Australia's largest stock trading and investment forum Australia's #1 stock forum

Apart from any possible financial reasons why would any "normal"...

First 3 Last

Share
Profile

Follow
kingpins

25,600 Posts.

32

07/12/17

09:55

Post #: 29442410
Share

Originally posted by Hairyback ↑

Smith Exposes the Bill and Turnbulls lies.

Smith exposes the appalling and frightening full extent of Dean Smith's same-sex marriage bill. This is not what the Australian people voted for in the postal survey.

It's not just same sex marriage - it's LBGTQI etc

The objective of the Bill is remove the restrictions that limit marriage in Australia to the union of a man and a woman, and to allow two people the freedom to marry in Australia, regardless of their sex or gender.
To achieve this, the Bill amends the Marriage Act 1961 to allow all couples to marry and to have their marriages recognised regardless of their sex, sexual orientation, gender identity or intersex status.
The term ‘same-sex marriage’ should be read to include a marriage of two people regardless of their sex or gender, where the union is not that of a man and a woman.
Same-sex couples and people who are legally recognised as neither a man or a woman will be able to marry and have their foreign marriages recognised under Australian law. For example, this would include an intersex person who is legally recognised as both male and female and a gender diverse person who is legally recognised as having a non-specific gender.
Marriage celebrants cannot refuse to marry people on religious grounds

State and territory officers and ‘civil’ marriage celebrants (who are not religious marriage celebrants) may not refuse to solemnise marriages on religious grounds. All marriage celebrants registered after this Act commences are required, as agents of the Commonwealth, to uphold the definition of marriage under the Marriage Act without discrimination.
Any new marriage celebrant registered after the Bill commences will not be identified as a religious marriage celebrant unless they are a minister of religion. The Bill recognises that ‘civil’ marriage celebrants are authorised to perform a function on behalf of the state and should be required to uphold Commonwealth law.
Defence Force Chaplains replaced with secular officers

(The bill will) enable the Chief of the Defence Force to authorise an officer (as defined by the Defence Act 1903) other than a chaplain to be an authorised celebrant. The inclusion of officers will ensure that Defence Force members, including those on deployment overseas, will have a non-religious option to have their marriage solemnised by a marriage officer, including where a chaplain declines to solemnise their marriage.

A new Registrar established to take "disciplinary action" against religious marriage celebrants

Items 10, 11, 12 and 14 establish administrative procedures for a Registrar to identify a person as a religious marriage celebrant, suspend or remove identification as a religious marriage celebrant, take disciplinary measures against religious marriage celebrants or notify religious marriage celebrants of their identification status.

"Spouse" and "Spouse"

Item 18 amends the monitum by adding the gender neutral term ‘spouse’ to existing terms ‘husband or wife’. This amendment will enable marrying couples to word their marriage vows in a manner that best reflects their relationship. 42. Item 19 amends the monitum to reflect the updated definition of marriage in this Bill. 43. These amendments ensure that people who are legally recognised other than male or female can use the gender neutral term ‘spouse’ to be accurately described in their wedding vows.

Florists, bakers and photographers cannot refuse LGBTQI "spouses" on conscientious grounds

The Bill does not propose any new carve-outs from discrimination law for individuals in relation to lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender or intersex people. For example, a taxi driver, florist, baker or photographer who does not work for a body established for religious purposes cannot lawfully refuse to drive a person to a wedding reception, provide flowers, prepare a wedding cake or take photographs at a wedding ceremony on the basis of their religious or other beliefs about marriage.

"Husband and wife" out - replaced with "Two People"

Item 65—The Schedule (table item 1 of Part III) 91. This item amends ‘a husband and wife’ to ‘two people’ in The Schedule

In summary

We were asked if we wanted to change the law to allow same sex couples to marry.
We're getting something very, very different.
And we have Turnbull to thank for it.

http://www.michaelsmithnews.com/201...amazed-at-how-much-further-the-bill-goes.html

Expand

Apart from any possible financial reasons why would any "normal" man and women bother to get legally married in the future.

Is this the end of christian marriage now in Australia and are we going to have an influx of "migrants" coming here to take advantage of the new gay society that Australia has become
23 Upvote

Reply

Top Stories

Earnings wrap Monday Week 34: A2 Milk, Bluescope, Suncorp's climate woes & more

ASX Market Open: Australian market to rise on US rally, S&P 500 and Nasdaq continue winning streak

SMI

Gold intercept of 8.6 g/t continues the positive storyline for Santana at NZ's RAS deposit

Good habits matters when it comes to finances

PR1

Fourfold skarn increase points the way to viable garnet project, says Pure

There are more pages in this discussion • 317 more messages in this thread...

First 3 Last