Civil Union Bill to surface on 24 June

Parliament will vote on the Omnibus and Civil Union Bills for the first time on Thursday week. Here's an article from The Maxim Institute It has some interesting points.

It is not a human right to have one’s sexual relationship recognised and protected in law. It is a privilege—awarded by the state because of the public benefits. And the state should protect the public benefits of marriage by upholding certain entry requirements

.
What do you think of the article? Are fatherless children necessarily any worse off than motherless children?

And this, from Associate Justice Minister David Benson-Pope, in an article in the Southland Times;

“One in every five New Zealanders living in a relationship—some 300,000 people—choose not to marry but the law does not support that choice. Currently the law differentiates between couples in committed, exclusive and stable relationships depending on their marital status, with a number of legal rights and responsibilities accessible only to married couples… This relationship discrimination runs contrary to our human rights legislation—the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act 1990 and the Human Rights Act 1993. Moreover, I believe it runs contrary to the innate sense of fairness that characterises us as a nation.”

So is the only reason he is not attempting to change the Marriage Act is because it is not politically achievable, or is he doing it this way to make it easier for same sex couples to adopt? Or both.