Myself and my partner Phillip McCrack are thrilled at this proposal.

It is ridiculous that the ALP will not recognise gay marriage.

So much for social progressiveness.

It says nothing in the ALP constitution about social progressiveness, that is a mere hijack of the left who have forgotten what being ‘left’ actually means.

Hi all,

National Young Labor Left had a phone link up to organise our delegation to national conference. We prioritised 5 policy areas that we will promote and push for policy/platform amendment in the lead up and at conference. These are:

- Same sex relationship recognition
- Climate Change
- Youth Wages
- Higher Ed/NUS Campaign
- Internet censorship.

This promises to be a great conference, with lots of awesome fringe events, stimulating policy debates and social events with interstate comrades. It runs from Thursday the 30th July to Saturday 1st August in Sydney. There will a national young labor left and left caucus on Wednesday 29th July.

More details can be found at: http://www.alp.org.au/features/conference.php
We are planning to stay at a backpackers so accommodation should cost max $25 a night. Let me know if you want to come but can’t afford it, we can possibly get Unions and MP’s to subsidise some of this cost.

Please let me know by Friday the 6th June if you are interested in coming. We will need to book accommodation and seats at the National Left dinner next Friday, so you will need to let us know by that date. (You don’t have to be 100% sure at this stage, just if your thinking about it let us know).
Email younglaborleft@gmail if your thinking about coming, and if you have any questions feel free to give me a call on 0409 034 790

Cheers,

Zoe Edwards

The ETU delegates will be definately voting against this. The only union that should be condoned is between a man and his transexual

“potentially embarrass the Prime Minister, Kevin Rudd”

What a bunch of poppycock. The PM has already been embarassed. He wants a seat at the UN Security Council and wants Australia to be known for its Human Rights principles, but the government of the day still will not afford same-sex couples equal treatment in all laws.

For those laws where there is financial advantage to do so, where the “practical” implications of equality are most pronounced the ALP has removed discrimination.

But lets not all forget even when it came to contentious issues like parenting, last years reforms did not initially include the Family Law Act. It wasn’t until a bipartisan recommendation for it to be included in the best interests of a child did the Rudd Government recognise same-sex couples as a “parent”.

So come on lets not make this out to seem like it’s a big deal.

Straight people can enter a marriage with all its ups and downs. Many choose not to have children and they are still ok to be married.

Gay people, some of whom do have children, can’t marry.

Is that equal? I think not! Its as simple as that!

If the Right was smart about it they would do the deal before it hit the conference floor.

And if the PMO or others are concerned about embarassing the PM, they too would deal it away before it got to the floor.

I for one would like to see the PM actually justify why we shouldn’t have equal marriage laws in Australia.

And please Mr Rudd, don’t tell me it’s because of Tradition… Traditionally many different forms of relationships constituted marriage… there is no such thing as “traditional marriage”, only a nice soundbite for talkback radio…

I might change Parties and Ollie and I can ‘ride off’ into the sunset.

Tom Craven: Well typed. I’m taking the word “progressive” back from the claws of the “social progressives”. They wrecked it and don’t deserve to use it anymore.

Young Labor: Legal recognition of same-sex couples is a good idea. But the number 1 policy priority?

Depends on your definition of “priority” I guess. If your definition is: “things that make us irrelevant and are of little interest to the average* punter, and if they are of interest, they only serve to alienate that demographic from political engagement”, then carry on by all means.

* people dumber than me and / or earning less than me i.e. them ones outside the latte curtain.

Epsteins Mum – “only serve to alienate that demographic from political engagement”

I think that recent history has shown an intolerant government, one that does not treat it’s citizens equally and justly… Is often voted out.

The recent successful polling by the Greens in Fremantle means that the next election will make it very interesting when it comes to voter intentions.

With the media sensationalism of the “Sex Party” it is surely likley that this issue will become an election one unless the ALP deals with it appropriately at the Conference.

like I said – “that demographic”, i.e. the statistic bulk that shift a party from 49% to 51%.

Settle down, AYL Left. Jolly good of you to take up the concerns of the latte-sippers, but when the biggest financial upheaval since 1929 is hitting us, Aboriginal people still have life expectancies more suited to 1709 London than 2009 Australia and we’re trying to get some sort of wrokable ETS up and running (not to mention win re-election), then forgive me if your concerns seem a little abstracted.

Whether or not two interior designers living in Prahran/Northbridge/Glen Osmond/Sydney can call each other husband and husband as they hold hands while walking the chihuahua, well….doesn’t seem quite so important, does it?

Birmingham Alabama 1963 this is not.

As ever, the concerns and priorities of the Left are abstracted from the interests of ordinary working people.

