AUSTRALIA: Senator Weeps During Heart-Tugging Defense Of Gay Friends At Marriage Bill Debate [VIDEO]

Australia’s News Corp outlet reports:

An emotional Sarah Hanson-Young has broken down in parliament while speaking on the bill to make gay marriage legal today.

The South Australian Greens senator could not fight her tears, or running mascara, as she issued a heartfelt apology to her former party leader Bob Brown, a gay man and LGBTIQ rights activist, that parliament was not able to make same-sex marriage legal before he retired.

She also blasted former Prime Minister John Howard’s move in 2004 to change the Marriage Act to specifically make marriage between a man and a woman, which she called a bid to “single-handedly outlaw love”.

“When Bob retired in 2012, I said to him, Bob I’m really sorry that we haven’t been able to reverse that awful law before your time was up,” Senator Hanson-Young said. “So today … today, I stand here with my Greens colleagues finishing the job that Bob Brown started.”

More from the Guardian:

In earlier Senate debate on the bill, the leader of the Australian Conservatives, Cory Bernardi, conceded that “this bill is going to pass” and although he would push to protect “religious freedom and freedom of speech”, he acknowledged “the numbers are against us”.

“You guys have the numbers to do whatever you want with this bill– to go forward,” he said. “I would only ask that you consider some of our concerns.”

Senator David Leyonhjelm has tabled amendments to allow civil celebrants and private service providers to refuse same-sex weddings but conservatives including Liberal David Fawcett have conceded they do not have the numbers to reintroduce commercial discrimination.

Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull has promised that same-sex marriage will be a reality by Christmas and it appears that any attempt to stop it will now be fruitless.

  • Boreal
    • pj

      wow..no words.

    • Bluto

      Damn Aussie onions.

    • bobbleobble

      Onions, everywhere onions! Seriously though, this is the sort of ad that the YES campaign produced. Compare this to those of the NO side and it’s so revealing about their side.

    • JCF

      “GetUp!”

      No, guys, that’s not what he meant. ;-p~~~

    • craigbear

      Seen that before. Still love it.

  • VodkaAndPolitics

    We’re witnessing the death throws of Evangelical Political Tom Foolery all over the world, and their demise cannot come fast enough.

    • Stuart Wyman-Cahall

      Except here in the USA. Marriage equality came to our country by judicial fiat…sadly not by the good graces of the American people. And the American people are going to go through the hateful process of relegating LGBT marriages to a “less than” status by legislating laws that will allow discrimination in the public domain.
      This is Trump’s America. This is Roy Moore’s America. This who we truly are.

    • Tawreos

      Sadly, this will make them more dangerous for awhile. It is why christians in the US are so in support of people like Trump and Moore, so they can get the courts packed with people that want the same things they do.

    • bandanajack

      throes… not throws and tomfoolery is all one word. i hold you in high regard for your beliefs but please, don’t use words you can’t spell, when there are plenty available that you can.

    • Adam Schmidt

      I think they’re passing the torch. Until the Christian conservatives realize that the GOP doesn’t actually intend to support them but is just using them for their votes, the real threat are the fascist element of the GOP represented by Trump and Breitbart and the so-called Libertarians like Paul. They’re just as evil and selfish, just with a different bent.

  • gaycuckhubby

    I love our queer community! The way we fight, the way we love, the way we express ourselves, the art we create, the communities that we built.
    We faced down some of the worst harassment and discrimination and been fabulous doing it! For a long time we’ve had to rely on only each other and had to take on most of the world.
    I am excited and grateful for a new era of straight supporters and allies and I love that both the queer community and the straight xommunity are becoming more inclusive of each other.
    despite everything going on in the world it is a fabulous time to be human

    • bandanajack

      i think the most remarkable thing about the gay tribe, as i prefer to think of us is how we mourn, and how we celebrate (community has contains the word unity or the implication of commonality and we are anything BUT either of those things, whereas when you are born into a tribe, it doesn’t matter where you are geographically, or what your physical features might be, or even what tribe your parents are, in fact most gay/queer people are not born to queer people, although exceptions exist to prove the rule.

      few people realize that the massively popular gay choral organizations sprang from our grief as we mourned the passing of one after the other of or friends and loved ones from the scourge of hiv-aids. also relatively few outsiders realize that the rainbow flag rose from the need to symbolize the varied facets of our people without using the symbols created in the nazi death camps.

      we turn our losses, and our gains into works of art. and if you doubt that, i defy you to a witness display of the NAMES project. the aids quilt, the most beautiful, yet touching and impactful memorial to loved ones lost yet devised by man.

