Up Front by Emma Hart

Read Post

Up Front: Choice, Bro

179 Responses

First ←Older Page 1 3 4 5 6 7 8 Newer→ Last

  • Hebe, in reply to Emma Hart,

    I also can't criticise Finlayson for his vote

    I don't think voting against the marriage bill makes an MP a homophobe. (I support it. Totally.) There are so many shades of grey in these sorts of debates (bugger that book because I don't mean THAT).

    Christchurch • Since May 2011 • 2896 posts Report Reply

  • BenWilson, in reply to Hebe,

    I don't think voting against the marriage bill makes an MP a homophobe.

    The contrapositive holds, too. Voting for it doesn't stop you being a homophobe.

    Auckland • Since Nov 2006 • 10641 posts Report Reply

  • Hebe, in reply to BenWilson,

    I hadn't thought of that -- you are right! I have a hunch that some MPs will change their voting for the next readings.

    Christchurch • Since May 2011 • 2896 posts Report Reply

  • Emma Hart, in reply to Hebe,

    I have a hunch that some MPs will change their voting for the next readings.

    Which is why I think it's really important now to write to those MPs whom you suspect are really opposed, or luke-warm, and thank them for voting in favour. Just to be nice, of course. Yeah.

    Christchurch • Since Nov 2006 • 4650 posts Report Reply

  • Tim Michie, in reply to Hebe,

    I agree. Which although less than wholehearted support at least means there is some faith in the process. NZ First's proposed referendum might be added at the Select Committee, no thanks to them and now out of the headlines their vote against shows the strength of their belief in the democratic process.

    Auckward • Since Nov 2006 • 614 posts Report Reply

  • Keir Leslie,

    The two Chch MPs against were NZ First, I think.

    Winston's stance on this is super scummy.

    Since Jul 2008 • 1452 posts Report Reply

  • Hebe, in reply to Keir Leslie,

    The two Chch MPs against were NZ First, I think.
    Winston's stance on this is super scummy.

    They are. I would call Win First's stance "weaselly" rather than scummy.

    Christchurch • Since May 2011 • 2896 posts Report Reply

  • Emma Hart,

    Christchurch • Since Nov 2006 • 4650 posts Report Reply

  • DexterX,

    It would be interesting to see where in statute same sex marriage is specifically prohibited.

    Auckland • Since Nov 2006 • 1224 posts Report Reply

  • Chris Waugh, in reply to DexterX,

    It would be interesting to see where in statute same sex marriage is specifically prohibited.

    I thought the problem was that it isn't specifically prohibited, but that licences were only ever issued to straight couples on the assumption that the law was written under the assumption that a marriage is one man and one woman, with the high court agreeing that that's what parliament intended when the law was written.

    Wellington • Since Jan 2007 • 2401 posts Report Reply

  • DexterX, in reply to Chris Waugh,

    Yes - I looked at what was prohibited under the Marriage Act and couldn't find anything - I would be interested to know the specific nature of same sex marriage being prohibited.

    Auckland • Since Nov 2006 • 1224 posts Report Reply

  • Paul Williams, in reply to Emma Hart,

    I also can't criticise Finlayson for his vote. He believes God made him gay, but that homosexual sex is a sin, so he's celibate. That seems sufficient pain in his life.

    I didn't know this about Finlayson. I can't quite get my head around that but, as you've said, it's his burden and he's voted according to his conscience (not wanting to get into the whole 'how can my human rights be determined by your vote' thing).

    And thanks to inthehouse.co.nz, I can watch what I missed.

    Sydney • Since Nov 2006 • 2273 posts Report Reply

  • Paul Williams,

    Incidentally, what did others make of Suo William Sio's contribution?

    Sydney • Since Nov 2006 • 2273 posts Report Reply

  • Sofie Bribiesca, in reply to Paul Williams,

    Suo William Sio’s contribution?

    I thought he genuinely felt between a rock and a hard place. He was heavily lobbied by his electorate, and he will be voted out if he went against them . I think he wanted to work for his electorate. He put them first ,himself second and Louisa third. I think that is why he felt compelled to speak. I am sure there were more like him too.

    here and there. • Since Nov 2007 • 6796 posts Report Reply

  • Gareth Ward, in reply to DexterX,

    Yes - I looked at what was prohibited under the Marriage Act and couldn't find anything - I would be interested to know the specific nature of same sex marriage being prohibited.

