IN the 1990s, when a challenge was brought to the New Zealand Court of Appeal under their Bill of Rights Act by two women, contending that an interpretation of the Marriage Act discriminated against them impermissibly on the ground of their sexual orientation, by denying them access to marriage, I reacted adversely to the dissenting view of judge Ted Thomas.
He held that the women had indeed suffered discrimination and that the New Zealand parliament should address the issue. In due course, the parliament of New Zealand did this, enacting civil unions. The fact that, at the time, I did not see the issues as Justice Thomas did shows that in such matters, the minds of everyone, heterosexual as well as homosexual, are on a journey. When new ideas are presented, they sometimes take time for absorption by everyone.
