Tuesday, September 22, 2009

The latest Australian initiative to reward debauchery


In my first-ever post at this blog I wrote that

I fail to see how any of these principles [of secularism] is compatible with the Social Reign of Christ; in fact, they constitute what one might call the Social Reign of Pontius Pilate, with the State purporting to be neutral at the same time as it promotes grave injustice, permitting all manner of sociopaths and degenerates to prosper.
Here’s the latest evidence for that observation (interestingly, there’s a gay angle to the story as well):

MISTRESSES and love-children of philandering spouses will soon be entitled to a share of the family fortune unless there is a will in place specifically ruling them out.

Controversial new intestacy laws, to take effect in NSW early next year, introduce the concept of "multiple spouses" to increase provision for de facto relationships.

This will have most impact where a married couple has separated but not divorced and the dead spouse was having a relationship with a new partner. The new laws will also benefit same-sex partnerships, where the deceased may have been involved with more than one person, and cultural or religious groups that allow multiple wives.

The laws complement legislation enacted earlier this year that gave more rights to de facto couples and same-sex partners in the event of a relationship breakdown.

"The term 'domestic partner' has been created to accommodate the new laws and includes a person in a de facto relationship with the deceased for two years or more, or, if less than two years, one that has resulted in the birth of a child," NSW Trustee and Guardian principal legal officer Ruth Pollard said.

Whether or not a person is a de facto spouse depends on such factors as the length of the relationship and public acceptance in the community - in the eyes of friends, for instance. […]

[bold type in the original]
The article fails to state precisely when and after what public and Parliamentary discussion these laws came to be enacted; it mentions that the laws “complement legislation enacted earlier this year that gave more rights to de facto couples and same-sex partners in the event of a relationship breakdown”, but I can’t remember hearing about them or any surrounding controversy at the time (whenever that was). Perhaps they went unreported because the media’s attention was consumed by the more sensational pro-same-sex-couple aspect of the story. Whatever the case, the whole situation there is abhorrent.

Reginaldvs Cantvar
Feast of St. Thomas of Villanova, Bishop, Confessor, A.D. 2009

No comments: