1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

LGBT News Victoria (Aus) passes same-sex adoption laws - with relgious exemptions

Discussion in 'Current Events, World News, & LGBT News' started by Aussie792, Dec 8, 2015.

Thread Tools

Thread Tools

  1. Aussie792

    Aussie792
    Full Member

    Joined:
    Apr 5, 2013
    Messages:
    3,317
    Likes Received:
    62
    Location:
    Australia
    Gender:
    Male
    Gender Pronoun:
    He
    Sexual Orientation:
    Gay
    Out Status:
    Out to everyone
    Same-sex adoption laws pass Victorian Parliament after Government accepts religious exemptions - ABC News (Australian Broadcasting Corporation)

    Victoria is Australia's second most populous state and Melbourne (with the majority of Victoria's population) is perhaps Australia's most socially progressive city, but the state government still had to cave in to a hostile opposition.

    At least it could be worse, but if Labor gets hold of the upper house any time soon I hope they'll amend the act to remove the religious exemption. The Catholic agency can't prove that preventing same-sex couples from adopting is in the benefit of the children and they really shouldn't be able to choose the best households on religious grounds, given that very young children really have no choice or conscious faith.

    I wish the Christian lobby, which is a laughing stock in the eyes of all but the conservative wing of the Liberal and National parties, could be purged from Australian politics, but that's rather too tall an ask, sadly.

    Still, it's a step forward and extends same-sex parenthood in Australia to a far greater number of couples than before, so I'm glad the state government decided to pass the act even with the rather unfortunate provisions the opposition forced on them.
     
    #1 Aussie792, Dec 8, 2015
  2. GeeLee

    GeeLee
    Regular Member

    Joined:
    Nov 10, 2013
    Messages:
    1,442
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Somewhere
    Gender:
    Male
    Sexual Orientation:
    Gay
    Out Status:
    Not out at all
    Got to keep that religious privilege alive and well!
     
    #2 GeeLee, Dec 9, 2015
  3. Open Arms

    Open Arms Guest

    Joined:
    Jun 14, 2015
    Messages:
    493
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Canada
    Gender:
    Female
    I believe it's religious rights GeeLee, not religious privilege.
     
    #3 Open Arms, Dec 9, 2015
  4. Distant Echo

    Distant Echo
    Full Member

    Joined:
    Sep 29, 2015
    Messages:
    462
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    on the verge of somewhere
    It's sad that there has to be any debate over this at all.
    My country, my state, and I'm not equal to everyone else.
     
    #4 Distant Echo, Dec 9, 2015
  5. GeeLee

    GeeLee
    Regular Member

    Joined:
    Nov 10, 2013
    Messages:
    1,442
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Somewhere
    Gender:
    Male
    Sexual Orientation:
    Gay
    Out Status:
    Not out at all
    So how come non religious adoption agencies aren't being afforded a right to discriminate?

    Moreover why is it acceptable for the religious to discriminate against gay couples in the first place?
     
    #5 GeeLee, Dec 9, 2015
    Last edited: Dec 9, 2015
  6. Argentwing

    Argentwing
    Full Member

    Joined:
    Dec 13, 2012
    Messages:
    6,696
    Likes Received:
    3
    Location:
    New England
    Gender:
    Male
    Gender Pronoun:
    He
    Sexual Orientation:
    Bisexual
    Out Status:
    Out to everyone
    The march of progress is slow but steady. The exception won't stand for long. I'm optimistic about the issue in Australia. :slight_smile:
     
    #6 Argentwing, Dec 9, 2015
  7. Distant Echo

    Distant Echo
    Full Member

    Joined:
    Sep 29, 2015
    Messages:
    462
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    on the verge of somewhere
    Why are religious bodies being told they are above the law? That the law that applies to everyone else doesn't apply to them?
    Because our politicians are cowards.
     
    #7 Distant Echo, Dec 9, 2015
  8. Open Arms

    Open Arms Guest

    Joined:
    Jun 14, 2015
    Messages:
    493
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Canada
    Gender:
    Female
    Well put it this way. Are you making a mountain out of a molehill? I believe I just read that the Catholic agency did all of 5 adoptions in 2014 and 4 adoptions this year. Next year they may do 0 adoptions rather than go through WW III with LGBT people.

    So you should be happy on that score. Mission accomplished.

