Yeah, its a little be strange how some churches get riled up about marriage but many don't seem to have a plan to educate, employ, house and provide congregations the type of vibrant Christian culture envisioned by the apostles.

“"We are committed to being an inclusive church that embraces LBGTIQ people." And added: "And to culturally appropriate discussions about relationships and marriage across our diversity."

Well, that's the Uniting Church for you: a renegade mob made up of Methodists and uncommitted Presbyterians and what was left of the Congregationalists. They deny the tenets of Christianity and warp it to current worldy perversions. Congregations were falling, so let's get hip and attract the loopy Left. But, it didn't work, and the Uniting Church is getting more irrelevant by the day. The people they are pandering to still have contempt for all religion.

“The Uniting Church's beliefs are impressive”? Only to silly old Peter Bowden, who might be in favour of SSM and other perversions, has no idea of the Christian message – the one that the Uniting Church ratbags are NOT putting out.

There is no need to take into consideration what the churches think of SSM nor is there any need for the churches to present their arguments based on their religion. Same-sex marriage is simply unreasonable and illogical quite apart from religious considerations.

The government is the sole arbiter as to what kinds of marriages they will support and what kinds they will not support. They are entitled to draw a line as they do in many other areas of government support. The aged pension kicks in at 65 not 64 or 66. They have to draw a line somewhere.

In regard to marriage they have drawn the line at supporting marriages only between one man and one woman. This excludes polygamous marriages and marriages between people of the same sex. This is not discrimination based on any regulated recognisable characteristic such as sexuality or gender. It is not aimed at homosexuals specifically because two heterosexual people of the same gender are also excluded from government consideration.

If you want the government to draw the line somewhere either side of where it now exists then you have to present good reasons why they should change it. None of the excluded people have been able to present viable reasons why this should happen.

Did you say Christian, Peter? Are you sure it's Christian not some medieval cult with a sword bearing, blood soaked fanatic at its head?

Has anyone among them bothered to look at the appalling suicide rate among young men? And just as dead as if killed by the evil tongue of some finger pointing medieval witch doctor or the sword of a fanatical bishop!

The golden rule states that we do unto others as ourselves.

Recent medical progress has reportedly uncovered the gay gene, which is not a single gene but a number of them, at the bottom on the DNA spiral?

So, only the abysmally ignorant are going to still follow the, I believe, hate filled ranting/satanic exhortations of this man, who claims among other things, to know the mind of and speak for God?

Inasmuch as yo do to the least among you, you also do unto me! Quote unquote.

Time to let go and let God. Nobody but nobody is going to be forced to officiate in ceremony they find personably unpalatable!

Moreover, it is we the people who will decide this issue not some self appointed religious fanatic(s)!

Bring on the next election, which will be the only decisive plebiscite we need and end all this control freak clap trap crap for once and for all!
Alan B.

Phanto,

You are dead right. The law on marriage has nothing to do with churches. The Australian marriage act clearly states that marriage is between a man and a woman. In my view, that is the way it should stay. However, people being what they are, some now want the act changed. Frankly, if I were in charge, they would be told to go away and grow up. But, our elected government has decided, wrongly in my view, that the marriage act could be changed only if agreed to by the people at a via a plebiscite. If SSM became law by will of the people, I would shut my mouth and say no more about it.

What angers me in this instance is, that Mr. Bowen seems to think it is good for a Christian church to OK SSM, when it is clearly damn well not OK. Christian dogma is quite clear on the subject – it is not on; and, I really despise churchmen who think that the can twist the faith to fit in with secular fantasies.

Allan,

Speaking of the “abysmally ignorant' as you have, I think that you are ignorant of the Christian faith and what it stands for. There has always been a separation between church and politics in Australia, as there should be. But, the church and individual Christians have every right to an opinion on politics and the running of their country. Any Australian citizen has such a right. My point is, whether you like the Christian viewpoint or not, it does exist and it will be expressed, just the same as the viewpoints of other religions and no religion at all.

2,000 years of tradition and values are not going to be overturned for modern whims and fancies.

no wonder the Uniting church is surviving on real estate and grannies. If their average member is as ignorant as Peter when it comes to homosexuality then they are a lost cause.