Jonathan Milne: Killing bill not on God's to-do list

This morning, prayers will be offered up seeking God's intervention to prevent legal recognition of same-sex partnerships.

The conservative pastor who last week began a 21-day fast will seek some thunderbolt from above to strike down the Civil Union Bill.

The Justice and Electoral Select Committee is to report back tomorrow, and Parliament is expected to push through the second and third readings this week and under urgency next week.

Politicians from across the House are set to come together to pass the bill. What man has joined together, will God tear asunder? It seems unlikely.

But already, three strands of opposition are being woven together in a final attempt to stymie the bill.

United Future's `family values' MPs are arguing the Civil Union Bill will undermine the sanctity of traditional Christian marriage.

Act's Stephen Franks expresses concern the legitimisation of same-sex unions could surreptitiously compromise freedom of speech - a de facto hate speech law preventing critics like the churches from preaching against gay relationships.

And NZ First's Dail Jones argues the bill needs the public approval through a referendum.

Opponents hope that those three strands - moralist, legalist and populist - will weave together into a rope just strong enough to pull society back from the perceived precipice.

The fact is, the Civil Union Bill does not allow same-sex couples access to the institution called "marriage", does not call them husband and wife, and gives them few extra legal rights - so it can scarcely be accused of undermining marriage.

What may more justifiably alarm the critics is that MPs will be asked to vote the Civil Union Bill into law while its sister act, the Relationships (Statutory References) Bill remains tied up in the select committee.

It is that second bill that gives civil unionised and de facto couples legal rights almost identical to those of married couples.

Yet the committee could have difficulty even deciding the meaning of such basic terms as "de facto" - fairly important when trying to decide whether a solo mother receiving the DPB is living with a flatmate or a de facto partner.

With the committee unlikely to agree on that bill's final shape until well into next year, MPs will have to vote blind on the full meaning of a civil union. And Parliament will need to delay the actual implementation of the Civil Union Bill until its companion bill is also passed.

With legal complications tied up with the potential for a decent old-fashioned conservative backlash, it is surprising that none of the opposition parties have made any significant attempt to whip up a moral panic.

Perhaps some believe the two bills could actually do some good in providing the same rights and obligations for committed unmarried couples as for married couples.

Perhaps some are just holding off their prayers and entreaties for election year.

After all, God usually takes the day off on Sunday, before she returns to her ninth floor Beehive office on Monday.

And it's safe to assume she will be voting for the bill on Tuesday.