And I'm happy to say that gp_ is Gregory Storer.

Gregory Storer -
On Line Opinion is a publication that covers a wide range of interests. It is one of Australia's most popular online sources. It addresses very many political and sociological concerns, other than those that specifically concern you. These concerns matter , Mr Storer, just as much as yours. You have no right to deny them a voice by destroying their outlet.

OLO has also published more pro gay articles than anti, including two by me.
In all of the forums connected with these articles you will find that anti gay commentary is challenged and refuted by very many commenters.

Instead of this method of dealing with anti gay sentiment, you want to shut down the entire publication, and to hell with every other concern raised here.

I don't like some of the anti gay things that are said anymore than you do.

But more than I dislike those comments, which can be and are refuted, I hate what you and other gay acitvists have attempted to do in lobbying to have financial support withdrawn from OLO, and bringing this publication to its knees.

Now you have demonstrated that you are no longer marginalised, but have arrived at the centre to the degree that you can wield the hegemonic tool of economic censorship, just like those who have oppressed you, are you content?

Oh brave new world, that has such people in it!

Sad that an open forum that celebrates free speech by supporting authors across a broad spectrum of views is targeted on the basis of one article.

Have those at IBM and ANZ forgotten the number of articles supporting same-sex marriage. Muhlenberg's article attracted many comments in support of same-sex marriage which is the beauty of an open forum. These comments were also freely published. This decision was badly advised and won't be popular with consumers.

The ANZ is able to sponsor the Gay Mardi Gras and support free speech at the same time - the two are not mutually exclusive. In fact gay rights would still be sitting somewhere in the back cupboard if it were not for those freedoms.

Worthy causes can be damaged by efforts to stifle free speech. Look how much flak the Christian Lobby cops when doing same; why try to emulate what clearly does not work?

Those who discriminate on the basis of sexuality are revealed in the written word. That does more for the cause than stifling free speech.

Good on you for adhering to those principles Graham. All the best.

Reader subs ok with me, but for those who can not contribute?
OLO is far better than these two and just maybe the monster has another home.
I support OLO and Graham,we should show our support with a contribution.

Reading the responses makes me wonder what is the original argument. I'll take it to be that advertising $'s have been lost because of the publication of a controversial article about gay marriage. Hon-est-ly!! I am old, a woman (straight) and a universtiy student and I am still being Enlightened. I may not agree with all I hear BUT I have to listen or I will not learn! Goodness me you guys, where the hell do you come from! LISTEN and learn. You don't have to side with all you hear but it will allow you to make an informed judgement. We have the freedom to make informed decisions .. don't waste this. This comes from understanding with an open mind. I would have thought the ANZ Bank was above worrying about the effect of being associated with a controversial topic such as gay marriages. Doesn't the ANZ Bank have gay clients?? I fail to see how the ANZ Bank is affiliated with gay marriage because of one article.

I'm a uni student and it stands to reason I am broke, but if I could I would donate a BIG amount of $'s. All for the sake of free speach and the right to read other opinions.

Get a life, people in the ANZ advertising Dept :)

in writing my previous post, I was advised to 'remove the profanity' before it would post. the profanity in question was changed to bulldust. Three letters difference. I have to agree that homosexuality being referred to as a 'perversion' also qualifies as a profanity, regardless of how many people agree with it. A popular opinion should not make it more worthy of the right to free speech.

My definitive, but relatively adjective was censored...but the highly insulting word 'perversion' was not.

Curious anomaly.