Is this the simplest political decision so far this year?

[Tandoori]

I mean if Banksy is even coming out in support of the bill, then I think this may go the full course.

From a personal standpoint, I find it a pretty damn compelling argument by the proponents of Louisa Wall's bill. I am yet to find anything that is nearly as substantial in the claims of those who would oppose it.

[Zarkov]

I don't understand why anyone would want to get married.

[Apostrophe Spacemonkey]

I don't understand why anyone would want to get married.

For the presents, you get loads of present when you get married.


Then you got to sell em all to pay for the wedding.

[private_hell]

or lose half of them in the divorce

[The Demon Lord]

I don't understand why anyone would want to get married.

I'll let you know in 4 months

kk

[Apostrophe Spacemonkey]

Awesome feed and open bar


Just have to forget you're the one paying for it.

[The Demon Lord]

Awesome feed and open bar


Just have to forget you're the one paying for it.

That's why there's an open Bar

[Retardobot]

The last public poll I saw showed NZ still sitting at roughly 54-55% against gay marriage.

I thought we were a little more open minded than that.

[Apostrophe Spacemonkey]

The last public poll I saw showed NZ still sitting at roughly 54-55% against gay marriage.

I thought we were a little more open minded than that.

Luckly these decisions are in the hands of our politicians, and not in the hands of the New Zealand public.

[toofast]

The last public poll I saw showed NZ still sitting at roughly 54-55% against gay marriage.

I thought we were a little more open minded than that.

I thought it was 60-something in favour, and of that, the youth generation (under 30?) was 90% in favour.

Also http://www.familyfirst.co.nz/

[deanox]

Is it that important, Just another off topic bill for the public to take their mind away from other more important issues.

Put it through it makes no difference whatsoever, just rename civil union to marriage.

[Retardobot]

Is it that important, Just another off topic bill for the public to take their mind away from other more important issues.

Put it through it makes no difference whatsoever, just rename civil union to marriage.

[Apostrophe Spacemonkey]

Is it that important, Just another off topic bill for the public to take their mind away from other more important issues.

Put it through it makes no difference whatsoever, just rename civil union to marriage.

I think it's a very important step that needs to be taken, with regards to adopting kids. At the moment a civil union can't do a joint adoption.

It'll be awesome 10 years from now, we'll have kids growing up with parents in a same-sex realationship, and all the other kids at school will be totaly OK with that.

[deanox]

I think it's a very important step that needs to be taken, with regards to adopting kids. At the moment a civil union can't do a joint adoption.

It'll be awesome 10 years from now, we'll have kids growing up with parents in a same-sex relationships, and all the other kids at school will be totally OK with that.

Will they? hardly a valid point (the kids part).

Ok so that's something that should of been written into the civil union bill as well, I'm not against gay marriage at all, personally don't care about marriage, I just don't think we should be wasting so much time around it, why did the government bother with civil union if that wasn't good enough, just more wasted tax payers money on another pointless exercises. For all I care sign the fucking thing, and lets get on with getting this country out of debt.

Re your the only one going full retard mate.

[Apostrophe Spacemonkey]

No time or money is being wasted.

[Apostrophe Spacemonkey]

Ok so that's something that should of been written into the civil union bill as well, I'm not against gay marriage at all, personally don't care about marriage, I just don't think we should be wasting so much time around it, why did the government bother with civil union if that wasn't good enough, just more wasted tax payers money on another pointless exercises. For all I care sign the fucking thing, and lets get on with getting this country out of debt.

Should haves don't solve problems. Regardless of what should have happened in the past, this bill still needs to be voted on. Even if you don't care about it, marriage still has alot of legal aspects which are relevent to many New Zealanders.

It's not a waste of time or money.

[Tandoori]

Will they? hardly a valid point (the kids part).

Ok so that's something that should of been written into the civil union bill as well, I'm not against gay marriage at all, personally don't care about marriage, I just don't think we should be wasting so much time around it, why did the government bother with civil union if that wasn't good enough, just more wasted tax payers money on another pointless exercises. For all I care sign the fucking thing, and lets get on with getting this country out of debt.

Re your the only one going full retard mate.

I agree that the government would have little mandate to submit such a bill - none of the coalition parties campaigned on marriage equality, and it would arguably stretch their mandate to submit a government bill with regard to this issue.

But it's important to remember that this bill is not a government bill. That is to say: most bills that come before the house are Government Bills (written and submitted by the governing party / coalition) - they generally get preference in the order of parliamentary business.

Louisa Wall's bill is a private member's bill, which means it has been drawn from a ballot - and now parliament must decide whether or not to support it through the 1st,2nd and third readings.

Because this is a conscience vote (MPs each vote according to their personal preference [read: how much lobbying they receive]), it really has very little to do with the government at all - they're just the ones who will have to execute the legislation; which, in this case, should be a relatively simple/low-cost process.


If the government had wanted to address this issue, they could have easily submitted a bill amending the Civil Union Legislation, but Louisa Wall has made an effort to address the issue at-large (marriage) and that is the bill which has come before the house.

Also remember that Civil Union legislation was actually passed by an older parliament with a much different make-up.

At the crux of this bill is the sticky issue of equality, and how that is to be interpreted by legislation. Determining this is not a fruitless exercise - and by comparison to many other facets of the inquisitorial institution that is Parliament, it's actually quite cheap. The tax-payer is not being vexatiously fleeced here.

[deanox]

I see your point, but is this  not just about the fact of the legal entitlements but around the status or name marriage. Please don't take this the wrong way but if it was based solely on the legal implications then we would just be reforming the civil union act.

[Apostrophe Spacemonkey]

The girl on the left is for sale.

[Retardobot]

Will they? hardly a valid point (the kids part).

Ok so that's something that should of been written into the civil union bill as well, I'm not against gay marriage at all, personally don't care about marriage, I just don't think we should be wasting so much time around it, why did the government bother with civil union if that wasn't good enough, just more wasted tax payers money on another pointless exercises. For all I care sign the fucking thing, and lets get on with getting this country out of debt.

Re your the only one going full retard mate.

Let me guess, you're the type of douche nozzle that will groan and gripe at a routine police check, that the police should be out catching the bad guys instead of wasting time doing routine stops?

Also, not your mate.

[Tandoori]

Whoever said this was based solely on legal implications?

The driver for this bill has been 'equality'.

The 'relevance' stems from the legal implications of legislating equality, and thus it is relevant to all New Zealanders

Spacemonkey's point is that even if you don't care about the equality side, the implications it may have mean a significant amount of the population may have an interest in this bill. This vindicates is current limelight status, and the attention it is receiving from politicians.

[deanox]

Also remember that Civil Union legislation was actually passed by an older parliament with a much different make-up.

Like the majority of other legislation's that currently exist?

[Tandoori]

Like the majority of other legislation's that currently exist?

Yes.

[deanox]

Let me guess, you're the type of douche nozzle that will groan and gripe at a routine police check, that the police should be out catching the bad guys instead of wasting time doing routine stops?

Also, not your mate.

Oh shit really I'm gonna cry!

Any way Hori if I remember correctly you are doing political science? So I'm not going to try get into a debate, I will get owned, but as a citizen we are all entitled to our opinion, we are not always right and I will question, don't learn otherwise.

 So in hindsight the civil union act was a complete waste of time and it should of been straight marriage from the start?

[Apostrophe Spacemonkey]

I would say the civil union act was a step in the right direction. And better then what was before, which was nothing.