by David H. Lane
Challenge Weekly
Vol. 58 Iss. 42 November 7, 2000, p. 9
The new Property (Relationships) Amendment Bill which replaces the Matrimonial Property Act (1976) was introduced into Parliament on 31 October following the release of a select committee report on the proposed Bill. The report documents overwhelming opposition (81.5%) to the proposed legislation.
The Committee, chaired by practising homosexual Labour MP, Tim Barnett, examined the Bill together with a Supplementary Order Paper [SOP 25] which proposed the removal of the terms "wife", "husband", "spouse", and "marriage", from the principal Act, replacing them with "partner" and "partnership relationship". The SOP 25 which has been seen by critics as "radical" and "anti-marriage", was a Government drafted "add on" to the Matrimonial Property Amendment Bill which had been introduced by the National Party when it held office.
The major change proposed in SOP 25 is the extension of property rights granted to married couples under the principal Act of 1976, to include all de facto couples who have lived in a relationship "in the nature of marriage" for a period of at least three years, both same-sex and heterosexual couples.
The Ministry of Justice advised the committee that it could find no other country in the world that had grouped marriage, same-sex and de facto relationships under one piece of legislation (p. 35). The report shows that of the "1631 submissions received from interested groups and individuals" 81.5 % [1330] were opposed to the "major change [of] extend[ing] the principal Act to cover de facto couples, both heterosexual and same-sex." (pp. 5, 45).
The committee's recommendation that all references to "spouse," "husband", "wife" and "marriage" (removed under SOP 25), be reinserted into the Bill, a reinsertion called for by way of 79 petitions, representing 3650 signatories (p. 6), is commendable, but is mere window dressing. As the National and Act Minority Report notes "the changes are only cosmetic and symbolic. All relationships still go into the same mould." (p. 36).
Mr David Lane, President of the Wellington Christian Apologetics Society (Inc.), commented in a press release (31 October):
"In reinstating such terms as "marriage" the Government has handed down a mere sop to the 81.5% of submitters opposed to the major change proposed by SOP 25 and smugly applauded itself for its so-called conciliatory response to massive public opposition. The changes provide only a Pyrrhic victory for those who may naively think that preserving such terms as "marriage" puts a block to the Labour/Alliance led Government's relentless drive to bring in legislation legalising same-sex 'marriage' and the adoption of children by same-sex couples."
Such laws have just been passed by the Dutch Government, through the influence of the powerful homosexual lobby, and take effect early next year. State laws have recently taken effect in Vermont giving 'rights' to lesbians and homosexuals to be legally 'married'. It is well known that the Prime Minister, Rt. Hon. Helen Clark, is personally committed to giving legal recognition to same-sex 'marriages'.
|