    Secondly, the adoption process is a very discriminatory process to begin with. There is so much screening. Don't you think it is very likely that the children up for adoption in a Catholic agency had a Catholic mother? and that this mother may want the child to be raised Catholic? which may include a traditional mother/father home? Just like Jewish agencies try to place children in Jewish homes and Aboriginal agencies want their children placed in Aboriginal homes?

    Oh, the biological mother has no right to decide where her child goes? She has the right to say what should happen to her own body, but not to her own baby?

    Well, last I heard in my country, the mother and/or father who were putting their baby up for adoption could actually go through albums looking at the potential parents for their child, complete with photos and detailed background descriptions, jobs, economic income, religion, city or rural location etc. etc. of the potential parents. They could pick the parents for their baby or at least narrow it down.

    If an atheist parent doesn't want the baby to go into a religious home, they are not forced to put it into a religious home.

    Government agencies should have a more wide open policy whereas private agencies should have the right to screen according to their own beliefs and standards in my opinion.

    Is your argument that same-sex couples are not likely to be chosen so people should be forced to give them their baby? Well, then maybe you should have first dibs on the babies of the mothers who don't care? or on the government agency babies?

    ---------- Post added 11th Dec 2015 at 03:09 AM ----------

    In Canada the following applies. I don't think it's going to change anytime soon. Gay couples do adopt here. We've had gay marriage for so long already that mothers may be more open to giving up their babies to same-sex couples than those in Australia and the US.

    On an adoption site in Canada it says...

    Now imagine that you (the birth mother) will have the opportunity to scrutinize these couples even more and compare them to as many other couples as you want, in order to choose the best fit for you and your child. You make the final decision about which couple you feel will give your baby the future you desire for him or her.

    As the birth mother you have control of the adoption process.
     
    #8 Open Arms, Dec 11, 2015
    Last edited: Dec 11, 2015
  9. Distant Echo

    Distant Echo
    Full Member

    Joined:
    Sep 29, 2015
    Messages:
    462
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    on the verge of somewhere
    Actually this is a mountain in reality. It's not the religious exemptions that are the point here, it's the fact that same sex couples are finally allowed to adopt children in Victoria. they aren't allowed to marry, but they can adopt. Baby steps.
    The religious exemption was forced in and the only way to get this passed was by allowing it in the legislation.
    Australia still has a long way to go for equality.
     
    #9 Distant Echo, Dec 11, 2015
    Last edited: Dec 11, 2015
  10. Open Arms

    Open Arms Guest

    Joined:
    Jun 14, 2015
    Messages:
    493
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Canada
    Gender:
    Female
    I see your point! That's too bad. I really must educate myself! I thought Australia had equality for gays!

    I know I sound like I'm bragging, but things are SO much better for gay couples here. Gays are generally regarded positively as being very loving and loveable, and same-sex couples are viewed as good parents and good candidates to adopt. Maybe read this story and be encouraged. This can happen in Australia too!

    http://thethunderbird.ca/2013/11/20/same-sex-adoptions-hit-record-high-in-b-c/
     
    #10 Open Arms, Dec 11, 2015
  11. Aussie792

    Aussie792
    Full Member

    Joined:
    Apr 5, 2013
    Messages:
    3,317
    Likes Received:
    62
    Location:
    Australia
    Gender:
    Male
    Gender Pronoun:
    He
    Sexual Orientation:
    Gay
    Out Status:
    Out to everyone
    Just for some context, the new act doesn't change the scope of birth mothers' ability to influence the adoption process; not a single mention of that is made in the act that passed this week and the 1984 adoption act (Victoria) is only amended to introduce gender-neutral terms and to equalise the status of domestic partnerships and marriages in relation to eligibility to adopt. No force would be involved and there are no other substantive changes apart from the introduction of religious exemptions.

    The religious exemption is actually a third part of this act which amends a completely different previous act; this act includes an amendment to Equal Opportunity Act of 2010 (Victoria), to expand the scope of religious exemptions to anti-discrimination ordinances. Now those exemptions include adoption. How to apply it is not at the discretion of the Parliament or of the courts which must approve adoptions. It completely places it in the hands of the adoption agency as a faith-based organisation, which under the act is only permitted to discriminate for reasons of performance of religious services and for sex, sexuality, gender, and sexual activity. It's a silver bullet for religious organisations to evade labour laws, anit-discrimination laws and virtually anything they want if if involves gays.

    Literally not a single one of those areas is related to the welfare of children, which is a public matter given that the adoption agencies are custodians, not owners, of children waiting for adoption.