  • Leo

    OT. Senate tax bill vote this week. If Murkowski votes for the bill based on
    the oil drilling add-on and getting rid of the mandate, Dems (assuming
    the Trump state 3 stay on) need 2 more besides Collins.

    Ron Johnson being a definite maybe hold on, we’d need McCain too which is a definite if. Not good odds at all :/ Thoughts?

    • Jonathan Smith

      we are fucked?

      • Leo

        Besides that though :/

        • Jonathan Smith

          ahhhh…….sorry.
          ROYALLY fucked

  • Stogiebear

    “Marriage [equality] will be a reality by Christmas and it appears that any attempt to stop it will now be fruitless.

    Have a Merry Marry Christmas!

    • Snownova

      And a gay yuletide!

    • liondon#iamnotatraitor

      Happy holidays 😂

      • Harley

        Happy Saturnalia.

      • mikeinftl

        Happy Holigays!

    • Gerry Fisher

      Have a Merry Marry Christmas, Mary!

    • Professor Barnhardt

      What’s Christmas without fruit cake?

      • Stogiebear

        If the photos I’ve seen are any indication (and real), it would look something like Melanoma’s Hall of Twiggy Horrors in the White House.

  • bkmn

    Go Australia, and remember that even if you get a victory this year that you need to keep voting to make sure the haters don’t get back in power.

    • Stuart Wyman-Cahall

      Like America did. (snark)

    • bandanajack

      spoken from bitter experience…

    • Cackalaquiano

      Isn’t voting more compulsory there than here? I might be wrong…

  • another_steve

    So few people today do not know an openly gay or lesbian person. A neighbor. A relative. A co-worker. I mean, for cryin’ out loud… there’s Ellen Degeneres! EVERYONE knows Ellen.

    How morally bankrupt can someone be, to today wish harm or inequality to a gay or lesbian person.

    How morally bankrupt.

    • Stuart Wyman-Cahall

      We’ve elected Donald Trump. We’re on the cusp of electing Roy Moore. That’s how morally bankrupt we’ve become.

    • Tawreos

      It is easy for them as they can always believe that hating gay people is not what they themselves want to do, but what god wants them to do. It helps to have an excuse for something that you were already going to do anyway.

      • another_steve

        I agree that 99% of homophobia is rooted in the belief of the existence of a wrathful god who, coincidentally, shares our human wrath and hatreds.

        Hucksters (theofascists) prey upon the human instinct to seek out and understand the transcendental. Much (not all, but much) of institutional religion is the manipulation, for money and power, of that human instinct.

  • Dayglo

    Yes, she didgeridid! We have some allies worldwide … and they’re not exclusively female pop stars.

  • vorpal

    Don’t go read the YouTube comments.
    Here… I’ll save you the trouble with a delightful summary of how wonderful humanity can be:

    = 90% of pedophiles are homosexual men.*
    = So-called “gay marriage” isn’t REAL marriage.
    = People were brainwashed to vote YES.
    = How did this dumb bitch get elected?
    = This dumb bitch put her makeup on to make it look like she was crying.

    * The guy refutes himself in a reply thinking he made his point by linking to an article saying that for every 1 homosexual pedophile (note: not gay man), there are 11 heterosexual pedophiles.

    • Tawreos

      Thank you for spending time basking in the “christian love” so the rest of us don’t have to.

    • William

      Thank you, now I have time to clean my oven.

    • robindaybird

      Don’t read Youtube Comments period. I wish there’s an extension that blocks or transform YT comments that doesn’t affect every other comment system out there.

      • vorpal

        They are only one tiny step up from Breitbart comments sections, aren’t they?

    • JCF

      “Don’t go read the YouTube comments.”

      You do realize this is sane policy, generally speaking?

      • vorpal

        LOL yes, but I am a shit disturber who enjoys conflict.

  • rextrek1

    Looks like Australians Lawmakers work as hard as America’s – NOT

  • worstcultever

    Wow – watch that vid – now THAT’S a person. What sincere & powerful expression of real everyday humanity and an antidote to the ginned-up $$ awfulness industrial complex.

  • Ben in Oakland

    You already have freedom of speech and freedom of religion. What you want is speech free of consequences and religion free of restraint.

    • Stuart Wyman-Cahall

      No. I want to sit at a counter and be served lunch like everybody else. And I want to go to the bakery of MY choice and have that BUSINESS bake my wedding cake. Oh. And that honeymoon cabin on the lake I’m willing to spend good money on? I don’t want an American to EVER tell me I can’t have it whilst he rents it out to a thrice married straight couple.

      • Jonathan Smith

        there you go demanding “equal rights”
        communist.
        /s

      • Ben in Oakland

        We are 100% in agreement. I hope you understood that.

