Family First is standing by its candidate Queensland Senate candidate Wendy Francis, who believes allowing same-sex couples to rear children is akin to child abuse, but last night dis-endorsed David Barrow, its candidate for the Melbourne seat of La Trobe, for his “inconsistent” beliefs in support of gay rights. Writing for Crikey, Barrow explains why his former party is wrong:

Family First gives families and small business a voice in parliament. To represent the voice of families, we need to make room in the boat for all the different types of families in Australia. Couples, mums, dads, children, grandparents and grandchildren and all the ordinary Australian people who make up our families.

My understanding of what a couple means, and my personal interpretation of Family First policy on this or what it ought to be, is that a family couple is a committed, co-dependent relationship between two adults in its widest sense.

At Family First, we say that a family is a committed relationship between a man and a woman — Adam and Eve. But it should also be Adam and Steve, and Eve with Eve.

Family First should be a “broad church” (in the modern secular sense of that term): heterosexual, gay and lesbian couples, as well as bi, trans, and intersex.

How else could we be equal citizens?

That’s a prophylactic thought: I just can’t conceive of it.

When screened for my Family First candidacy on July 16 I was asked these questions before being approved a speedy seven days later (and then the delay only being due to party leader Senator Steve Fielding returning from a secret mission to Afghanistan).

Would you oppose same-sex couple’s access to adoption of children? Yes, I said (and this was in a personal affidavit before a justice of the peace, which I tucked away in a drawer at home rather than cluttering up the candidate application form, as to me this answer was already included in my affirmative tick). But, and only but (two buts if you will), because the expression same-sex doesn’t necessarily mean anything. A woman is the same sex as her mother. A man is the same sex as his father. So a same-sex couple can just mean a man and a woman who are the same sex as their parents.

And then there are other possibilities. It is easier just to say that I support access to adoption of children for all committed, responsible and loving life-partners, howsoever you might define them whether they be heterosexual or gay or lesbian couples.

Secondly, would you oppose any legal recognition of same-sex relationships? Yes, I wrote. But again — and this is important because to get this wrong could fundamentally violate the human rights of the people involved — the expression same-sex doesn’t necessarily mean anything. It is easier just to say that I support legal recognition of all committed, loving, co-dependent relationships.

As Family First should.