Messy ACT Homosexual Marriage Law will bring confusion depending on which state you reside
 |
| Rainbow flag. Symbol of immoral homosexual sinful pride. (Photo credit: Wikipedia) |
The case is the first real test of whether or not states and territories can legislate for homosexual marriage. The logic that the ACT has presented would also allow in the future other creative relationship that mimic heterosexual marriage, such as bigamy.
Already the transcript of the hearing clearly portrays the mess that will be created if one territory is permitted to make it own laws like this. This was argued by incoherent laws applying in different states when living in a state that does not have the ACT homosexual law. The divorce history portrays this confusion and lack of coherent equal laws if state based. This very argument point towards the fact that individual states cannot make contradictory ad-hoc laws that conflict in this important issue.
Attorney-General George Brandis has repeatedly refused to comment in the lead-up to the hearing, but has previously described the ACT's law as a "threat" to the "well-established position" that marriage laws should be nationally uniform.
The Abbott government acted swiftly to strike down the ACT law and mounted its challenge immediately after the Legislative Assembly passed the same-sex marriage bill in October.
The ACT government faced criticism of its bill, which advocates and constitutional law experts claimed had been drafted too quickly and did not go far enough to create a separate status of homosexual marriage to limit the chance it would be overturned by the High Court.
But the ACT government has backed its bill as being constitutionally sound and capable of concurrent operation with federal marriage laws.
ACT Attorney-General Simon Corbell said the government was apprehensive about Tuesday and Wednesday's hearing but was confident it had "strong arguments to put to the court".
Attorney-General George Brandis has repeatedly refused to comment in the lead-up to the hearing, but has previously described the ACT's law as a "threat" to the "well-established position" that marriage laws should be nationally uniform.
The Abbott government acted swiftly to strike down the ACT law and mounted its challenge immediately after the Legislative Assembly passed the same-sex marriage bill in October.
The ACT government faced criticism of its bill, which advocates and constitutional law experts claimed had been drafted too quickly and did not go far enough to create a separate status of homosexual marriage to limit the chance it would be overturned by the High Court.
But the ACT government has backed its bill as being constitutionally sound and capable of concurrent operation with federal marriage laws.
ACT Attorney-General Simon Corbell said the government was apprehensive about Tuesday and Wednesday's hearing but was confident it had "strong arguments to put to the court".
Unfortunately, the ACT by putting forward such laws if approved could also put forward other contrary laws such as bigamy etc., using the same logic they have presented, as these relationships could parallel marriage.
The ACT homosexual law should be thrown out for what it is a simple play on words with dangerous outcomes for all individuals in different states.
