>>I don't think heterosexual people would have any problems with the association of natural sex with traditional marriage irrespective of whether it occurs.<<

I don't think they would either. And I don't think homosexual people would have any problems with the association of anal sex with homosexual marriage irrespective of whether it occurs (and I doubt that lesbians have much anal sex). I know heterosexual people wouldn't have any problems with the association of anal sex with homosexual marriage irrespective of whether it occurs, except for a small minority who seem to have an unhealthy fascination with other people's sex lives.

There is a word to describe people who spend a lot of time obsessing about other people's sex lives: perverts. Because let's face it: it's only a short step from spending much of your time thinking about other people's private, intimate moments with their loved one to climbing a tree outside their bedroom window with a pair of binoculars. All this obsession from the anti-gay marriage crowd over what gay people do in the privacy of their bedrooms just seems a bit weird and creepy to me.

I wouldn't mind so much except that I every time I try to have a reasonable discussion about gay marriage around here, it gets run off into a ditch by somebody with a strange fascination with buggery. It's tiresome, and I personally find the discussion of other people's most private and intimate moments rather distasteful. There's a lot more to marriage than sex and gay men are still going to have anal sex whether they're allowed to marry or not.

It would be nice, just for once, to have a discussion about gay marriage which focused on gay marriage rather than bumming.

Cheers,

Tony

"It leaves them performing an unnatural act and thus debasing marriage."
"The way I see it marriage is an officially solemnized relationship, an ideal..."

Surely the easiest thing is for all who hold such views to not perform the 'acts' or not let themselves get married in a way with which they disagree?

Up to now I've thought people with a preoccupation, bordering on the obsessive, with other's sex lives satisfied themselves with buying Who Magazine.

But as to what is 'natural'... to quote my grandmother, "You should get out more."

Here is one helpful tip. Unnatural sex is anything that leaves a bad taste in your mouth, or requires batteries.

None the less anal sex is unnatural regardless of who performs it, it is an act that nature did not intend, hence unnatural.

I must admit that I performed an unnatural act upon myself for years and still do it occasionally, though not the full act these days.

Looking at the results of the elections, it's actually pretty hard to see what motivated people ito vote the way they did, aside from confusion and disillusion. Except for one thing: same-sex marriage clearly had very little to do with anything.

However, I never took it for granted that the marriage equality 'issue' would necessarily sway the electorate as a whole, despite the number. A majority, incidentally.

However, overall majorities are not the same as majorities in electorates, or even in States.

Multi-cultural, well-educated and sophisticated electorates, filled with people who have daily contact with people of all sorts and don't feel they should fear them - these are the areas where the notion of marriage equality raises few eyebrows. And they may even be in the majority - but that doesn't necessarily equate to an overall electoral win.

Simple fact. just saying.

>>None the less anal sex is unnatural regardless of who performs it<<

See what I mean? It's always about the anal sex. I guess these weird sick perverts just can't help themselves.

>>it is an act that nature did not intend, hence unnatural.<<

Nature doesn't intend any acts; it cannot hold intentions because it lacks agency. Who taught you philosophy?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Agency_(philosophy)

Unnatural acts are simply those that do not occur in nature. But I don't believe in the supernatural so the only possible acts are natural acts - and the only acts which can be said with certainty to be unnatural are those that could never possibly occur because they would breach the laws of nature. I leave it as an exercise for the reader to imagine what sort of sex act would violate the laws of physics.

>>And they may even be in the majority - but that doesn't necessarily equate to an overall electoral win.

Simple fact. just saying.<<

You are quite correct jcro. May I call you Jim? The overall electoral win will come in time: older demographics have higher than average opposition to SSM and younger voters have higher than average support. Once enough of the worn out old fossils and their medieval views have shuffled off the mortal coil the electoral win will be inevitable :)

Cheers,

Tony

Can't imagine it influenced any voting intentions:

"I must admit that I performed an unnatural act upon myself for years..."

Umm, thanks for sharing... if that's not a contradiction in terms in this instance. It's not everyone who can pull themselves together...

You have reminded me to be more tolerant of anyone who needs time to come face to face with their issues.