Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
It ironic that other than the right to marry, and maybe some feel goiod psychology that comes from acceptance.
The only other thing LGBT couples gained from the whole marriage debate was the right to a legal divorce.
Even if Civil Unions take care of all or most of the 'practical' things (which looking at Nat's article that appears to not be the case even in a country like Australia), societies aren't just a matter of practical 'things' and policies. It is a matter of doing what is right and that reaches towards equality for all citizens.
Unless you are gay you really just wouldn't feel this inequality. I have been married since 2010. If at that time I could not have gotten married, it would have been a possibility that my partner of now 8 years wouldn't even be in Canada anymore. Full equality and full recognition isn't something we did to get attention - there are real consequences to not having equal rights under the law in any society in ways that groups who have been naturally afforded those don't really get.
We have a very large immigration programme and the largest source at the moment are from India and China, both of which are more socially conservative than Anglo Australia. Our divorce rate is lower than the US, more children live with both their biological parents, although more than 80% of couples live together before marriage there is a general negative reaction to cheating once married. In these matters I suppose we are conservative. I am not convinced this is necessarily a bad thing.
Abortion is available on demand and has been for a long time. Yes gay marriage is recent but part of the reason is that gay couples already had most other rights in law. Nudity on beaches is not common as most of us need to cover up to avoid skin cancer. Religion has a small part in society and the largest stated religious belief is none.
Not sure what other issues are potentially included in such an assessment.
Well Canada is no slouch when it comes to Asian and Indian immigration at all. In terms of numbers I would say there are more Chinese and Indian Immigrants in Canada than Australia. Australia may have a higher representative percentage but I don't think that would be enough to make a meaningful dent. As for the other points you mention, I don't really see those as being 'bad' either. Cheating should be frowned upon in any society, but i'm not sure that a society advocating or dismissing cheating on a spouse or significant other is exactly liberalism
Consider this however when moving back to gay marriage and how it may translate into other areas in our two countries- in 2015, 65 percent of Australians supported gay marriage. Same year, only 5 percent more of Canadians support gay marriage at 70 percent. Not a whole lot more. Gays have been allowed to marry in Canada since 2003 at a time when support for Gay Marriage in Canada was a lot lower than in 2015 for Australia. I'm wondering if there is possibly a more pronounced liberal streak in our politics, judiciary and other political institutions that sort of move certain socially progressive causes forward quicker. Gays have been allowed to openly serve in the Canadian Military since 1994 as another example.
This may not be for all issues either but using gay rights as an example - that appears to possibly be an explanation. I mean look who our PM is now pushing for woman's equality and trans rights pretty strongly and I mean actual movement in law. It is generally our Liberal party in Canada that push strongly for social progression and the idea of liberalism. The Conservatives don't really do much to reverse those gains, but they aren't exactly social progression champions either at least in this century.
Well, imagine if we had this take in the 90's or in the 60's or in the 40's... Why are we so different now.. Don't you think in 50 or 100 years from now they'll look back at us and say, man those people were pretty backwards.
Our divorce rate is lower than the US, more children live with both their biological parents....I am not convinced this is necessarily a bad thing.
You would be correct. Even liberal researchers in the U.S. are admitting that this arrangement is much better for children. I'm sure it applies in Australia as well.
a wealth of research strongly suggests that marriage is good for children. Those who live with their biological parents do better in school and are less likely to get pregnant or arrested. They have lower rates of suicide, achieve higher levels of education and earn more as adults. Meanwhile, children who spend time in single-parent families are more likely to misbehave, get sick, drop out of high school and be unemployed.
Well, imagine if we had this take in the 90's or in the 60's or in the 40's... Why are we so different now.. Don't you think in 50 or 100 years from now they'll look back at us and say, man those people were pretty backwards.
What I hope is that people will look back and and say "OMG, it's amazing how we were completely unaware of how the world was really run and how we were played off against each other in so many ways. Glad that's a thing of the past".
After speaking to Canadians in Australia though, Canada does seem to restrict choices available to the broader community on a number of key points, though.
Private health insurance, and hence access to care outside the government run system, seems limited to services not covered by that system. Public funding for schools outside the government run sector seems to be a contentious topic, and not available in many provinces. In those types of issues, Australia seems to offer more choice for the majority of people.
Similarly, Australia's programs for retirement income give the average working person far more opportunity to be self sufficient, and not be dependent on the government of the day, than is the case in New Zealand.
Last edited by Bakery Hill; 04-22-2018 at 02:55 PM..
After speaking to Canadians in Australia though, Canada does seem to restrict choices available to the broader community on a number of key points, though.
Private health insurance, and hence access to care outside the government run system, seems limited to services not covered by that system. Public funding for schools outside the government run sector seems to be a contentious topic, and not available in many parts of the country. In those types of issues, Australia seems to offer more choice to most folk.
Similarly, Australia's programs for retirement income give the average woking person far more opportunity to be self sufficient, and not be dependent on the government of the day, than is the case in New Zealand.
That is nothing to do with being liberal - it's just a compulsory payment legally required by to be made by employers. Liberal should equate with choice.
NZ has a similar scheme, but while the employers contribution is also legally required [at a lower rate than Australia], joining the scheme isn't mandatory.
NZ pensions aren't means tested.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
