Great article Jim. The gay marriage proponents would certainly like the polygamists out there to keep quiet at the moment while they promote their lies about ‘marriage equality’. The comments from the gay proponents against this article are as illogical as the sexual activity of gay people is perverse. I’d like to hear from the people who’d like to marry their pets – there is undeniably an extremely strong bond between many single people and their pets, so surely they should be allowed to marry too based on the gay arguments.

But in all honesty, you’ve got to feel so sorry gay people – really, what a terrible infliction to have. They can’t naturally have kids, and they so desperately want to be accepted in the community as being married. Whatever laws parliament makes on this issue, you’ve got to feel sorry for them. However, I especially feel so sorry for any unfortunate children who are raised by a gay couple, whether they like it not. And, yes, of course, not all heterosexual couples are perfect (yawn – would someone like to trot out that so very irrelevant argument again?)

If you really do need to feel sorry for someone, feel sorry for yourself. Being gay doesn't mean people don't have genitals, so the assumption that they are incapable of natural reproduction is something of an affront to human intelligence. I feel sorry for you - I'd hate to be that dumb. It must be hard to make friends...

I'm sure, though, that you have a lot of friends and get along with them all really well. After all, when you put fifty people with Down's syndrome in a room together there is bound to be a lot of hugging, but I think your most likely affliction is just plain ignorance. On the other hand, you could also just be trolling.

When I was about eight, I drew a face on my hand and practiced kissing it, which I will admit is a little gay, and I have often thought there would be advantages to homosexuality such as Abercrombie & Fitch reward points, successful couch fabric selection capabilities and the gift of dance. With or without a top on. This would come in extremely useful if I needed five hundred dollars and saw a poster advertising a dance competition with a first prize of five hundred dollars.

Unfortunately, it's not my thing, and I would never choose it. No one would. The fact is that gay people are as much a process of natural selection as stupid people like yourself are. Your suggestion that gay people can't naturally have kids suggests that at least you have some concept of the fact that being gay is perfectly natural. However, your logic functions failed when you drew this conclusion.

The fact that gay people are not naturally attracted to the opposite sex does mean that they should not be forced into a loveless marriage with someone just so that they can be married - they fall in love with people of the same sex, and want to marry them because of that. Not just for the sake of marriage. It's a concept that many straight people fail to understand.

Ben of Perth, animals or pets cannot give consent, hence you cannot marry your pet!
Nice try Ben, but ignorance is not bliss, when it comes to bigots!!

Jim Wallace makes good sense with this article. Those making negative comments are missing the facts presented.

There is clear evidence that other groups beside the gay community eg. polyamours, are desiring marriage and it is obvious that these groups will also push for such. Where will it stop? - a valid question.

What is with Croome’s discrimination?

Until now, my natural good manners have prevented me from posting here.

But since we have reached the point where we are blithely discussing marrying our pets, I'm confident that my crass behaviour will go completely unnoticed.

So here goes.

"Putting Pandora back in the marriage equality box"

Ummmm... Pandora was never in the box to begin with, so she could hardly be "put back", could she?

Ok, now I feel much better.

Come here Tiddles, it's time for our nap...

I am a mainstream christian and I know that Jim Wallace and the "Australian Christian Lobby" does not speak for me. I wonder how many people this lobby does speak for when a majority of Australians are in favour or 'marriage equality'.

Any mention of polygamy in the context of opposing marriage equality is a laughable and monstrous red herring. It is laughable because polygamy refers to one man marrying 3, 3, 4 or more women, or more rarely one woman marrying 2 or more men. I have never heard of three or four men wanting to marry each other or a group marriage of 3 or more women.

In any case, children born into a polyamorous family can hardly be seen as neglected when there are more parents for them to bond with.

Mr Wallace, you;ve had a fair hearing on a number of different platforms. Please give it away and accept the majority decision: it's not as if we were demanding you to marry another gay. Please keep your nose out of other peoples' business