So David are we to assume that you'd support the removal of the marriage act? If so you'd get my vote and I've been an abstainer since 1996.
Good luck with de-regulation, the so called "Gay Rights" activists are hostile to that idea because they want authority over other people and to be able to force their definition of marriage upon the churches and schools.

...The war waged against society by homosexuals rages....These are the "real terrorists"!

Yes, marriage is a private matter and the state should not be in the business of defining private matters, either narrowly or widely. The state should not tell us who is married and who isn't. The state should neither endorse nor oppose marriages. The state should not register marriages at all and let the word 'marriage' and all its derivatives be erased from all legislation.

Gay marriage is a moral imperative because equality so shut up.

If you dont shut up you are a h8er, so shut up even more!1!

David's argument for it is pathetic. The government forces us to choose opposite-sex partners, and this awful compulsion is bad? Somehow trapping us all - like insects in amber!

But David, why should we expect more freedom from your ideas when the newly-invented moral imperative seems to be that we have to line up to affirm gay lifestyles as equal or even better than ordinary ones.

That would not be Liberty outcome at all. When the mere standard of causing someone to take a huff remains illegal under 18c, vindictive activists can smash individuals with lawsuits and proudly display their invented new morality backed by the power of the state. Its already happened over choices of race identification.

The challenge to freedom is not the tension of innovative social arrangements being called marriage, but the form of debate that creates an arbitrarily invented moral rule and shuts up anyone who wants to question it.

You have that all ass about David.

We for various reasons have developed the version of mirage we want over millennia, & our governments have passed laws to enshrine our wishes in stone.

It is not the other way around, we have what we want. Most can see no reason to change our wishes on what mirage should be, & will thank you to mind your own ruddy business.

It is time to discard the noisy wheel, rather than oil it with what it wants. If homosexuals don't like it, tough!

I disagree. The choice of one's partner in most developed countries is a totally private matter but the legalisation of that choice - marriage - bringing with it a range of government-provided benefits is very much a public matter. Why? In my view, marriage is an institution designed to protect the children that arise from the union of a man and a woman. Children are totally dependent upon adults until well into their teens and marriage is or should be about how the adults accept the responsibilities associated with the production of their children.
In other words, marriage is never about the two adults who have chosen to share their lives with each other. That's a very selfish view, regardless of whether same sex or opposite sex partners are involved.