.- Family Life International, New Zealand has released a statement warning that The Civil Union Bill proposing the legalisation of same sex unions, to be brought before New Zealand’s parliament this thursday, is severly lacking in due democratic process, is loaded with conflicts of interest, contains false claims, and has been unduly rushed in order to take advantage of the public’s lack of knowledge of the precise nature of the bill.
The Bill, on which a final vote is expected by December 7th , “is far too important to be handled the way it has been and the negative ramifications which will follow if it is passed into law will be felt for many generations to come,” says Family Life, who have called it “one of the most disgraceful abuses of political position and totalitarian ignorance that this country has witnessed in a long time.”
Conflict of interest
Right from its inception this Bill has been driven and sustained by minority politics, say Family Life, who point out that the Select Committee proposed for Civil Union Legislation was chaired by MP Tim Barnett, an openly homosexual public supporter of the bill who has stated that the equal-rights agenda needs to take advantage of the queer-friendly government now in power.
Barnett and another member of the Select Committee, MP Chris Carter, who plans to enter a civil union the moment it is legal, both stand to gain personally from the bill’s passing.
Circumvention of due democratic process
Despite the fact that 95% of the 6000 public submissions to the Select Committee concerning the bill opposed legislation of the bill, they were ignored and the bill was passed forward to be voted upon – “an unjustifiable mockery of the Select Committee process,” says Family Life.
The bill was brought before parliament a Private Member’s Bill, “which means that no New Zealand citizen who voted for the current government at the last election had any idea that this Bill would be part of their current political agenda.”
A “yes” vote from only 61 Members of Parliament, of whom several stand to gain personally, is all that is required for the Bill to become law for a nation of 4 million people.
Family Life claim that the legislation of the bill, which affects the lives of every New Zealander, is far too important to be decided by 61 people and should be the subject of a public referendum.
The fact that the bill, if passed into law, will have been done so under parliamentary urgency, a condition which unnaturally speeds the Bill into law, shows that it is only beneficial to the minority who support this Bill because it nullifies public involvement in the decision making process
Only six months of parliamentary time has been given to debating the bill despite the fact that it will have very serious social implications for the whole country for generations to come.
“If it becomes law next week,” says Family Life, “it will become the quickest implemented legislation of this type in the world.”
Family Life state that since there is no conceivable reason for rushing the bill, “more time should be given for a complete and transparent investigation and debate of the issues surrounding this proposed legislation.”
The claim that much needed rights for heterosexual de-facto couples as well as for same sex couples by supporters of the bill, is entirely untrue, says Family Life, and is meant to divert attention from the real purpose of the bill.
No more rights are afforded to heterosexual de-facto couples than are already afforded under current New Zealand laws.
It is highly likely, claim Family Life, that “the proposed legislation will contain a clause that will allow recognition of same sex marriages solemnized in other countries, meaning that a homosexual couple residing in New Zealand would simply have to marry abroad to have their union legally recognized in this country on their return.”
“This Bill is nothing more than a thinly veiled attempt to legalize homosexual marriage and in turn homosexual parenting,” say Family Life.
“At best this proposed legislation is undemocratic social experimentation at worst it is totalitarian law-making that benefits a very small minority of New Zealanders at the expense of future generations.”