Logical:

The equality that same-sex couples want is not the equality of relationships but the equality of sexuality. Whilst they claim to want their relationship to be equal in all respects to that of opposite sex couples what they are really seeking is an affirmation from society that homosexuality is as valid as heterosexuality.

You can have equality without calling your relationship a marriage. Whatever advantages that marriage supposedly provides can be provided to any relationship. You do not have to be ‘married ‘. Both married people and couples benefit equally and if they don’t then pressure should be brought to bear on those who discriminate. Same-sex couples should be treated equally but they do not need to be married for this to happen.

They should be content to come up with a new name that describes their relationship and to make sure that those in authority give them everything that heterosexual couples have in their relationships. Then they would have equality in every sense of that word except that their relationships would have a different name. What is so hard about that?

If you can have the equality that you claim you want without causing so much angst to another group of people (those who see marriage as being the name of the relationship given to some opposite sex couples) then why would you not do this? You can have what you want and all the grief could stop. The only reason you would see this as unreasonable is if you were actually agitating for something other than equality of relationship. This is what they are doing.

The government and society should call their bluff by creating a new type of relationship and making sure they have all the equality except in name only. We would soon see how dedicated to equality they were. Wanting that word for no good reason is like the petulant child who wants the medicine that the mother is giving the sibling even though it does not need it. It is not the medicine it craves but the attention.

Phanto
I agree with your assessment and in particular your statement "what they are really seeking is an affirmation from society that homosexuality is as valid as heterosexuality".
In my view no one should demand that everyone else approves of their personal preferences.
A legislated redefining of the traditional meaning of the word marriage only gives the illusion of the desired affirmation. Redefining words will not reconcile competing views.
Unfortunately some individuals may seek to redefine the word marriage as a mechanism to hurt their opponents rather than gain equality with them

Sounds true and reasonable that "what they are really seeking is an affirmation from society that homosexuality is as valid as heterosexuality"

But if they seek society's affirmation, then why are they asking it from the government? Don't they realise that the government is the people's enemy, so whatever the government approves society will despise?

Yuyutsu:

Whether you like it or not the government in a democracy is representative of a majority of the society.

If they can get such a representative to affirm their sexuality rather than just give them equality then it shows the power they can generate by their emotional manipulation. This gives them the confidence to try even more manipulation so that they can begin to seek advantages to which they do not have a right. If you are not restricted by reason because your government is too weak to enforce it then you can do some real damage to a society.

Dear Phanto,

<<the government in a democracy is representative of a majority of the society.>>

Still there is no democracy in Australia. The electoral system is designed so that ordinary people will never be represented.

Anyway, it is true that a pressure group can obtain advantages from government, but this way they will never receive affirmation from the people: they could possibly achieve fear-based obedience but they will never be loved or even respected if they take that path.