    Asked this question previously - it was tested through the courts, and they ruled the intent of Parliament in the Marriage Act was for it to be man/woman only. Hence this amendment is just explicitly stating Parliament's intent as to who it applies to. Forget the name of the case sorry...

    Auckland, NZ • Since Mar 2007 • 1727 posts Report Reply

  • Emma Hart, in reply to Paul Williams,

    Incidentally, what did others make of Suo William Sio's contribution?

    He stood up, and a friend and I simultaneously tweeted, "Uh-oh."

    I found most of it weak. I found his framing himself and his community as victims who might get "called names"... ironic? Mildly offensive? I think he could have made his position clear without that.

    As far as rhetorical content went, I was most impressed with Nikki Kaye's speech. She quite deliberately invoked her party's history, its activists, even Ronald Reagan, to show that being pro-marriage equality was a sensible, traditional right-wing position. It was a hugely clever speech.

    Christchurch • Since Nov 2006 • 4650 posts Report Reply

  • Gareth Ward, in reply to Gareth Ward,

    Forget the name of the case sorry...

    Wait found it, c/o Kyle Matthews: "The case is Quilter v Attorney-General (Court of Appeal in 1997, reported in 1998 I think)"

    Auckland, NZ • Since Mar 2007 • 1727 posts Report Reply

  • Emma Hart, in reply to Sofie Bribiesca,

    and he will be voted out if he went against them

    Sofie, if Labour didn't de-select him and he stood again in Mangere, you think that electorate would vote against Labour, on this single issue? Here are the results from last time so you can calculate the swing.

    Christchurch • Since Nov 2006 • 4650 posts Report Reply

  • Russell Brown, in reply to Emma Hart,

    It was a hugely clever speech.

    I was a fine speech. And not just for its intelligent framing of marriage equality in conservative terms (I was thinking of Craig for most of it). At one point she gulped with emotion. She meant it and it showed.

    Auckland • Since Nov 2006 • 22756 posts Report Reply

  • Russell Brown, in reply to Keir Leslie,

    Winston’s stance on this is super scummy.

    What a jerk. Easily the low point of the debate.

    Auckland • Since Nov 2006 • 22756 posts Report Reply

  • DexterX, in reply to Gareth Ward,

    The case is Quilter v Attorney-General

    Here is the NZ Law Report summary - which is a part of why we find oursleves where we are today:

    http://www.equalrightstrust.org/ertdocumentbank/Quilter%20v.pdf.

    It is "peculiar" that in the operation of law that for same gender couples to exercise the benefit of the rights guranteed to all people under the Human Rights Act and Bill of Rights Act - in realtion to a Marriage act that did not exclude them or define marraige - there needs to be further legislation.

    The legislation, will further define what consists a marriage, and should pass.

    Auckland • Since Nov 2006 • 1224 posts Report Reply

  • Sofie Bribiesca, in reply to Emma Hart,

    Well maybe not but the church from his area went straight onto tv to say he is warned. Maybe he got a fright. In my short time on this planet I have discovered that many people I come across are pretty conservative. I don't understand why but that's just me, lots of people sit on the fence. some leap over it and others hide in its shadow. I doubt our politicians are any different.

    here and there. • Since Nov 2007 • 6796 posts Report Reply

  • DexterX,

    Auckland • Since Nov 2006 • 1224 posts Report Reply

  • Emma Hart, in reply to Sofie Bribiesca,

    Well maybe not but the church from his area went straight onto tv to say he is warned.

    I don't doubt it. Nor that their opposition, and his, is perfectly genuine. What I'm not buying is the idea that this will cost Labour Mangere, or indeed "seats".

    Christchurch • Since Nov 2006 • 4650 posts Report Reply

  • Keir Leslie,

    To be honest Sio could be discovered to actually be a goat and would still win Mangere. Hell he could be a goat, die the week before polling, and provided everybody knew he was the Labour dead goat he'd win Mangere.

    Since Jul 2008 • 1452 posts Report Reply

First ←Older Page 1 3 4 5 6 7 8 Newer→ Last

Post your response…

Please sign in using your Public Address credentials…

Login

You may also create an account or retrieve your password.