Doug Cameron (NSW, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Minister for Human Services) Share this | Hansard source

I welcome the opportunity, once again, to stand in this chamber and express my support for marriage equality in this country. I respect the contributions that have been made by each of the speakers before me here today, but I must say I am not persuaded by the arguments from Senator O'Sullivan or Senator Williams in relation to marriage. Just for the record, when Senator Williams was saying that no-one in Inverell would talk to him about marriage equality, I interjected, 'No gays in the village!' Well, there would certainly be gays in Inverell; there would certainly be gays in Tamworth; there would be gay, lesbian and transgender people in most country towns around this nation.

My interest in this area is not of long standing, not like some of the debates that have been going on in here for a long time. When I became a senator just over six years ago, I received a telephone call from one of my constituents in Greystanes, in the western suburbs of Sydney. That constituent was a woman with a gay son who pleaded with me to give her son the right to marry. She put to me her son's history—being brought up and educated in a public school in the western suburbs of Sydney, facing homophobic ridicule and violence. It was heartbreaking to listen to what had happened to that individual Australian.

I then had another such encounter when I was in Albury-Wodonga for a committee hearing. A middle-aged man approached me when I was having a cup of tea at the local cafe. He recognised me and he said, 'Hello, I just wanted to indicate to you that there's this debate about marriage equality. I'm gay, I've lived in Albury-Wodonga all of my life, I've suffered all this discrimination; I've got a partner, I've been in a relationship for over 10 years, I would like you to support my right to marry my partner.' This reinforced my views that discrimination has no place in this country—absolutely no place.

I understand the position that Senator O'Sullivan is putting, but I vehemently disagree with some of the conclusions that he has come to. You see, I am an atheist. I do not believe in God. And I think what has been missed out in this debate is the role of the church in trying to deny some of our fellow Australians equal rights in this country.

I received some correspondence from the Most Reverend Anthony Fisher. He is the Archbishop of Sydney, in the Catholic Church. I did not ask him to write to me, but he wrote to me anyway. He wrote to me about the proposed vote on same-sex marriage. At the top of the letter, under what must be the insignia of the Archbishop of Sydney, there is the line 'Speaking the truth in love'. The letter goes on to tell me that the debate we are having is 'in the context of the Irish referendum'. Well, Archbishop Fisher, the debate is not in the context of the Irish referendum. The debate is in the context of human rights. The debate is about people having access to the same rights as others in this country. It is not about what happens in Ireland. It is not about what happens in Spain. It is about what happens in Australia and the need for everyone in Australia to have the same rights.

The last time we had this debate, I remember being told about the 'sanctity' of marriage—again, putting marriage in a religious context—and that you are not really married unless you have a marriage sanctified by the church. That is a load of tosh. That is not correct. It does not apply to many, many millions of people in this country, and nor does the proposition that you marry to procreate, that you marry to have children. That does not apply to many, many people in this country. For medical reasons, for reasons of choice, these are issues that do not enter the heads of some Australians who are married.

It is my view that we should remove one of the last vestiges of discrimination against gay, lesbian and transgender people—that is, we should give them the right to marry someone they love. In the archbishop's letter about marriage, it says:

The Christian tradition teaches that every human being is a unique and irreplaceable person, created in the image of God and loved by him.

Well, Archbishop, if God loves a gay Australian, if God loves a transgender Australian, if God loves a lesbian Australian, why can't those Australians marry if they love each other? I just cannot understand the hypocrisy from the church on this matter. It is not everyone in organised churches around Australia who takes this view, but some do to the extent that you have got the Catholic Church writing to me and writing to the other politicians basically trying to stop changes that provide human rights to all Australians. I do not see that as the role for the church. I do not have a problem with people being religious; that is their right. But their religion should not end up forcing a view on me or on society that is wrong.

The view that the church takes, that you must be heterosexual and that you must procreate before you can have a marriage under the sacraments, in my view is nonsense. I do not accept it, and I cannot understand it. If people in the Catholic Church, or people in any religion, want to maintain their traditions, their sacraments, their views on marriage, no-one wants to disturb that. Senator Williams raised the straw man about churches being forced to marry gay couples. Churches will marry gay couples in Australia, let me tell you that. Eventually that will happen, but no-one will force them to do it. The legislation that is before the House of Representatives does not do that; what it does is basically provide rights to people who deserve the same rights as everyone else.

I just cannot accept the proposition that the separation of church and state that we should have in this country should not apply when it comes to people's right to marriage. It should apply. There should be a separation of church and state. I come in here for prayers every morning when the Senate is sitting. I do not pray, because I am an atheist, but the tradition is that you come to pray. It is a tradition that, if we are real about the separation of church and state, we should get rid of. But that is the tradition, and I come—I do not pray, but I come here for the ceremony and for the tradition.

But marriage is not a tradition. It is not a ceremony that has stayed the same over centuries. Marriage was used to gain social status. Marriage was used to stop wars. Marriage was used for many things that had nothing to do with people's religious beliefs or people's traditions, and we now hear about this inviolable position of marriage—well it is not true. Marriage changes constantly and traditions change constantly. I simply want a tradition in this country where if gay people want to marry they can marry. Senator O'Sullivan talks about being married for 32 years. I think that is a great thing. I have been married for 44 years. My marriage is not inferior to anyone else's marriage because I did not get married in a church. My marriage is not inferior because it was not done under sacraments. My marriage has been for 44 years and it is a marriage based on love. I have the right to a marriage based on love, and that should be the right of every Australian.

I support the proposition that this parliament, both the Senate and the House of Representatives, should deal with this issue. We should not run away from it and say there has got to be a plebiscite. The rules have always been there that we can change it, and we should change it for the better. We should change it so that every Australian is treated equally, so that every Australian is treated fairly and so that every Australian has the same right as everyone else, and that means that they should have the right to marry whether they are gay or lesbian. That is what I support, and the sooner we do it, the sooner we will become a mature country, recognising the human rights of all of our citizens.