Church’s Solicitors Confirm Advt View (Press, 18 May 1985)

On 18 May 1985, a spokesman for the Auckland-based Church of Christ stated that legal advice received by the church regarding the Homosexual Law Reform Bill was confirmed to be correct. The church's stance came in response to a written complaint made by Ms Fran Wilde, a member of Parliament for Wellington Central and the creator of the bill. Wilde challenged a full-page advertisement published in several newspapers by the church, claiming its content was "overwhelmingly false." She urged the Newspaper Publishers Association to implement stricter oversight for similar advertisements in the future. Mr Jim Peacock, the church spokesman, defended the advertisement, asserting it aimed to provide a balanced and reasoned Biblical perspective on a matter he deemed crucial for New Zealand's future. He argued for the necessity of free expression and public debate in a democracy and expressed surprise at Wilde’s request for censorship regarding the church's message. Peacock explained that the church's advertisement sought to convey potential real-world implications if the bill became law, using non-legal language for accessibility. Peacock acknowledged the uncertainty of the precise effects of any legislation until the courts interpret it, and that such interpretation would be influenced by public opinion. In response to Wilde's accusation that the advertisement suggested homosexuals would have the right to solicit relationships in public, Peacock clarified that the term "solicit" was used in its everyday context, rather than as a legal term. He maintained that nothing in the proposed bill would prevent homosexuals from seeking attention in public. Moreover, Peacock responded to other criticisms from Wilde by stating that, should the bill pass, homosexual couples would legally be able to cohabit similarly to de facto couples, with the Adoption Act allowing for separate adoption applications from two individuals. He noted that a man in a homosexual relationship would not be barred from applying to adopt a child. Overall, the controversy highlighted the clash between differing views on the implications of the proposed Homosexual Law Reform Bill and the importance of public discourse in shaping social policies.

The text on this page is created, in the most part, using Generative AI and so may contain errors or omissions. It is supplied to you without guarantee or warranty of correctness. If you find an error or would like to make a content suggestion please get in contact

The text on this page is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 New Zealand