Kevin Rudd sought to differentiate himself from Gillard and Abbott by being a campaigner for SSM...only to discover that the strategy got applause in certain circles but didn't bring any votes.

Kevin was vocal on this issue in the last week of the election on Q & A.

PM Abbott has been clear that he supports marriage as between a man and a woman.

The results are in- If this issue had mainstream support, Rudd would have attracted votes.The vote flow went the other way.

Please MP's-forget about this issue this term of Gov't.
There is no discrimination against gays in society.
Aussies are happy to live and let live.That's tolerance.

Marriage is currently defined to reflect the natural order of biology and to reflect public policy that children are generally best raised by a father and mother,if possible.

Lets focus on those that are discriminated against-the unwanted unborn & asylum seekers

The truth is that gay marriage, which was only up until recently sledged and reviled by gay activists, would not be a vote winner with all gays either.

It is a just a few noisy activists. As is quite apparent from the main suspects in the media and particularly the publicly-funded national broadcasters who promote gay marriage at every breath, the main push for gay marriage is coming from the leftie 'Progressives' and radical feminists. They pursue their own secondary gains from the gay marriage Trojan Horse.

What gay really wanted the interfering 'Progressives' to redefine and extend the de facto provisions of family law to him? Particularly where the definition is so murky and broad that even the government bureaucrats themselves, who now look over the shoulders of gays informing them of their de facto status (?!) can and do disagree on individual cases.

Whereas once gays could have whatever relationship suited and could easily sort their own assets on break-ups, lawyers and courts are now involved. It was simply not enough for the 'Progressives' and feminists to re-jig the family law for straights, they just had to extend their social re-engineering to gays. They always presume to know what is best for others and the changes happen whether gays like it or not.

with the Greens vote down 3% australia wide it shows that murdoch and the abc are pushing an agenda most don't want. hopefully Tony listens to his convictions and does not get bludegeoned by a loud vocal nasty minority group.

So if the comments so far are correct in saying that same sex marriage is no big deal for most, why was it raised as an election issue by Rudd? There is no discrimination, even gay activists like Helen Razer concede that. You are all right in one thing though, and that is that the electorate wants its leaders to focus on real issues. Back to work, oue elected leaders ...

Most comments agree there is a lot of noise being made by a few who want dysfunction in society, break down family values, disrupt principled lifestyles - it makes them think they are in charge. Homosexual discrimination is targeted more for these reasons than any other. But the people have used this election as a catalyst for change and spoken in favour of what they believe will bring success, based on the model of two leaders. Tony Abbott prayed (as did others) may the best man win. Therein lies the difference.

Speaking of marriage equality, does anyone supporting same-sex marriage support marriage equality for those of polyamorous sexual preference - i.e. polygamy and polyandry - and if not, why not?