Mike Freelander (Macarthur, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Hansard source

There has been a lot of hot air expressed in the last few days about this bill, the Marriage Amendment (Definition and Religious Freedoms) Bill 2017. I'm a conservative 64-year-old doctor who's been married to his wife for 38 years and who really feels that this is a human rights issue. I fundamentally believe that sexuality is biologically determined. On that premise and that premise alone, I believe that marriage equality is a human rights issue and that we need to pass this bill without amendment.

I have seen many, many children in my career as a paediatrician. I never judged them on their possible sexuality and I never believed that any child should be treated differently to another. This bill is about whether we as Australians and as members of parliament believe that all Australians are equal. In fact, the Australian Human Rights Commission considers that 'the fundamental human rights principle of equality means that civil marriage should be available, without discrimination, to all couples, regardless of sex, sexual orientation or gender identity'. It just isn't right that we effectively persecute a proportion of our population based on their sexuality. To not afford same-sex couples the same rights as those that are heterosexual is effectively saying that their relationship is not equal, that their love is not equal and that their commitment to one another is somehow less significant than others—and I don't believe that that should happen. We shouldn't be judging people on their sexuality.

It was, indeed, a joyous day when it was announced that the majority of Australians voted to allow all Australian couples of the same sex to have the same rights to a recognised civil marriage. It was a day on which Australians proved to this government and the world that we believe in equality. I didn't believe that the postal survey was the right thing to do and I still do believe that it did a lot of damage. I apologise to the many people who felt harmed by this—and there, indeed, were a number.

It really is time to move away from the misconceptions that are still being proposed by many people who oppose marriage equality. These misconceptions include things like 'being gay is a choice' or that it can be taught and untaught. As a paediatrician for nearly 40 years, I and the research can assure you it's biology. It's nothing other than biology. The notion that a person can somehow choose their sexual orientation is not only abhorrent; it's scientifically and medically disproved. One only has to look at the recent research into the genetics and biology of siblings, and indeed twins, who identify as LGBTIQ to see that there is clear evidence that suggests that genes and biology have the major role to play in an individual's sexuality. I really think some of the arguments that are being proposed are not only spurious; they're nasty; they're small-minded. They do not really deal with reality and it's time to dispel them. There's no connection between marriage equality and Safe Schools programs and things like this. There's no relationship. We are voting to allow people who love each other to get married. I have been married, as I said, for 38 years, going on for 39 years. Why should I deny that to any couple who love each other? We just shouldn't.

We cannot underestimate the harm that's been caused to individuals in the LGBTIQ community, who have had the nation discuss whether or not they are equal members of our society, and to the same-sex families and the children of these families, who've been told their families are unnatural and wrong. It's just not right. As a paediatrician, I have seen children from all different family make-ups. I can assure you that the only real thing that's important to children is that they are loved. In fact, it's the discrimination that we've seen, and continue to see, which is harmful to children, not that they have parents who are of the same sex.

Research conducted by many paediatric groups has confirmed that children raised in families with same-sex partners do as well emotionally, socially and educationally as children raised by heterosexual parents. The rubbish that's been said to the contrary is really enough to make me despair sometimes. Most of my child health colleagues have come out against the misinformation that's being circulated. Professor Frank Oberklaid, of the Murdoch Children's Research Institute, the most revered developmental paediatrician in Australia, has continuously stated that it's essential that we recognise the potential that the debate that we've just had about marriage equality has to cause harm. We saw mental health organisations, AIDS organisations and LGBTIQ organisations being inundated by requests for mental health support throughout the postal survey, and we continue to deal with the targeted abuse that was put out by some people during this campaign.

A number of organisations have been calling for this matter to be resolved in a far more efficient and effective manner in parliament. My own Australian Medical Association has come out in support of marriage equality. In fact, the President of the AMA, Dr Michael Gannon, stated:

There are ongoing, damaging effects of having a prolonged, divisive, public debate—

about marriage equality—

and the AMA urges the Australian Parliament to legislate for marriage equality to resolve this.

Coming into this place last year, perhaps naively, I believed that the function of the members of this chamber was to make choices on behalf of those we represent. I think that the marriage equality survey really was a denial by this parliament of what it should be doing. What became clear to me throughout the process is that the current government is lacking leadership and backbone, but I'm not going to say anything more about this. I do not believe that this is an issue owned by the Labor Party or owned by the Liberal Party or National Party or by other parties. This is evidenced by the wonderful work of people like Dean Smith, Penny Wong, Louise Pratt, Trevor Evans, Trent Zimmerman, Tim Wilson, Julian Hill and, I think most of all, Warren Entsch.

Thankfully, the Australian people have led in this debate, and they've called out loudly and clearly for equality. Today, and over the next day or so, we'll be making history and legislating for same-sex marriage equality. We will have a bill that deals with basic human rights. We will be giving rights to a community that for too long have had their rights as people, as Australians and as parents questioned. That has been very, very wrong.

I am very glad that we'll have marriage equality. It's long after time. I congratulate all those who've worked so hard for this to happen, but I am also sorry. I am sorry that we have put a whole lot of people through questioning of their sexuality, of their relationships and of their families. I think that has been a very bad thing. I don't think any political party is particularly to blame for that, but I do think the process could have been handled in a much better way. I look forward to having marriage equality in Australia and I will celebrate the fact. I'm glad to put my name to this debate, but I won't be happy until we have marriage equality. And I'll also be happy to see Trent Zimmerman stop smoking!

See this speech in context