        • nocadrummer

          You just forgot the notation “/s” to indicate “satire”.
          With trolls often commenting, it’s sometimes difficult to discern.

          • Ben in Oakland

            but I wasn’t being sarcastic at all. I was being accurate.

          • Reality.Bites

            The “you” wasn’t the people here. Ben was addressing bigots.

  • Butch

    Did the reporter really, really need the catty “or running mascara” remark?

  • Tawreos

    It worries me that the other side appears to be admitting defeat. I hope the pro-marriage equality side keeps their guard up and takes nothing for granted.

    • bobbleobble

      Oh they’re not. Bernardi might have tempered his language a bit but there were other speeches today in the Senate which were far from conceding. Chief of which was Eric Abetz but also David Fawcett (who somehow managed to claim with a straight face that the YES camp displayed the worse behaviour over the course of the campaign), Concetta Fierravanti-Wells (who is suddenly a champion of Muslims) and James Paterson had a go among others. Paterson apparently wants to graft his failed bill onto the Smith bill by giving everyone the right to discriminate against gay people.

      There are rafts of amendments coming too though very few are likely to get the votes to be included in the Senate given that Labor, Greens and Nick Xenophon’s team are pretty much united on the Smith bill being the best compromise. It’s going to be a bumpy ride though.

    • Ninja0980

      Yup.
      As Yogi Berra said, it ain’t over till it’s over.

  • lymis

    Once again, just what are these “concerns?”

    I don’t know Australian law or how civil marriages are contracted there, but I assume that the law doesn’t obligate any cleric from performing a religious marriage ceremony in violation of the tenets of their franchise.

    If Catholic priests are already protected from having to marry divorced people, and any priest, pastor, imam, rabbi, tribal elder, or whatever is not obligated to marry members of some other (or no other) religion, then no church or cleric will be obligated to marry a same sex couple.

    If people want the right to pretend that legally civilly married people aren’t really legally married just because they disapprove of them, then they just have to get over that. They’re free to continue to disapprove. Just not to discriminate.

    Off topic, just what is a Pastafarian cleric called? Do they have such things?

    • Gustav2

      Whenever someone brought up the religious ceremonies I always reminded them of the RCC angle on not having to marry the civilly divorced.

      But somehow that is different!

    • bandanajack

      pretty sure that would be a pasta fazool !

    • Reality.Bites

      As in other countries, people who are NOT clerics seem to think they are entitled to the same religious protections.

    • ChrisMorley

      Pastafarian clerics are Ministers on the official certificate of Ordination: https://venganza.org/ordination/

      “Do they have such things?” * drowns in splutters of amazeballs *
      Noodle Mass discrimination in Germany
      ‘From the New York Post,
      Brandenburg state court ruled Wednesday the group can’t claim the rights of a religious or philosophical community. Judges said its criticism of others’ beliefs doesn’t constitute a philosophy.’ https://www.venganza.org/

    • Under Commonwealth law, no marriage is valid in Australia unless the wedding (marriage ceremony) has been performed and certified by a Marriage Celebrant licensed by the State. There are no ex-officio exceptions: if a clergy-person, ship captain, Member of Parliament, magistrateetc wants to perform and certify a marriage, he/she must first undergo the prescribed training, pass the prescribed examinations, and then apply for a licence.

      There is, however, a partial exception. An ordained minister of an “accepted” religious denomination may apply for the training/examination requirement to be waived, on the grounds that his/her training as a minister is equivalent to that normally required — though his/her superiors must provide documentary evidence to support the claim. (I assume an “accepted” denomination is one whose clergy training has already been examined and found suitable for this purpose by the state, and that statements like ” but I have accepted Jesus as my personal saviour” don’t count.)

      So far, so good — licensed Celebrants are obliged to conform to the law, in this case the Marriage Act 1961, as amended in 2004 by the Howard government. At present the Act forbids same-sex couples to marry; but that is about to change, and the celebrants’ duty to avoid discrimination will come to the fore.

      There is a serious precedent here: when in the 1990s the Keating government overturned the armed forces’ long standing “no poofs” policy, it cited the Commonwealth Anti-Discrimination Act’s prohibition of discrimination on grounds of gender and/or sexuality. Commanding officers are not allowed to cite their personal religious beliefs to justify refusal to comply.

      That is what is getting the knickers of Senator Bernardi, Archbishop Fisher and their ilk in such a knot. But not only are clergymen-celebrants already allowed considerable freedom in how they counsel their customers, they always have the option of simply handing their licences back.

      That will be no skin off the country’s nose — couples choosing to marry in church are already a substantial the minority in Oz, and there are already plenty of clergy-people willing to marry same-sex couples.

