Paterson same sex marriage

Duration: 9min 31sec Views: 1601 Submitted: 29.04.2020
Category: Brunette
This Bill meets the demands of the religious right as expressed in the popular press, academic literature, government inquiries and the courtroom. This post argues that the Paterson Bill has no foundation in international human rights law, and indeed is at variance with legislation and court decisions in countries with legislative or constitutional human right protections. The post is divided into three sections. First, I deal with the parts of the Bill regarding refusal of the provision of goods and services in light of human rights treaties and the decisions of international and national courts. This analysis demonstrates that the Bill is premised on an unjustifiably broad notion of religious freedom. Finally, the Bill contains some unrelated protections — including for parents to withdraw children from class if the subject is objectionable to them — which have no basis in the human rights jurisprudence of other Western democracies.

Same-sex marriage: Why has Senator James Paterson written an alternative bill?

James Paterson voted very strongly for same-sex marriage equality — They Vote For You

Follow our live coverage for the latest news on the coronavirus pandemic. Follow our live coverage of the US election aftermath. Refusing to serve gay people would be like returning to a time when it was OK to refuse service on religious or racial grounds, according to Labor's Penny Wong. Senator Wong has dismissed Liberal senator James Paterson's proposed bill for same-sex marriage, which includes more protections for same-sex marriage, as a "licence to discriminate". Senator Wong argued the bill put forward by Liberal senator Dean Smith, which has some exemptions so churches can refuse to conduct same-sex weddings, had appropriate protections. Senator Smith's plan has attracted broad parliamentary support — but Senator Paterson released an alternative on Monday , which he argued would provide even greater protections for religious freedoms, beyond the ceremony itself.

Rival same-sex marriage bill to trigger Coalition showdown

Turnbull government ministers have largely rejected a push by Coalition conservatives to overturn sections of anti-discrimination law in the event same-sex marriage is legalised. Liberal MP James Paterson on Monday released a bill that would permit same-sex marriage but allow a wide range of service providers to discriminate against gay couples planning a wedding. The exemptions would extend to any person or business refusing to co-operate with the staging of a same-sex wedding on religious or "conscientious" grounds, protecting them from civil litigation. It would override existing state and territory anti-discrimination laws, stating plainly that when the two come into conflict, the federal law would prevail. Liberal senator James Paterson, pictured in Canberra on Monday, has drafted an alternative bill to legalise same-sex marriage.
A marriage bill allowing wide-ranging discrimination against same-sex weddings has been released by the Liberal senator James Paterson in an attempt to force a Coalition party-room debate about which bill should be used to legislate marriage equality in the event of a yes vote. The Australian Marriage Equality co-chair Alex Greenwich has warned the bill could have unintended consequences including discrimination against divorced people remarrying and people who have had children out of wedlock. Paterson is a supporter of same-sex marriage who has been outspoken about the need to protect religious freedom but the bill is expected to enjoy substantial support from opponents of marriage equality as it implements demands from Tony Abbott, Matt Canavan, Ian Goodenough, Michael Sukkar, Zed Seselja, Andrew Hastie, Eric Abetz and Kevin Andrews. Smith has produced a bill out of the recommendations of a Senate committee inquiry that is co-signed by four Liberal moderates, enjoys support from Labor and qualified support from the Greens, who intend to seek amendments.