    It's unlikely that a same-sex couple would have been chosen by the Catholic agency had the amendment to the Equal Opportunity Act not been included. A more quiet bias would undoubtedly have occurred, anyway. At least that would have been legally challengeable. What makes me uncomfortable is the new increase in areas where religiously decided discrimination in performing a public task is permitted. I think what's most concerning is that religious organisations, even those performing a public role in lieu of the government, are permitted to engage in arbitrary discrimination on the basis of sex, sexuality, gender and sexual activity at all, especially where it has an impact on people beyond the religious functions of the organisation.

    Open Arms, you believe that when a government permits a religious organisation to perform a public task, that religious organisation ought to have free reign. I believe that any religious organisation performing a public task should be subject to the same restrictions placed on civil organisations, because that task goes beyond the realm of religion itself. Placing children into new homes is not a religious function of any organisation. The children involved are rarely religious as such and all adoption procedures are conducted to ensure the welfare of the children, through assessing the suitability of the new parents to raise children in a stable and safe environment. The Catholic Church is in no way the arbiter of that. The religious organisation doesn't have priests ordain the prospective parents; they have trained psychologists and social workers. Again, their functions are not religious and even they work in that knowledge. Excluding an entire demographic of potential adopters is not a decision that acts in the best interest of children. It's rather petulant, does not serve any identifiable public good and as such I regard it as very poor public policy.

    I think it's rather strange that you on one hand support the Catholic Church being able to lobby for a subsidiary organisation to have a chunk carved out of the law for its own benefit and on the other hand hope that Australia will improve its laws relating to LGBT people. It seems more than a little contradictory. You applaud the step forward but refuse to decry the foot being chopped off in the process.

    The Canadian Supreme Court decisions that have given LGBT Canadians the rights you so enjoy are not possible here. Our High Court is constitutionally much weaker on domestic human rights issues, and hasn't been able to deliver a pro-LGBT verdict since 1997, when LGBT issues were still able to come under the right to privacy. So when these issues are debated in the Australian parliaments, we don't have an easy backup like you had and still have. We desperately need good legislation, because there is no other route save the nigh-impossible creation of a bill of rights to achieve sufficient LGBT equality in the law, which in Australia is far more piecemeal than Canada's comprehensive and legally-enforceable guarantees of human rights. That's why inamirrordarkly and I are so opposed to watering down legislation like this.
     
    #11 Aussie792, Dec 11, 2015
    Last edited: Dec 11, 2015
  12. Open Arms

    Open Arms Guest

    Joined:
    Jun 14, 2015
    Messages:
    493
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Canada
    Gender:
    Female
    I'm not sure what you define as a "public task"? Is adoption a public task? We have both private and government adoption agencies in Canada. Some would even say adoption is a privilege, not a human right, per se.

    I don't know about a chunk being carved out of the law? Religious freedom is a very high value here as are gay rights. When there's a stalemate, we try to use common sense, consensus and compromise. We could even have a gay adoption agency here where gay couples would be favoured, and I don't think anyone would lift an eyebrow really.

    People understand Catholics do not believe in abortion, same-sex couples adopting and heteros using contraception. We understand Jewish and Aboriginals want their babies to go to their own ethnic couples. That's why we have private adoption agencies.

    Government agencies can give priority to gay couples if they need to even up the playing field, and I'm sure they do.

    I admit to looking at things from a Canadian perspective and bias which means I may just not "get it". Gays and the various churches co-exist quite well here. I don't hear anti-religious insults from LGBT, and I don't hear anti-gay insults directed at LGBT. I have lots of Christian friends and family and simply do not hear derogatory things spoken about LGBT. They don't say "Oh that gay couple shouldn't be allowed to adopt a child".
     
    #12 Open Arms, Dec 11, 2015
  13. Distant Echo

    Distant Echo
    Full Member

    Joined:
    Sep 29, 2015
    Messages:
    462
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    on the verge of somewhere
    Australia is way behind Canada on LGBT rights. We have a Christian lobby campaigning against everything lgbt, including marriage equality, adoption, support for kids in school etc. Apparently a poster supporting gay rights is promoting promiscuity? Quite inane and vicious arguments going on.
    Our "government" is planning a plebiscite to determine the marriage equality issue which will give plenty of opportunity for attacks on lgbt individuals and groups. this is despite the majority of citizens being in favour and an insane cost.
     
    #13 Distant Echo, Dec 13, 2015
(You must log in or sign up to post here.)