Divorce Doctor - I note your concerns in a previous post regarding the Transitional & Savings part of a Bill. The proposed gay law reform is actually going to SAVE tax payers $66.0 million over four years.

Below is some information regarding the proposed gay law reform which I have copied from the 2008-2009 budget: http://www.budget.gov.au/2008-09/content/bp2/html/expense-03.htm

Removal of differential treatment of same‑sex couples and their children — law reform:

The Government will prospectively remove differential treatment of same‑sex couples and their children from Commonwealth laws (except where they rely on the Family Law Act 1975 definitions and presumptions) in the areas of Australian Government (defined benefit) superannuation schemes, social security, veterans' entitlements, workplace relations, workers' compensation, taxation, health (including Medicare, pharmaceutical benefits and hearing services) and immigration and citizenship. The measure is expected to result in net savings of $66.0 million over four years.

The majority of the expenditure in 2008‑09 will be to implement changes to Centrelink's payment systems.

Legislative changes are expected to take effect on 1 July 2009 with the exception of Medicare and Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme Safety Nets (1 January 2009) and Fringe Benefits Tax (1 April 2009). Amendments to the Australian Government (defined benefit) superannuation schemes will commence on a date to be set by proclamation, with amendments related to superannuation and taxation of death benefit payments having effect from 1 July 2008.

This measure delivers on the Government's election commitment.

J said:

If you actually compare the proposed bills to the current law as it stands you will notice there is virtually no difference apart from it includes same-sex couples and there children.

Don't follow, why do same sex dudes have "there" children while non same sex have "their" children

sounds like discrimination to me

and I am not homophobic, as I just love those fags whose "toilet" type sex acts have wiped out half the population of Africa

Jason,
I agree that same sex relationships should have the exact same rights as heterosexual relationships. That should include the right to get married.

I am not against same rights for all, but what bothers me is that these new laws are imposed upon all relationships whether they like it or not.
Why can't it be a choice for all couples, why can't people who want this just register for it if they want to have these financial obligations?

I can imagine that there are same sex couples as well as heterosexual couples who do not want these laws to apply to them.

C said:

I am not against same rights for all, but what bothers me is that these new laws are imposed upon all relationships whether they like it or not.

firstly you must always include responsibilities whenever you say rights, as it must be a 2 way street [as JFK said] or we end up no better than lawyer activated feminists, fags etc, screaming their lungs out for "my rights", while at the same time infecting a billion people with AIDS

but secondly this legislation only applies if you separate, then only if at least one wants a "settlement", then only does a judge come in if you can't agree

even for married folk, only 2% actually go to court. The State cant force people to litigate, hence my words about chose in action in my submission [which I trust you read]

DD
"you must always include responsibilities whenever you say rights"
I agree.

As for the rest of your post, I find it quite disrespectful the way you talk about 'fags' and feminism.
There's nothing wrong with women wanting the same rights as men, or with homosexual couples wanting the same rights as heterosexual couples.
Rights always come with responsibilities also, at least in my opinion.

Aids in Africa was mainly spread by heterosexuals like soldiers visiting prostitutes, then taking the virus back to their own wife.
Blame the Vatican also for not encouraging sex education about condoms.

A friend of mine works in Africa as a counsellor for AIDS victims.

Still, these new laws are imposed on couples' freedom.
There is a reason why couples do not want to marry. That reason is nobody's business but theirs.

Homosexual couples once again are being treated as second rate citizens because they do not have the choice about getting married.
They should have the same rights AND responsibilities as heterosexual couples.
Why should they have to be happy about having less choice and rights as others?
Not good enough.

Unfortunately, the price we pay for having an "opinion" forum is that while we have many well thought out, intelligent contributions from many people, there always comes a time when an ignorant buffoon says what's "really" on his mind. A great example is the homophobic Divorce Doctor with his written belief, "I just love those 'fags' whose 'toilet' type sex acts have wiped out half the population of Africa". It's hard to imagine a more inaccurate, misinformed, ignorant, biased, prejudiced and just plain dumb, dumb, dumb false statement as that quote from Divorce doctor.

When it comes to sheer stupidity, I'm afraid the homophobic Divorce Doctor rules the roost.