-
Centrelink payment for pre-op transgender living with female
You mean to say that Centrelink decided that you were a Defacto Lesbian couple, however, there is no law Commonwealth or state that allows such?
I just wonder if you have done a service or dis-service to the TG community? And the Gay and Lesbian types?
Lets look at it from the argumentative point that Centrelink is a federal government body, which ascribes to the laws made by parliament. THey can’t of course just make up a rule that says two of the same sex are in a defacto or marital relationship, cause this contravenes all the laws set by parliament, even in the states.
However, the Gay, Lesbian and Trans community has been fighting for years to have such relationships recognised as Marital, say sex marriages, same sex defacto etc. If one partner dies, the other gets nothing under law, this is NOT good.
However, if you had a governments authority that was declaring people as married, under one of the highest statute authorities available, next to the Tax commissioner, then haven’t you won the Marital Argument?
Doesn’t such a declaration have benefits – that one government agency is treating you as one thing when another perhaps is not? This creates a rift in the law and it would have been easy to establish case law thereupon for a same sex marriage.
I find it interesting that the decision defines the relationship as a “lives in a lesbian relationship” – which means as a couple, and the SSA defines a couple fairly clearly, beyond that of marriage or defacto.
Interesting to say the least. So on one hand it is a win, on the other hand it could well be a set back.
-
2 Replies
-
Hehe after reading that more, I’m so glad the definition of human isn’t:
2 arms
2 legs
1 torso
1 head
2 working ears
2 working eyesshall I continue?
What a joke. Seems a lot more needs to be done yet to bring about the realisation that the courts are now opposite to law where gender is concerned.
I wonder what Mr Bobbit has to say about this? His Penis was bit off by his wife! Is he a woman now?
(smile)
I’m sure there are far more detailed examples of “men’ who have deformed, non existent, or removed penis (penis cancer patients for example?)
-
I can SO relate to Mr Ella
Although I see your point, the judgment itself is based around the definition of a relationship, not who is part of it, beyond that of the question of the parties gender.
The Tribunal did not want to sanction a Same Sex relationship – oooh la la!
Hanging your medical and biological all over the judgment in my view is nothing more than to embarrass you for embarrassing the government – but I know you from my past life and your past life
Hehehe
Look the judgment is good in many a sense, but all things have an opposite reaction and whether the tribunal has “stuck with” status quo or tried to nub centerlink I’m not sure.
Time will tell.
For now, you have won what you fought for and had to keep defending. That’s great
