The whole push for legalising gay marriage was predominately because a majority of voters were accepting of it. By the same yardstick a greater majority of voters prefer a plebiscite to a parliamentary vote.

Given that the Coalition has a mandate to pursue the Plebiscite, the alternative may be a parliamentary vote on in the issue only in 2019 or 2022.

If I was a young single worker today I would be very angry that both public and private sector workplace agreements provide additional benefits to 'marrieds' that include de facto partners, heterosexual and homosexual.

There is NO free lunch. Those additional benefits for large numbers of 'marrieds'(sic) have to be paid for and working singles are being forced to subsidise the 'love' choices of others.

I cannot see what benefit there is for a single worker, especially a young person, to belong to a union that is not bothered to represent his/her best interests. It is BS.

Gays only want to bet the gold stamp of legitimacy through trashing the Marriage Act. The experience of other countries that have introduced homosexual marriage is that there is a spate of show marriages by attention-seekers, immediately followed by separations. Then the interest peters away to a few lesbians who want wedding dresses and a photo somewhere.

Alright for pollies, private sector executives, senior public servants and others who can extract worthwhile benefits such as partner accompanied travel and super for life for the partner I suppose. A case of all for one and one for all, with the snouts planted firmly in the trough. However, someone always pays.

@onthebeach that young single worker is also funding people having kids and middle class welfare in general what is your point? as for your statement about gays separating please shown your research.

@runner please don't make commitments you're not prepared to follow through on.

Posted by Cobber the hound, "as for your statement about gays separating please shown your research"

Netherlands, try reading. Look it up for yourself. Besides, other posters have provided it many times before.

You say that, "that young single worker is also funding people having kids and middle class welfare in general", which only serves to prove the point I was making about the complete lack of care by Union heavies about the rights and welfare of single workers and especially young workers who are trying to make their way in the world.

Young workers have been copping the rough end of the pineapple for decades since Whitlam, also having to subsidise the gravy train of entitled 'victims'(sic) and their advocates and urgers that Labor relies on so heavily for votes in marginal seats.

@ontgebeach .. when you say "Netherlands, try reading. Look it up for yourself. Besides, other posters have provided it many times before." we all know you mean "I just made it up and have nothing to back up my claims".

Your antipathy towards the LGBTI community (like that of the author of this opinion piece) is writ large - and you demonstrate an ability (like the author) to ignore actual facts and manufacture your own in an endeavour to demonise that minority. The use of such misinformation is par for the course by the opponents of equality - who ignore actual facts, instead presenting their own unsubstantiated opinion as reality to create a strawman argument.

As for "trashing the Marriage Act", I think you'll find heterosexuals do that quite well on their own - and your attempt to blame "Gays" for your own ills is nothing but a misdirection (something else opponents to equality are good at).

@rob1966 exactly

@onthebeach just what exactly are you suggesting that unions should be asking for different rates of pay depending on people relationship status? Half the things your unhappy about have been brought in by Liberal governments not the unions.
Are you actually thinking about what you're saying or just having a rant?