Same-sex marriage in New Zealand
 |
It has been suggested that this article or section be merged with Civil unions in New Zealand. (Discuss) |
| Legal recognition of same-sex relationships |
||
|---|---|---|
| Same-sex marriage | ||
|
|
||
| Recognized in some regions | ||
| United States(MA) |
||
| International recognition | ||
| Israel United States(NY) |
||
| Civil unions and domestic partnerships |
||
|
||
| Recognized in some regions | ||
|
Argentina ( |
||
| Unregistered co-habitation | ||
|
|
||
| Recognition debated | ||
|
||
| Civil unions legal, same-sex marriage debated |
||
|
|
||
| See also | ||
|
Same-sex marriage |
||
During the 2005 election, Prime Minister Helen Clark admitted that she thought it was discriminatory to exclude same-sex couples from the Marriage Act 1955, but said she would not push to change it.[1]
On July 2,2007, George Ireland of Auckland's Milne Ireland Walker legal firm was asked for his opinion on current matters related to same-sex marriage in Sweden, which may result in LGBT access to fully-fledged marriage as opposed to the parallel spousal rights and responsibilities legislation that allows for civil unions, which have existed there since the early nineties. He suggested that given the New Zealand Labour Party-led government's strong record on rights for LGBT New Zealanders, such change would probably occur. Destiny New Zealand party president Richard Lewis agreed, from a negative and social conservative perspective [2]
Marriage amendment
In 2005, United Future MP Gordon Copeland sponsored the Marriage (Gender Clarification) Amendment Bill that would have amended the Marriage Act to define marriage as only between a man and a woman, and amend anti-discrimination protections in the Bill of Rights so that the bill could stand. It also would have prohibited same-sex marriages from foreign countries from being recognized as marriages in New Zealand. The bill was voted down by a large margin (47 in favour, 73 against) on December 7, 2005. MPs who opposed the bill said they considered it unnecessary and MP Katherine Rich called the bill a "cheap political stunt" meant to appeal to "banjo-playing redneck homophobe(s)." [3]
Since the failure of the Marriage (Gender Clarification) Amendment Bill, there has been no public debate about further legislative reforms or prohibition of same sex marriage within, or outside, New Zealand's Parliament. Even the newly reformed Future New Zealand party has kept silent about whether or not it would sanction a revival of its earlier failed private members bill, given that proponents of the ban Gordon Copeland and Larry Baldock are founding members of the party.
Transsexuals
If a post-operative transsexual marries someone of the opposite sex to the one that they had been reassigned to, that is considered a legal marriage under the Marriage Act 1955. This was decided by the M v H [1995] case in Otahuhu (Auckland)'s Family Court, and later upheld in New Zealand's Court of Appeal. This means that while pre-operative transpeople can contract civil unions, they cannot get married to a person of the gender opposite their gender identity, unlike their post-operative counterparts.
Public Opinion
A New Zealand Herald poll found that 40% of New Zealanders supported gay marriage. There appear to be generational discrepancies in support, given that younger cohorts supported an end to discriminatory marriage laws, while older cohorts do not support such reform[4]
See also
This entry is from Wikipedia, the leading user-contributed encyclopedia. It may not have been reviewed by professional editors (see full disclaimer)
