Homosexuality In Australia

What is right and what is wrong? People around the world have different opinions on this

Upholding human rights is essential for ensuring a fair and equitable society. In 1966, Australia and a majority of the world’s nations signed on to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR). After the atrocities committed in World War II this seemed like a positive step for ensuring acknowledgement and respect for the rights and freedoms of all people. However, the means of enforcing human rights is not a straightforward process. In response to ratifying the ICCPR, Australia set up the Australian Human Rights Commission. However, after a number of failed attempts, it has not followed through with implementing a

Australia is now the only Western democracy without a bill of rights. Its law-makers have consistently declined to introduce a bill of rights, either legislative or constitutional. Recently, in 2009, the Australian Government commissioned the most extensive consultation on human rights issues in Australia’s history – and then flatly rejected the consultation committee’s recommendation that a Human Rights Act be introduced. To observers in Europe – where courtesy of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR), human rights are woven deeply into the fabric of governance- Australia’s position may be surprising, even perplexing. Why is Australia so isolated from the global trend towards introducing human rights-specific legislation? – David Kinley & Christine Ernst

The definition of marriage has changed over time. At the beginning of the nineteenth century, the United States defined marriage as a union between a consenting man and woman, of non-African decent (Stahlberg, 2008, p. 443). This, however, changed after the civil war. In 1868 two consenting adults of opposite gender could marry someone of the same race, but this was also restructured in 1967 to allow marriage of all consenting adults of opposite genders regardless of race (Stahlberg, 2008, p. 443). Today, the law looks very different. Recently, on June 26, 2015, the Supreme Court ruled that same-sex couples have the right to marriage (gay marriage, 2015).

The Australian Government, unlike many liberal democracy countries, has no Bill of Rights, instead we have a constitution. This is a document stating the laws of Australia and the way our government must run. A Bill of Rights would positively enforce new, and re-instated laws to protect the rights of Australian people.

However, although their rights were recognised starting from 1900s, some argue that it is insufficient as Australia does not has a ‘Bill of Rights’ and the Constitution is not a document which focus on human rights (Bailey 2008; Owen 2010). Despites of the claims, there is no need for the Australian government to have a ‘Bill of Right’ as the third element of Rule of Law already ensures the protection of human rights and natural justice. Plus, having a ‘Bill of Rights’ means that it will be likely subjected to High Court’s interpretation and will not guarantee protection of human rights.

"When any society says that I cannot marry a certain person, that society has cut off a segment of my freedom." - Martin Luther King Jr, 1958. This provocative statement, in reference to interracial matrimony during the fight for black civil rights in America is unfortunately once again significant, however this time in reference to marriage equality in Australia. The failure of the law to allow all couples regardless of sex to marry, and furthermore refusal to acknowledge marriages conducted overseas, is a disgrace to the nation supposedly know as accepting of difference and intolerant to discrimination.

Edith M. Humphrey’s academic discussion papers on the Bible and human sexuality provide insight into the complex realm of interpretation, in regards to human sexuality—amidst 1st generation and 2nd generation Christians. Before results are revealed, Edith begins this series of academic papers with the emphasis on the Christian obligation to read the scriptures with thorough analysis and interpretation. When proper examination of the scripture is performed, the authoritative Word of God is revealed and becomes distinct from opinions based on current human experience, concern and determination. In both the Old Testament and New Testament, human sexuality is discussed, although sexuality can cause one to misinterpret the use of sexuality within

Same-sex couples are becoming increasingly popular in our society and advocates have been pushing for social justice to abolish sexual discrimination. America has been misled by opponents of the Religious Freedom Restoration Acts who claim a business' right to religious freedom to turn away gay customers is discrimination and bigotry, and we need to return to the biblical view of homosexuality as what it really is: sin. This paper will cover religious freedom and the advancement of gay rights in society today as it pertains to the opposing arguments of the Religious Freedom Restoration Act passed recently in Indiana.

The law regulating same-sex marriages continues to change, in order to better reflect the community 's opinions and expectations. Within the last decade, Australia has seen substantial changes in the legal recognition of same-sex relationships. This increase in legal recognition is primarily aimed at removal of institutionalized discrimination, as well as providing adequate legal protection of same-sex couples has arisen due to the wide spread changes of opinions about same-sex relationships within society.

The Australian legal system doesn’t have a bill of rights so it must protect individual human rights in other ways. Individual human rights consist of civil, economic and social rights. The law protects these in four ways: through common law, the Australian Constitution, ordinary legislation and International Law. The common law protects human rights through judges making court decisions within cases that involve human rights. This is prevalent in cases that are heard in the superior courts where the decision later becomes a precedent for similar cases.

A Bill of Rights is a declaration that lists the fundamental individual rights and freedom a citizen has, typically issued by their national government. To this day, the Bill of Rights is being heavily debated on whether or not it should be enforced in Australia. In a rapidly progressive society, though a Bill of Rights may seem necessary depending on an individual’s morals and ethics, Australia should not employ the Bill of Rights to its citizens. Employing the Bill of Rights will contribute insignificant progress to the development of Australia. This is due to common and statutory law is already enforcing majority of rights, a bill of rights can prove to restrict human rights more.

“…Finally, Jesus and the woman were there alone. Jesus stood up and asked her, "Where is everyone? Isn 't there anyone left to accuse you?" "No sir," the woman answered. Then Jesus told her, "I am not going to accuse you either. You may go now, but don 't sin anymore.”

Good morning everyone, I am Amy Homes from the Homes’ Law Firm, and I am here because I believe Australia must have a Bill of Rights. Australia is the only Western democratic society that does not have a Bill of Rights. ‘A Bill of rights is a document that contains a formal list of the rights of a citizen in a society which the society regards as being fundamentally important to its citizens’. The purpose of a Bill of Rights is to list and protect such rights of all humans. Human rights are the basic rights and freedoms that everyone is entitled to, because we are human.

Australian culture is vital in the process of socialising the public’s views and beliefs. Through social stratification and labelling different groups as superior and inferior, Australian culture has been manipulated into believing that homosexuals are deviant to the rest of society.