GAY TRUTH

It is hugely concerning that the politicians failed to grasp some critical consequences of changing the definition of marriage . There was virtually no discussion in the 2nd Reading about the major impact on adoption laws that this bill will have. Changes to adoption are being 'snuck under the door', yet the changes will be weakening the rights of the child in favour of pandering to the demands of adults. The politicians are also failing to comprehend that the bill as proposed will coerce those with a conscientious objection to same-sex 'marriage' to solemnise them against their conscience. This includes all independent marriage celebrants and marriage registrars who perform almost 70% of marriages, and potentially some ministers and celebrants from approved organisations. What the promoters of the bill say, and what the bill actually offers, are two very distinct and separate things. The Select Committee process has been shameful as they have attempted to ram this

Family First NZ is calling on politicians to treat any changes to the Adoption Act as distinct and separate from the current debate on redefining marriage. "Significant changes to adoption laws should not happen without appropriate debate and consideration. Changes are being sneaked in under the radar and many people are unaware that changes to the Marriage Act will automatically confer rights to same sex couples to adopt ," said Bob McCoskrie, National Director of Family First NZ. "The Select Committee report spent very little time discussing the issue of adoption - yet it has huge ramifications for the children involved. There is no need to overhaul the current law because the Adoption Act isn't broken. There is no huge queue of children desperately waiting to be adopted. There is no shortage of suitable married couples wanting to adopt." " Same sex couple and single parent adoption where there is no biological connection and surrogacy pot

A Legal Opinion obtained by Family First NZ from Barrister Ian Bassett has labeled the conscientious exemption proposed by the Select Committee Report on the same-sex marriage bill as 'unprincipled and wrong', 'misguided', 'unjustifiably discriminatory', and 'based upon flawed legal advice'. "The Report of the Government Administration Select Committee states: 'It is our intention that the passage of this bill should not impact negatively upon people's religious freedoms… The bill seeks to extend the legal right to marry to same-sex couples; it does not seek to interfere with people's religious freedoms.' Yet the Legal Opinion clearly explains that 'the advice of the Crown Law Office and the Ministry of Justice and the resultant recommendation of the Select Committee will interfere with people's rights to act according to their beliefs and conscience'", says Bob McCoskrie, National Director of Family Firs

A poll of New Zealanders has found that only 47% now believe that Parliament should change the definition of marriage, and 43% believe that civil unions are sufficient for same sex couples . The poll also found strong support for laws protecting celebrants, churches and schools if the law is still pushed through. Almost half of NZ 'ers believe there should be a Referendum on the issue. In the poll of 1,000 people undertaken by Curia Market Research this month, respondents were asked: "In 2004, Parliament legislated to allow same sex couples to register a civil union, amending over 150 pieces of legislation to give legal rights and recognition to same-sex couples. Do you think Parliament should change the definition of marriage to allow same-sex couples to marry, or do you think civil unions are sufficient for same sex couples?" Only 47% said that Parliament should change the definition of marriage to allow same-sex couples to marry and 43% said they believed