"It ought to be made clear that I believe that marriage is fundamentally between a man and a woman, and so I do not support gay marriage."

How does that follow? I believe that men have more money than women, but that doesn't mean I don't support the equal distribution of wealth. You are telling us what you believe is the case and leaving out the all-important process by which you arrive at your decision as to what _should_ be the case -- but I think most of us here can guess at what that is, and why it doesn't have the slightest shred of credibility.

As for gay marriage in Britain, the second reading of the bill has passed by 375 votes to 70, which I would say is a pretty clear endorsement by the British people and their representatives. Once again, God's self-appointed representatives on earth have been shafted by their omnipotent Maker.

Don't you ever ask yourself: "If God doesn't want people to be homosexual, why doesn't he stop people being homosexual?" That would appear to be a no-brainer for an all-powerful being.

"It ought to be made clear that I believe that marriage is fundamentally between a man and a woman, and so I do not support gay marriage."

It ought to be made clear that I don't care either way about this legislation. I believe that the state should stay altogether out of personal relationships and that marriage is not under their jurisdiction, but in the jurisdiction of heaven. When I marry, it will be in a religious ceremony and the state will not be invited nor informed about it.

"To get an idea of why it would be politically damaging to the Liberal Party to legalise gay marriage"

Regardless of my personal views, "legalising" (wrong term, because it is already not illegal for homosexuals to marry) gay marriage would be of great political benefit to the Liberal Party, because it would decimate the Greens who except for "gay marriage" in all possible combinations and permutations have nothing else to say and would be virtually left without an election platform.

An interesting new front is opened with this very personal message to MPs.

You can almost hear it, that anonymous voice at the other end of the phone.

"You don't know me, but I know you, and I know what is good for you. Don't vote for gay marriage, it could be... damaging, know what I mean? See what a mess it has made of politicians' careers in the UK. And France too, don't forget those riots. We wouldn't like to see you out of a job, now would we? Just think of that glorious pension plan you'd be throwing away..."

Perfect. A direct appeal to their lack of conscience.

Smelly, but probably quite effective.

Hi Thomas,

We are eternally grateful to Gillard, the ALP and the left wing of Australian politics for sensitizing the electorates to wedge politics and spin.

I like your first comments where you try to establish that you are opposed to gay marriage and therefore support Abbott.

Then along comes your case for making this a much bigger issue than is real, the threat, the risk and the political wedge.

<< faced much criticism, electorally dangerous, could impact its political chances of election or re-election, politically damaging to the Liberal Party, the dangers of legalizing gay marriage for the Liberal Party in Australia, it risks alienating part of its core demographic, this could translate into electoral defeat, it would damage its chances of electoral success, potentially lead to the rise of another centre-right political party >>.

This one is particularly tacky Thomas, << regardless of the sexual orientation of his sister >>?

OK Thomas, I think we get your message; this is a HUGE issue for Abbott?

What you failed to mention is that the latest policy priorities from Newspoll, show that the gay marriage issue does not even feature in the top ten concerns of the electorate at all.

Your omissions and multiple references to polling on this issue are a misdirection of a non-issue. So who is making this such an issue Thomas?

<< the rise of UKIP has been because of the alienation of conservative voters in the UK who oppose gay marriage >>. Rubbish.

The UKIP policy platform is Taxation, Economy, European Union and Immigration. The UKIP party does support civil partnerships but opposes legalization of same-sex marriage.

So Cameron as a conservative is in political trouble for supporting a vote for legislation on gay marriage, the exact opposite is true of Abbott who as a conservative is opposing it?

Australians have decided their policy priorities and, much as you would like this to be otherwise, gay marriage is a wedge issue from Gillard/McTurdman, it will not be an election issue or the subject of a referendum.

Another see through ALP politician in the making?

Yuyutsu - "It ought to be made clear that I believe that marriage is fundamentally between a man and a woman, and so I do not support gay marriage."

It ought to be made clear that I don't care either way about this legislation. I believe that the state should stay altogether out of personal relationships and that marriage is not under their jurisdiction, but in the jurisdiction of heaven. When I marry, it will be in a religious ceremony and the state will not be invited nor informed about it.

I agree totally that the state should keep its grubby snout out of things that don't concern it, however it appears that the homosexual contingent seek something in the way of official legitimization that they feel can only be achieved by enactment of whatever legislation. In any case, aren't marriage celebrants / clergy / whatever required to submit details of those they marry to the relevant gubmunt department ?? In any case, adopting a position in favour of homosexual marriage purely to defuse the Greens doesn't strike me as a particularly smart move. It tells me the LNP cares infinitely more about power & influence than about any moral principles the party once might have had. The sheeple have never been asked for their opinion, we've only had a small noisy minority clamouring to be heard, apart from the Greens of course, which has long been a haven for all manner of funny people.

Pardon my intrusion but I reject the proposition of gay 'marriage'. I find the images of two men passionately kissing or men dressed in bridal dresses as deeply offensive and I am sickened by it.

I see the desperate push by the Gay Lobby as being proof that our society is rapidly becoming depraved and, with fear, I wonder what the next step is likely to be.

When are the pedophiles going to demand their rights to have sex with children or even have parents demanding the right to have sex with their offspring?

Are people so caught up in the 'novelty' of gays that they can't see that we are destroying the fabric of our society? As they gawk at the sad people who take part in the Gay Mardi Gras can't they see what is happening, that they are being conned?

Can't they see that children no longer know what is right but are exposed to all manner of weird relationships during their formative years to say nothing about easily obtained pornography?

WTF is happening? Where are the people who try to protect our society, our kids from people who have unnatural instincts? Why are they being given free reign when, for centuries, they have been kept at arms length?

My position is that gays should be allowed to go about their deviant lifestyles without censure. Let them just live quietly and leave the rest of society alone to get on with being a mum and dad who raise their children to know the difference between right and wrong and give them clear rules.

The decadence of Ancient Rome has reached our shores. Our longterm survival is being threatened!