surely we have more important things to worry about than 2 men mincing down the church isle?
If they want normality then they will have to modify their behaviour, not try and modify ours

I agree with your stance on gay marriage but comparing this issue with slavery is a little wide-eyed, perhaps. Justice Murphy's website claims that only 15% of gays want to marry. This is not a major social issue in our country - but we don't have to look far to find ones that are.

Putting aside the symbolic purposes for a moment, what are the practical purposes of the movement for government registration of gay marriages?

It couldn't be, for example, a desire for the provisions of family law to apply, because the property relationships acts apply and they are in substance the same. And since the States conceded the administration of such legislation to the feds, it is even administered by the Family Court.

It can't be for family provisions act purposes (ie changing the terms of someone's will after he has died) because this applies regardless of marriage?

Is it for entitlements on intestacy?

What is the actual practical purpose?

"surely we have more important things to worry about than 2 men mincing down the church isle?"
-peter piper

How is it that 'worrying' about gay marriage is mutually exclusive with 'worrying' about 'more important' things? I'm afraid I don't quite follow your reasoning there.

"If they want normality then they will have to modify their behaviour"
-peter piper

What, stop being gay? I don't think it's that easy. I've spent a full hour this morning trying my very hardest to stop being heterosexual, and strangely enough I still find myself attracted to women.

Ken McKay’s historically illiterate and anti-Christian rants are laughable (especially when so many gays are against so-called gay marriages). I note too that he doesn’t single Muslims out with much stronger views, so he also sounds like a politically correct coward. I wonder what makes him so anti-Christian. Where does all this hostility come from?

why yes...YES..of course there should be a *conscience* vote on Gay Marriage.

THEN..we can continue fuelling the fear, hate and loathing of Christians who happen to disagree with the view that homosexual behavior is 'ok' and 'normal'.

In fact.. we can soon gather a large pack of hungy dingoes at the MCG and start feeding those 'evil' Christians to them.. should make for good sport doncha think?

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1325311/Gay-rights-laws-danger-freedoms-Bishops-speak-homosexuality.html

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-489285/Foster-child-taken-away-Christian-couple-refuse-teach-homosexuality.html

Earlier this year, Somerset County Council's social services department asked them to sign a contract to implement Labour's new Sexual Orientation Regulations, part of the Equality Act 2006, which make discrimination on the grounds of sexuality illegal.

Officials told the couple that under the regulations they would be required to discuss same-sex relationships with children as young as 11 and tell them that gay partnerships were just as acceptable as heterosexual marriages.

Fabian 'inevitability of gradualism' and Marcusian 'Repressive Tolerance' are alive and well! Make no mistake.

http://www.marcuse.org/herbert/pubs/60spubs/65repressivetolerance.htm

//THIS essay examines the idea of tolerance in our advanced industrial society. The conclusion reached is that the realization of the objective of tolerance would call for intolerance toward prevailing policies, attitudes, opinions, and the extension of tolerance to policies, attitudes, and opinions which are outlawed or suppressed.//

Welcome to the Orwellian/Marcusian/Socialist world.