I watched, via twitter, the build up to, and the passing of, the civil union legislation in Queensland. I felt bloody good about it really. For reasons.

But there’s one thing by which I am utterly perplexed. Julia Gillard’s position on gay marriage*. Or at least her position on her party’s position – I don’t think we should always equate a personal position with a political position after all. I’m sure she has her reasons for maintaining that the ALP should not support a change to the federal legislation, but they are unfathomable to me. Apart from the fact that it is wrong to be denying people equity under the law, wouldn’t you rather be the Prime Minister who was there when the law was changed rather than the Prime Minister who prevented the change.

I can’t see that her position is based on electoral expediency, because she did, after all, lead her party through the carbon tax, so I really do not understand. Unless maybe she simply doesn’t agree that Australian laws should recognise marriage between same sex couples. I suppose that could be it. She wouldn’t be the only one.

I suppose now, whatever her reasons, she’s so far in she can’t change her mind. I abhor our contemporary willingness to say ‘backflip’ every time a politician changes their mind. Of course there are principles and promises to which we must adhere, but surely it’s possible to be principled and reflective. Okay, that’s unrealistic. I guess another several thousand years and maybe our cortices will be evolved to the point that such things are possible.

In the meantime, how good would it be if the ALP’s national conference thingammijig managed to work their way around the dilemma of how to not embarrass their leader while at the same time getting the party to pass a resolution (or whatever it is they need to do) to have the legislation changed at a federal level. That would be grouse.

*understanding that ‘gay marriage’ is a less than ideal use of language used here to refer to the specific discussion of this specific position, and the civil union legislation still leaves many people excluded