Interesting that “L” chooses to talk about the biggest financial upheaval being a reason for not having same-sex marriage, when most conservative commentators out of California recognise that marriage equality would be positive for the economy.

Now I won’t use the word stimulate in the context of same-sex marriage, but good for the economy none the less

Yes, cos I bet THAT’S an argument that’ll sway votes in an election debate….”Vote 1 Rudd Labor. We have a plan to fix the economy – gay marriage!”

That sound you can hear is your logic snapping after being stretched past breaking point.

Now now “L”… Firstly don’t put words in my mouth and secondly, if you’re going to get so close to my mouth, recognise a tongue inside my cheeck when you see it…

My non-light hearted point is this.

Other pressing concerns like GFC and Aboriginal health are no reason not to continue advocating for same-sex relationship recognition.

Despite your rather undergraduate attempts at inducing what you no doubt hope will be a homophobic response, I’ll soldier on, perhaps unwisely….

Those other pressing concerns would, in an election campaign, be effectively obscured if these platform objectives get up. Letting the Tories looks the more focused and sensible party…sounds like a good idea to you?

I must admit though, I don’t even think the Young Left reckon they’re a chance here. I suspect this all just a good philosophical wank on their part, and they’ll no doubt use their defeat to further their martyr complexes and convince one another that the ALP is a right-wing fascist corporation or some other such self-serving rubbish.

I have no hope for a homophobic response. Nor do I have any reason to believe you would give one.

You present a certain view that same-sex marriage would make the ALP lookless focused and sensible.

However my point, undergraduate or not is this – one paragraph in a policy platform of over 150 pages would not affect the outcome of any election.

Nor should it obscure other objectives in getting up.

The ALP is not a right-wing facist corporation in my view – it is a party with the principles of a fair go for all Australians as a cornerstone of its foundation.

How is denying same-sex couples the right to marry a fair go for ALL Australians?

Brian – I think “L”, like me, is talking about the political stupidity of championing that specific issue – at the expense of other issues of more interest and more importance to more people – rather than whether or not civil unions are a good idea.

I hear your point EM, but Im still not sure I agree with it.

Simply because there are only a smaller number of people affected by same-sex marriage than say the global warming problem, is not a reason to choose one item over another for political championing.

This comes down to a very simple proposition. Does the ALP believe in a fairgo for all Australians or not? If it does then this shouldn’t need to even come to the floor and cause a ruckus, if they don’t then the ALP should simply stop trying to sell themselves as a party who does stand for a fairgo for all.

Em has nailed it, Brian. I’m not commenting on civil unions (I’m in favour, incidentally) or even gay marriage (I’m against, on political grounds).

You say “Simply because there are only a smaller number of people affected by same-sex marriage than say the global warming problem, is not a reason to choose one item over another for political championing”. Yes, but giving your opponents a stick to beat you over the head with, for no reason, in an election year, on an issue that very few Australians care about, is just plain dumb.

Do it in 2011, if you must.

This isn’t about anti-hate crime stuff, or about stopping a slew of gay-targeted kynchings. This is peripheral. So lets no make it central when we don;t have to…or we’ll look like posers enaged a good old irrelevant masturbation session.

eff this

What about my human right to marry my she-male partner?

***so come on lets not make this out to seem like it’s a big deal***

Brian, I’m guessing you’re unaware of the recent Miss California controversy? And the gay jihad after the Proposition 8 vote? Get the hate and intolerance out of the gay community and then we’ll talk about marriage.

Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. I love the ALP left. It is so in touch with community attitudes in marginal seats, the same seats that feature 3,000 person ampitheatres called evangelical Christian churches. All the Liberals need to do to win is replace six/sevenths rainbow Malcontent Turncoat – every colour but true blue.

I think this is ruddy marvelous. Why I have been screwing every man women and child in Australia since being elected as the Prime Minister of Australia. At least this makes my actions half right. Did I mention that I am the Prime Minister of Australia?

I hope this is supported so I can finally propose to my lover Charlie.

Craig and I support this motion

‘Taint gonna happen. Nothing to worry about here. Australia is a signatory to a UN treaty, the Haigh Convention on the Recognition and Celebration of Marriages. And the UN is never going to re-define marriage to include homosexual liaisons.

By the way, any US married homosexuals reading this: if things haven’t worked out and you’ve decided to marry a person of the opposite sex, come to Australia and do it. No need for a divorce. Your marital status here is ‘never validly married’ so you can be legally married and this marriage will be recognised world-wide, including in the US.

I hope the ALP wakes up….if same sex marriage is ok, Charlie and I will be finally able to get hitched. Oh happy days!

And I can hook up with Doris and her big swinging dick.

Ahh I love the left and identity politics.