From the Booklet -

"marriage includes an emotional union, but it goes further than that. It involves a substantial bodily and spiritual union of a man and a woman."

Over 70% of marriage ceremonies in Aus (and probably at least a few other Western countries) are civil ceremonies ie. they are not religious ceremonies.

Society has already decided whether marriages [largely] involve a substantial 'spiritual union'.

But religious organisations and religious couples can still have a marriage with a "substantial bodily and spiritual union of a man and a woman".

McReal

When the church calls marriage a “spiritual union” it is talking about the spiritual union between husband and wife, not the fact their marriage may have been conducted in church. A civil marriage or de facto marriage can be a “spiritual union”.

In my view there is no reason a same-sex marriage cannot also be a bodily and spiritual union

Thank you, Shadow Minister:

"As an atheist and someone that supports marriage equality, I don't agree with much of what the catholic church is trying to say.

However, what I find particularly abhorrent is the attack on free speech and the attempts by the left whingers to crush dissenting opinions."

I'm also an atheist, but I'm disgusted at the completely diversionary and irrelevant attacks, the easy marks and free kicks, of the BS pseudo-left, who can't seem to mount any sort of case for free speech IF it's somebody else's. Gutless wonders.

I don't like the Catholic church - apart from being atheist, it seems, looking back through my genealogy, I come from a long line of Protestants on both/every side: my lovely old grandfather was a proud Callumthumpian. But Catholics have as much right to express their opinions as anybody else.

it doesn't mean that their opinion is correct, or even that it should be respected. But it should be allowed to be expressed, and it should be able to be criticised , even ridiculed.

If the BS 'left' can't get their pinny little heads around that, then they really have become irrelevant at best, and a danger to free speech at worst.

Ah, so that's why they wet themselves to apologise for terrorism, and to try to divert discussion away from it to straw men and red herrings. That makes sense now.

Thanks again, SM.

Joe

Joe,

"I don't like the Catholic church - apart from being atheist, it seems, looking back through my genealogy, I come from a long line of Protestants on both/every side: my lovely old grandfather was a proud Callumthumpian"

Now don't be like that, think of all the Catholic ancestors that you have before the Protestants.

In my family I have among my immediate ancestors, Anglicans, Catholics, Methodists and Presbyterians.
My first ancestors in Australia were Presbyterian then the Anglicans and lastly the Irish Catholics.
Before them was a long period of 100% Catholicism and before that various pagan religions.

Hi Is Mise,

No, I don't have any dislike for Catholics, I admire much of their practices for its spirit and honesty, and people's concern for each other. No, not so much the Church itself.

As long as people have genuine compassion for other people in desperate need, people from groups other than their own and followers of religions other than their own, I don't care what they believe, they are people I would be happy to be friends with.

I'm in a couple of singing groups and of course, at this time of the year, we're practising all manner of Christmas songs, which, as an atheist, I really enjoy. Many of them I've sung since primary school, of course. My atheism pre-dated primary school, but that hasn't stopped me enjoying some beautiful and stirring songs. And why should God have all the best tunes ?

Freedom of speech extends to everybody, including atheists, the Catholic Church and Islamic groups, as long as they are not inciting violence against any group. We can all get offended at a view which is different from our own, so that would be a ludicrous argument to use against it. For anybody who may be offended at something, I suggest you grow a pair, cop it and try to give as good as you've got. It can be fun.

For example, in the light of the micro-aggression campaign, where people are holding up signs about some perceived slight, I was planning on walking past people with their signs with one of my own saying "I'm probably a racist, but I don't give a toss" just to get some freedom of expression going. There's not enough of it around. Passionate dispute is vital to a healthy society.

As is red wine, of course.

Joe

Hi Loudmouth

I support your post. I was raised as a Catholic who went to mass every Sunday.

So why did my faith change, simple – since the mid 1990’s was aware of the most despicable abuse to children by priests, nuns, Salvation Army Homes and many other institutions run by Church and affiliated organisations.

I sent letters to respective leaders in government at the time. I remember one response being – nothing enlightening except – “keep going” with my cause.

We now have a Royal Commission into Institutional Abuse – and (we and many others) had no idea as to the extent of child abuse now uncovered.

I applaud those brave persons who are prepared to front the Royal Commission to relate their horrific experiences at the “hands” of those persons who were "supposed" to care for them.

So my question has to be (to Catholic Priests and other institutions involved in the care of children placed in their care for all those years yet receiving Government funding, whilst being abused) – who the F!@#K do you think you are to have abused so many of those children...and in the name of "faith"?