The Human Rights and Equal Opportunity Commission (HREOC) opened ‘Same-Sex: Same Entitlements’: A National Inquiry into Discrimination against People in Same-Sex Relationships: Financial and Work-Related Benefits and Entitlements on 3 April 2006. The subjects of the said inquiry are focused on the issues of discrimination against same-sex couples in accessing financial and work-related entitlements and benefits.
According to the Commission, the Inquiry reviewed Commonwealth, State and Territory laws in order to develop a full list of circumstances in which same-sex couples may be denied financial and work-related benefits and entitlements that heterosexual couples enjoy and recognised by the law.
The Inquiry collected individual qualified stories about the impact of such laws on people in same-sex couples, and any children of same-sex couples. Over 300 submissions were received and many from individuals wished to remain anonymous in being.
The Inquiry made a final report containing the recommendations to the Federal Attorney-General, Philip Ruddock, and Federal Parliament as to how to address any discrimination.
Conclusions of HREOC
- There is a need for the acknowledgement and modification of laws in relation to same-sex couples.
- The submission of the HREOC’s Same-Sex Entitlements to the Federal Attorney-General should be accepted.
- The results of the Inquiry should be adressed by the Federal Parliament authorities as to identify the needs of the people concerned.
- The HREOC should continue its efforts in providing opportunities to same-sex individuals and couples.
Media Contact
Further details about media issues can be obtained from HREOC Authorities or visit the web page – www.hreoc.gov.au/samesex/index.html.
BACKGROUND BRIEFING AND ANALYSIS
Presently, same-sex or homosexual issues are one of the most vigorously advocated reforms discussed in law reviews, one of the most explosive political questions facing lawmakers, and one of the most provocative issues emerging before public spectrum[1]. If same-sex rights will be fully realized, it could be one of the most revolutionary policy decisions in the contemporary history.
The potential consequences – positive or negative, for children, parents, same-sex couples, families, social structure public health, and the status of heterosexuals are enormous. Given the importance of the issue, the value of comprehensive debate of the reasons in support of and against same-sex rights should be obvious. To the points of view of different conservatives and religious groups, same-sex marriages per se is very immoral and mortal sin because for the fact that both have the same sex and is impossible to procreate and form an ordinary family. It is an insulting factor not only to the society but also an insult to God by committing such sin. With this certain belief, same-sex marriages should not be practised, for it will only result to a disgusting and immoral stand in the society. Values should be learned, nature should be followed and same sex marriages should be abolished or terminated. On the contrary, the followers of same-sex union, non-discriminatory human rights and equal opportunity continuously voice out their arguments and cry for equal humane treatment and societal recognition. The fact that human beings are equivalent, in terms of rights provided by the laws of the land, it is but necessary to reinforce homosexuals’ suppressed rights and eventually established a legally accepted group[2]. The homosexual battle is based on several dimensions such as religious, cultural, moral, sociological, or legal. But no matter what or how each side proves the validity of their opinion, the fact still remains that the global recognition of same-sex rights is emerging.
In Australia, the battle has been in progress for years over whether equal rights and equal protection against discrimination should be extended to homosexuals. Recently this has expanded not only to the area of marriage but also in almost all dimensions of human rights. These are among the underlying principles the Human Rights and Equal Opportunity Commission (HREOC) in the opening of ‘Same-Sex: Same Entitlements’: A National Inquiry into Discrimination against People in Same-Sex Relationships: Financial and Work-Related Benefits and Entitlements Marriage on April 3, 2006. This Inquiry works on the following objectives:
- Review Commonwealth, State and Territory laws in order to develop a full list of circumstances in which same-sex couples may be denied financial and work-related benefits and entitlements that heterosexual couples enjoy and recognised by the law;
- Collect individual qualified stories about the impact of such laws on people in same-sex couples, and any children of same-sex couples; and
- Make a final report containing the recommendations to the Federal Attorney-General, Philip Ruddock, and Federal Parliament as to how to address any discrimination. [3]
Specifically, the laws to be considered by the Inquiry include, but are not limited to, laws dealing with the following issues:
- Workplace leave entitlements
- Social security benefits
- Tax concessions
- Medicare and the Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme
- Superannuation entitlements
- Workers’ compensation
- Veterans’ pensions and entitlements
- Parliamentary entitlements
- Judicial pensions
- Inheritance[4]
After the collection of written discussions, all information are summarized in a report that will:
- summarises all the information collected throughout the process
- identifies those laws which may be discriminatory
- describes the impact of those laws on same-sex couples, and any children of same-sex couples
- makes recommendations about what needs to be done to eliminate the discrimination. [5]
The last stage is the passing of the final paper to the Federal Attorney-General, Philip Ruddock, and Federal Parliament as to how to address any discrimination.
In relation to the stakeholder chosen – the Festival of Light[6], the said Inquiry is legally based and not equated to the principles of the group. With the recognition of the legal rights of every individual, the Inquiry is not directly against the values, beliefs, culture, and principles that the organization proliferates and practices. If the principles of Same-Sex Entitlements will flourished, it does not mean that the Festival of Light’s beliefs are set aside. With this case, the law is the working mechanism. Besides, it is still on its pilot execution that is why any violent reaction can be addressed given the fact that the Same-Sex Entitlement is under study and probation.
In conclusion, debating the issue of homosexuality and related aspects in general is an unending endeavor. With the varying dimensions being dealt upon, it is very apparent that there will still be a significant proportion of the modern population that is not in congruent with the principles manifested by the other side. Thus, arguments will be there. But with respect and understanding of human indifference, the intentions of Same-Sex Entitlements for instance, will not harm the sensibilities of the opposing side but instead takes care to the welfare of the person through legal basis and being a person entitled to have humane treatment in general.
[1] Coolidge, DO, Duncan, WC, Strasser, M, & Wardle, LD (Eds.) 2003, Marriage and Same-Sex Unions: A Debate, Praeger, Westport, CT, p. 3
[2] Sanders, D 2002, Human Rights and Sexual Orientation in International Law, International Journal of Public Administration, vol. 25, no. 1, pp. 13+.
[3] HREOC 2006, Background Briefing, Same-Sex Entitlements, viewed 3 October 2006 from http://www.hreoc.gov.au/samesex/background.html.
[4] ibid.
[5] ibid.
[6] Festival of Light 2006, Festival of Light Homepage, viewed 3 October 2006 from http://www.fol.org.au/index.html.
No comments:
Post a Comment