@ Chrys Stevenson,

It's not that homosexuals will be 'bred out' or suffer any harm whatsover - in this study the treatment obviously takes place before there's any awareness at all. The 'homosexual' will still have a healthy and happy life, he just won't be 'homosexual' but the same person in every other way - according to this science;

http://articles.latimes.com/2010/aug/15/science/la-sci-adrenal-20100815

The only reason to be against this is that it would prevent people choosing to have homosexual children, i.e. the doctor would say 'your child's going to be gay' and the parent would have to refuse using the treatment.

But I'm no doctor or scientist, so I'm not sure how it all works in detail, but it does seem harmless

I called out my mum on this issue the other night.
She was cooing over some Homosexuals she's encountered who've adopted(more likely surrogate from what I understand) a little boy from overseas, saying how great it was.
I reminded her that when I was a kid she repeatedly warned me and my brother about homosexuals and that she would never in a million years have left us in a long term arrangement with such people.
Ok for other kids not good enough for her own.
This is the prevailing mindset among the "50% of Australians" who support homosexual marriage,as long as it's someone else's kids they don't care.
Just like the Lefty parents in Fitzroy and Carlton who don't let their kids go and play on the public housing estates or send them to the local primary schools...oh but they Luuuurve "Multiculturalism".
Furthermore these studies, both negative and positive all come from sources supportive of the "Gay Rights" lobby, so the "support" for this issue is only informed by one source, that's like asking the chairman of Coca Cola if Coke is a good product.
If you asked the academics who write these studies of Homosexual reltionships whether they support Gay Marriage or not, and bearing in mind that their livelihood and reputation depends upon a politically correct answer....I need go no further, we all know what would happen to them if they gave an incorrect response.
What's alarming is that in relation to this issue all other opinions are negated by the time honoured tactic of holding a gun to our heads, in this case "Gay youth suicide".
If young Homosexuals are committing suicide that says more about homosexuality and the people advocating it than people who disagree with them.

<<the adult male who (homo)sexually molests young boys is not likely to be homosexual>>
A very convenient disassociation between homosexual acts and homosexuality!

I refer you once again to the seminal report on the sexual abuse of minors by catholic priests which demonstrated that 80.9% of the victims were boys:
http://www.usccb.org/nrb/johnjaystudy/

Male priests - boy victims > homosexual child abuse

@ Proxy

Proxy, Catholic Priests have been molesting children for centuries, with little happening after the mid 1990s.

Their distorted view of sexuality, obtained from the Church's distorted view of it and for them, in conjunction with their far greater access to boys than girls in recent decades, is likely to mean many of those acts could not be defined as homosexual or heterosexual.

This child molestation angle isn't a particularly good way of articulating dissent if applied in a general way.
What we can be specific about is the motivations and opinions of Homosexual advocates and social engineers over the years.
Homosexuality was probably just as widespread before the sexual revolution of the 1960's but it wasn't promoted as normal and there were laws against it.
All that's changed is the law and the way homosexuality is promoted and dignified in the media, there's been no change to Homosexuals or Homosexuality nor to heterosexuals and their values.
Going back to the genesis of the "Gay Movement" pederasty was a very prominent part of their activism, to the extent that a bill on lowering the age of consent was introduced into parliament in the Netherlands with the full support of the Left Wing parties.
The left and "Respectable" Conservatives like this author have this blindspot when it comes to Homosexual activism and it's historical links to pederasty (among other things, drug use,crime, domestic violence, infidelity, promiscuity) but the same people will scream long and loud if anyone else appears on the political scene with historical links to politically incorrect thought.
As I said earlier, all the information published on homosexuality comes from one ideological source, dissenters don't have the resources to produce studies and propaganda such as films and TV series and what's more it's illegal to portray homosexuals in a negative or discriminatory light. So the "50% of Australians" who approve of Gay marriage as long as it doesn't impact on them personally are not "informed", they're not getting any other viewpoint save that from sympathetic sources.
Discrimination means making a choice.
They're being informed that they can legally discriminate in favour of homosexuals and that they risk a penalty if they discriminate against them....no choice in the matter at all.
In the absence of any evidence that "Gay Marriage" will improve the lives of all Australians all we can go on is a gut feeling, my gut feeling is that it'll end in tears and we shouldn't go down that road

Jay of Melbourne, by your postings you appear to have not experienced true love in your life. What issues you have to living your life, the love and commitment of two same sex couples towards each other, will have absolutly no affect on your life.
Only you can find love and contentment, live your life as you want to, and not carry negative baggage of your life experience.

@Kipp.
You're only saying that because I'm heterosexual.
To you heterosexuality is flawed by a syndrome of of hangups and we need to be "liberated" from our "Hate".
You composed that post in exactly the same way as a rabid homophobe might to "Spew Hate".

What's love got to do with legislative change?
A state is nothing but a monopoly on the use of force, our contract with it is co-operation in exchange for protection.
A law is an exercise in the use of that force over the entire population, no one is exempt from laws.
Any change to the marriage act will impact all Australians because it applies to all Australians.
It'll impact me and many others posting on this thread because our personal views on the matter will be criminalised over night.
If our views are no longer protected and our liberty is no longer guaranteed if we show dissent then that means the contract between state and individual is broken.
This is one issue to you and to the author because you both have a monotheistic, universalist outlook, but to people such as myself whose principles are informed by a diverse set of value systems and world views, some unpopular and some technically illegal more legislation is just more justification for the use of force delivered into the hands of the state.

Barbarian, Heretic, Vandal,Philistine we Polytheists have had lots of names over the years, lately it's Hater, Racist, Bigot, Redneck but we'll endure in the natural world while your artificial empires of words and foolish whims will continue to rise and fall into dust.