motion was passed unanimously:

That the NSW CCL, acknowledging the fundamental civil right of equality before the law, supports the rights of gay, lesbian and transgender people to marry under Australian law other adult people of their choosing and opposes any legal restriction on the right to marry and consequent legal rights and privileges on the grounds of sex or sexuality of the parties to the marriage.

(Annual General Meeting, 27th October 2004)

Australian Parliament bans same-sex marriage

Canberra (Friday, 13 August 2004): The Australian Labor Party joined with the government to pass the Marriage Amendment Bill through the Senate today. The passing of the Bill introduces yet another piece of federal legislation that discriminates against Australia's gay and lesbian community, by denying them the ability to marry in Australia and denying recognition of their marriages solemnised in more enlightened nations like Canada.

The Bill is a subset of the provisions contained in the Marriage Amendment Legislation Bill, which was still before a Senate Committee at the time. The Committee received over 16,000 submissions. Many MPs and citizens were outraged that the Senate would pass this legislation before the Committee had reported its findings. The Senate has since abandoned this inquiry (more...).

Plans to challenge in the Federal Court the federal government's failure to recognise same-sex marriages solemnised overseas are now in doubt.

The new discriminatory provisions in the Marriage Act 1961 (Cth) are:

the definition of marriage in section 5:

marriage means the union of a man and a woman to the exclusion of all others, voluntarily entered into for life.

the explicit denial of recognition of foreign same-sex marriages in section 88EA:

A union solemnised in a foreign country between:
(a) a man and another man; or
(b) a woman and another woman;
must not be recognised as a marriage in Australia.

Why the moral panic?

The move by the ALP to pass the discriminatory defintion of marriage was a shock to many human rights advocates across the country, because the ALP had promised that it would wait to read a report, then being prepared by a Senate committee, before voting on the legislation. Despite this promise, shadow Attorney-General, Ms Nicola Roxon, told a meeting of 1000 right-wing Christians in Parliament House that the ALP would vote to ban same-sex marriage.[1] The Bill was passed within a fortnight.

Why the moral panic? Holland introduced same-sex marriage in April 2001, followed by Belgium in 2003. In 2004 provincial Canadian courts began to rule that the exclusively heterosexual definition of marriage is discriminatory and unjustifiable in a free and democratic society.[2] On 28 June 2005, the Canadian Parliament passed legislation introducing same-sex marriage. On 1 July 2005, Spain introduced same-sex marriage. On 1 December 2005, the Constitutional Court of South Africa ruled that the exclusively heterosexual definition of marriage is unconstitutional.[3]

The story in the US is more complicated. In 1993 Hawaii changed its state constitution after state courts ruled unconstitutional the exclusively heterosexual definition of marriage. In 1996 the US Congress passed the Defense of Marriage Act, which, much like the recent Australian legislation, defines marriage as exclusively heterosexual in federal law. In 1998 Alaska made changes to its constitution after similar court rulings. On 17 May 2004, Massachusetts became the first US state to recognise same-sex marriage.

In July 2004, US President George W. Bush failed in his bid to amend the US Constitution to ban same-sex marriage. Bush feared (probably correctly) that the US Supreme Court, when the issue finally gets to it, will follow the example of the Canadian and South African courts and strike down the Defense of Marriage Act and the similar “defence of marriage” provisions now enacted in the constitutions of the majority of the states.

Of course, all the countries mentioned above have a Bill of Rights. In Australia, without a Bill of Rights, our courts are unlikely to rule that the constitutional word ‘marriage’ includes same-sex couples. This is because our Constitution does not guarantee Australians equal protection of the law.

[1]: Meaghan Shaw, “Labor backs ban on gay marriage”, The Age (5 August 2004) 3.
[2]: See Barbeau v Canada (Attorney-General) (2003) 13 BCLR (4th) I (CA); Halpern v Canada (Attorney-General) (2003) 65 OR (3rd) 161 (CA); and, Hendricks v Québec (Procureur général) [2002] RJQ 2506 (Superior Court). These decisions were confirmed by the Supreme Court of Canada: Reference re:same-sex marriage [2004] 3 SCR 698.
[3]: Minister of Home Affairs v Fourie & Bonthuys 2005 (1 Dec 05) (SACC). See also: court's media release.

Senate abandons inquiry into same-sex marriage

Canberra (Monday, 6 September 2004): The Senate Legal and Constitutional Legislation Committee today officially abandoned its inquiry into the Marriage Legislation Amendment Bill. It did so because of the passing of the Marriage Legislation Bill banning same-sex marriage and because Parliament has been prorogued for the October federal election. The inquiry received over 16,000 submissions.

Read CCL's submission to the Senate Legal and Constitutional Legislation Committee inquiry into the Bill.
Read the Senate committee's final report.

PM plans to ban same-sex marriage

Canberra (Thursday, 27 May 2004): Prime Minister Howard today introduced into Parliament plans to ban same-sex marriage in Australia. Under the Australian Constitution, the federal Parliament has the power to make laws about marriage. This use of Parliament's power is discriminatory and you should protest these changes before it is too late.

Read CCL's submission to the Senate Legal and Constitutional Legislation Committee inquiry into the Bill. (On 30 August 2004, the Senate abandoned this inquiry.)
Read the proposed legislation.
Read the Parliamentary Library's Digest on the Marriage Legislation Amendment Bill.
Read the PM's comments on gay marriage.

What YOU can do

You should talk to or email your local member of the House of Representatives or the Senate to express your concerns that same-sex attracted Australians are not being treated equally.