      As for the cake-makers, florists, seamstresses, musicians, etc etc, the law does not require their services at weddings and their religious beliefs are irrelevant.

  • zhera

    “You guys have the numbers to do whatever you want with this bill– to go forward,” he said. “I would only ask that you consider some of our concerns.”

    Oh… like you bigots would consider the concerns of the pro-equality side if YOU had the numbers? I think not.

    • RJ Bone

      They do this every time.

      Oh woe is us, you guys are going to railroad us, just please oh please be gentle! And Liberals will be the bigger people, because we think we can appeal to their better natures…? Or because it’s the Right Thing To Do (TM) or something. *Sigh*. We’ll be fair and give them a chance to contribute, because whatever.

      And afterward the conservatives will still claim that Liberals ran all over them and that they got nothing and oh look at those horrible satanic heathens! Give us money to stop their evil agenda!

      Yeah, were the roles reversed it would be a bloodbath. They would give us nothing and take everything.

    • -M-

      And the anti-equality side don’t have any valid concerns. Religious freedom is already covered, no church will be forced to perform same-sex weddings or ‘condone’ homosexuality. What they’re after is a special privilege to discriminate against gay people in commerce and the public sphere with religion as a bogus rationale.

      • prixator

        They’re always trying to get “special rights”!

        I think most people here are old enough to remember when that claim was flung at us regularly, and it was never true; we were only ever after equal rights. But, in this instance, it is true – they want a special right to avoid obeying anti-discrimination laws based upon a mythical belief.

  • Gigi

    Whoever’s cutting onions needs to stop.

  • JAKvirginia

    To Australia, et al: If you cannot treat each one of your citizens equally and fairly, then what’s the meaning of citizenship? Why honor that flag or stand for that anthem? What’s the point when you’ll never be treated as a full citizen?

    • David Walker

      And how do we know this? Marriage doesn’t mean we’re first class citizens; it means only that we are 2nd class granted the right of marriage by the court. And that’s it. I’d hope Australians are smarter than Murkans in this regard, but, since there has to be a law, I doubt it.

      Why are we excluded from full citizenship? And not just here, but nearly universally? And not just xn-dominated societies…we are the go-to group to blame anything on.

      • Reality.Bites

        In most countries marriage was the final step, coming years after every other piece of legislation was in place.

        I can’t claim that bigotry doesn’t exist here or anywhere else. There will always be people who hate and people who quietly discriminate.

        But in the eyes of my government, yes, I am absolutely a first-class citizen.

        I had surgery last week in a Catholic hospital. I didn’t have the slightest fear of me or my boyfriend being treated disrespectfully in any way.

        • Al Prazolam

          What we need is for sexual orientation to be added to federal anti-discrimination law. Fat chance under current administration and Congress. Why didn’t Obama do this in 2009, when he had majorities in both houses of Congress?

  • Reality.Bites

    Even if they managed to stop it their attempts would be fruitless.

    And dykeless.

  • jruffdc

    It would have been best if she hadn’t cried.

    • AJayne

      Are you kidding? I could barely read her words without crying – to imagine saying them without do so would make her much less than the person she is.

      • jruffdc

        Meh

  • KenDC

    This dear woman has a heart as big as Australia! What a balm, in these times.

  • KnownDonorDad

    Time for a couple more patches of dark blue on the wiki map, with Australia and Chile!

    https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/61acb57460007585790f78bda8e70dff81262b45659b25f8fb992e161bda521e.png

  • sword

    Australian Law should declare that a citizen does NOT have to marry someone of the same gender!

  • What a lovely human being! She has a feeling, caring heart. If only the vast majority of those in power across the world had such a caring heart.

  • SelectFromWhere

    I for one find the detail of the “running mascara” completely irrelevant and sexist. The only time mascara is germane to the discussion is on RuPaul’s Drag Race.

  • Al Prazolam

    Right now I’m more concerned about the outcome of Masterpiece Cakeshop, Ltd. v. Colorado Civil Rights Commission. I hate to see religious wingnuts prevail. I just hope that Fake President Donald Trump doesn’t shoot off his mouth about the case.

  • JCF

    I’m confused: it’s a “Sarah H____-____” who has a soul.

  • EDinMCO

    “Bernardi told Fairfax Media he had been proven right on a number of controversial statements, including that climate change is not man-made and same-sex marriage leads to bestiality and polygamous marriages.”

    This is the same guy in 2013 who now wants Parliament to “consider our [Conservative Party] concerns.” Fuck. You.

  • Maggie 4NoH8

    Best christmas present EVER for “christians” world-wide!