In this editorial, the Age supports marriage equality and argues for a conscience vote:
Federal Labor is agonising over a bill that would end ministerial vetoes of laws passed by the territories. The democratic case is clear: governments elected by voters in the Northern Territory and ACT should not be subject to arbitrary powers of veto. Despite professions of concern about constitutional anomalies (what of anomalies between the rights of state and territory voters to have laws that reflect their views?), the real fear is that the bill opens the door to same-sex marriage and euthanasia legislation.
This, too, is an issue of representative democracy. The House of Representatives is elected to represent the balance of views and values of voters. This principle of representation applies to all tiers of government and to individual electorates. The result may dismay a federal government when a territory passes laws that reflect its voters’ more progressive views. Prime Minister Julia Gillard’s predecessor, Kevin Rudd, and the Coalition’s John Howard both vetoed such territory legislation.
Ms Gillard insists on limiting marriage to the union of a man and a woman, but not because she holds traditional religious beliefs. It is more likely she wishes to avoid further political difficulties. Being in minority government, which has to allow more private members’ bills, has upset that strategy. The Greens introduced a bill to the upper house that would give same-sex couples equal marriage rights. Last November, the lower house passed a motion calling on MPs ”to gauge their constituents’ views on ways to achieve equal treatment for same-sex couples, including marriage”. The ACT has twice legislated to recognise civil unions between same-sex couples and would go further if it could. In March, after the ALP caucus agreed to support the bill increasing territories’ autonomy, a right-wing revolt forced the bill to be referred to a Senate committee.
For the full article, click here