Minor Taur.. all my posts are factual... So don't lie.
Just for you again...

The reality is that a large number of LGBTIQ people are not committed to a long-term, monogamous relationship. Two recent national surveys, “Private lives: A report on the health and wellbeing of GLBTI Australians” and “Monopoly: A study of gay men’s relationships”, it is clear that a large number of LGBTIQ people prefer a more fluid lifestyle. All my Gay friends agree with that, none are interested in getting married.

In the 1st survey: Only 5-10% reported formalising the relationship with a marriage or commitment ceremony, while most others had no wish to do so. In the 2nd survey: Only a minority of men indicated they would like to marry their primary regular partner. To the question, “Would you marry your partner?” only 11% said yes.

While Turnbull favours a plebiscite, a policy largely endorsed by the Australian people in a survey, Shorten and Wong say they fear that debate will lead to gays and lesbians being vilified and attacked. Suddenly Australians have all become homophobic and hateful. Both are wrong to argue that those supporting "heterosexual" marriage are bigoted etc. The Left’s default position has been to engage in ad hom attacks.

While they both argue in favour of SSM a great many in the LGBTIQ community show no real interest in it. Also ironic that, after being elected as servants of the people, they wish to deny one of the basic tenets of democracy – the right of citizens to vote on issues. Surely this issue demands the people have a say. Without it, any change will have no credibility or authority.

97% of Australians identify as heterosexual, surely they have every right to express their opinion on whether the institution of marriage, a cornerstone, a bedrock of a stable, peaceful society, should be so radically redefined.

If only 11% of 3% want this change... just why are we contemplating it. Little wonder they refuse a plebiscite and seek a Progressive government consisting of a handful of pollies to over-rule the rest of us.

YAAAAAWWWWWNNNNN...the T800 tedium continues.

T800,

Instead of stubbornly digging your heels in and simply repeating your assertions, how about you actually try addressing my criticisms of them?

Fat chance of that, eh?

Apparently you can’t give an example of obfuscation or disingenuousness from myself; you’ve again stated the obvious by reminding us that “[i]n Australia Marriage is the Union of a Man and a Woman”, with some unnecessary capital letters; you’ve again assumed that all politicians are lefties without giving a reason (that has not already been discredited) as to why they shouldn’t be allowed to vote on this specific issue without a plebiscite first; and you again demonstrate that you have no idea what a reductio ad absurdum is.

<<Suddenly Australians have all become homophobic and hateful.>>

Well, a vicious hate campaign ensued in Ireland. In all jurisdictions that have held a public vote on the issue, the mental health of those in the gay community declined measurably during the debate.

http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.602.5629&rep=rep1&type=pdf

What do all your gay friends think of that?

<<… the institution of marriage, a cornerstone, a bedrock of a stable, peaceful society, should be so radically redefined.>>

And how will allowing same-sex couples to marry compromise any of this? The change is hardly "radical", too, by the way. I could think of changes far more radical.

<<If only 11% of 3% want this change... >>

Actually, the figure consistently sits around the 70% mark, with all polls since 2004 indicating a majority in favour of same-sex marriage, and that’s still growing. Your flawed figure assumes that only gay people who want to get married support the changes. What about all the heterosexual people wanting the change? You’ve been debating the topic with some of them and still you fail to account for them.

AJ Philips you are wasting your time trying to any logic or coherent argument from T800. Just simply repeats its deceitful claims. Lets see how the deceit works.

T800: 'Only 5-10% reported formalising the relationship with a marriage or commitment ceremony, while most others had no wish to do so.' The wording of the survey, was such: '...the majority of respondents (between 52% of men and 39% of women) indicated no intention or wish to formalise their current relationship.' Note the word CURRENT. That means those who said 'no' could in the future change that answer. That's a moot point though. To try build a case against same sex marriage on the basis some don't want to marry their current partner is a fallacy. It is also ignores the extension that if some heterosexual couples don't want to marry then marriage should just be abandoned.

T800 then deceitfully tries to build an objection based on the statistic of 11% of gay men wanting to marry. When looking at the actual report the number of those who answered yes to the question ‘Would you marry your partner?’ 34.3% said yes and 34.6% were unsure. The 11% figure was from men with multiple partners. Ah, the deceit is simply growing and growing.

Exposing T800 as a deceitful fraud means it is no longer worth engaging with.

//Perhaps they are not as amazingly liberated as you are when it comes to talking about sex?//

They're amazingly liberated when it comes to talking about some types of sex. But not others. I just thought it was interesting to observe the types of sex they're more comfortable discussing. Not trying to make anyone envious.

//The Australian people not a handful of LW progressive pollies should have a say on this issue... therefore a plebiscite is required.//

Still a non-sequitur the second time round. Haven't we already discussed the futility of repetition? And it appears that the RW pollies are still playing hide & seek... little scamps.

//97% of Australians identify as heterosexual, surely they have every right to express their opinion//

Yes, they do. And they exercise it. Frequently. I'm surprised you haven't noticed anybody doing it around here, seeing as that is exactly what we've been doing. What did you think we were discussing? Sunflower cultivation? Art-deco design? Good chilli recipes?

//If only 11% of 3% want this change//

There is a difference between believing you should have the right to get married and actually wanting to marry somebody; you're falsely conflating the two. What percentage of homosexuals believe they should have the right to get married? And what percentage of the 97% want it? Or do their views suddenly not matter any more?

Phanto says:” Why does it matter whether or not homosexuality is a perversion? This issue is about same-sex marriage and not about same-sexuality marriage. Sexuality has nothing to do with it.He is correct.

AJP, in his desperation to distract from the true agenda of the same sex activists led the thread to a discussion about perversion., and has employed his nonsense “fallacy” arguments to attempt to keep it there.

As I said:” We should consider what the activist perverts say about marriage.
The lesbian activist Gessen says:”” Gay marriage is a lie.”
• “Fighting for gay marriage generally involves lying about what we’re going to do with marriage when we get there.”
• “It’s a no-brainer that the institution of marriage should not exist.” (This statement is met with very loud applause.)
http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2013/04/29/lesbian-activists-surprisingly-candid-speech-gay-marriage-fight-is-a-lie-to-destroy-marriage/
“Homosexual activist and pornographer Clinton Fein echoes Gessen's candid sentiments: "Demand the institution [of marriage] and then wreck it," he once wrote. "James Dobson was right about our evil intentions," he quipped. "We just plan to be quicker than he thought."
http://www.onenewsnow.com/perspectives/matt-barber/2015/08/17/the-gay-marriage-gauntlet-time-to-choose

This is from an address by John Murphy MP in 2012
Mr MURPHY (Reid) (12:11): I rise to speak against the Marriage Equality Amendment Bill 2012. …… Supporting Altman's call to remove the words 'a man and a woman' as a first step to abolishing the Marriage Act, prominent gay writer Masha Gessen attacked those who claim that redefining marriage to include same-sex couples will not diminish the importance of traditional marriage, saying: 'It is a lie to say the institution of marriage won't change … We want to abolish marriage.' Her words confirm my previous speech in this House, when I said redefining marriage would change the meaning of marriage for all Australians. Effectively, it would make marriage meaningless.
http://australianmarriage.org/parliament-gay-marriage-debate-opens-we-want-to-abolish-marriage/

”