As reported today in the Adelaide Advertiser...
Asked if he could support gay marriage in light of Sir Elton's civil union, Mr Howard said: "I would be opposed to it.
"I think marriage is for men and women.
"That's why we amended the Marriage Act (in August 2004)."
Mr Howard said he did not intend to show hostility or discrimination towards gay people.
"But I believe very strongly that marriage is exclusively a union for life of a man and a woman to the exclusion of others," he said.
"That's the common understanding of marriage in the Judeo-Christian tradition, and I would be opposed to the recognition of civil unions."
And I thought The Liberal Party believed in:
"lean government that minimises interference in our daily lives and equal opportunity for all Australians"
Apparently those beliefs don't extend as far as to who homosexual people share their life with. I think Greg Barns put it well last year when he wrote:
One key area of discrimination that remains in Australia is in relation to the institution of marriage. Some might argue that marriage is less relevant in 21st-century Australia. But the state does not think so. As University of Capetown philosopher David Benatar has noted, A marriage recognised by the State provides an opportunity for those who make commitments and investments to formalise them in a way that facilitates the protection of the parties to the marriage. Where no provision is made for same-sex marriages, homosexuals (both male and female) are denied such benefits.
The liberals in John Howards Liberal Party have another chance to make a stand for the values for which their Party once stood tolerance and equality. Australias gay community deserves their support because there is no legitimate reason to deny their right to be treated as equal citizens.
As far as I'm concerned, this issue is just one of many that convinces me that Australia needs a brand new political party for the 21st century. A party that is modern, relevant, and that understands contemporary thinking about such issues and isn't wedded to inane and archaic Judeo-Christian principles.