Alan B:

Every time this issue is raised you raise the issue of the 'accident of birth' and yet it is totally irrelevant to whether or not same-sex marriage is reasonable. Whether homosexuals are born or made does not matter. What matters is why they should be given a government issued marriage certificate.

No one should be given such a certificate. It is not the government's place to be issuing such certificates. Governments should not be in the business of affirming or denying emotional relationships nor should they be even seen to be doing so. This is not a role that anyone needs to play. It is for the individuals themselves to affirm or deny their own emotional attachment.

Whatever their sexuality might be is irrelevant.

Dear phanto,

What governments should or shouldn't do is beside the
point. The fact is marriages to be recognised legally
in this country with all the legal rights included require
a marriage certificate. That is the law as it stands.

The Marriage Act clearly states that marriage is between
a man and a woman to the exclusion of all others. This
is the change that same-sex couples are asking for. They
want to be able to have the same choice that heterosexual
couples have in our society - and that is the choice of
being able to have their marriage recognised legally.

It does matter that homosexuals are born not made! Given one section of a brainwashed from birth, made homophobes! Will never ever accept anything that conflicts with their brainwashed from birth, MAN MADE belief system!

And when the evidence conflicts with that MAN MADE belief system, they trot out disingenuous garbage that claims, born or made just does not matter! And true for them, given born is not something that can be modified except by brainwashed from birth, bastardry!

It is an important distinction, given as long as this errant, indoctrinated from birth inculcated belief system remains. It will remain alone, the ongoing and continuing single remaining reason, justification or excuse for unending gay bashing, discrimination and worst of all, ostracising estranged members of one's own family!

There are none so blind, as the brainwashed from birth, cult members!
Alan B.

Methinks all you undeserving 'n commenting Sinners should pay homage to His Eminence, Cardinal Pell a great MAN* of the Church. I hear he supports Gay marriage.

He is a humble man in all things, totally misunderstood, who puts his Australian and Vatican flocks before his own affairs.

So let's hear it for His Eminence.

* Um, woman in that church, being the God-ordained focus of temptation for MAN, can't even rise in priesthood.

Amen, Amen, Ar, Ar, Ar, Ar MEN.

Setting to one side the pro- and con- arguments and returning to the politics of the gay marriage, there should be concern that a reportedly very small number of activists have been able to bring about such mammoth social and political change and so quickly, almost before the public has been able to comprehend what they are about and the impacts are known, or even identified.

This is not to enter into whether it is all good or bad. -Simply to say that where a small number of activists can cause an abrupt change in social direction and with legislative effect to reinforce their will, what is to stop other activists, possibly with nasty intent (and totalitarians spring to mind), from applying the same formula and doing the same?

This article, although somewhat slanted in one direction (which is why independent university research is needed), is interesting in that it attempts some analysis of the 'dark arts' of manipulating the media, public and politicians,

http://www.thetrumpet.com/10772-the-shrewd-strategy-behind-same-sex-marriage

Perhaps some aware of the same model, tools and strategies in use elsewhere and working powerfully and seemingly impervious to debate/challenge.

Foxy:

What governments do is never beside the point. What they do should always be for good reason and there is no good reason why they should affirm or deny the emotional relationships of anyone.

“They want to be able to have the same choice that heterosexual
couples have in our society - and that is the choice of
being able to have their marriage recognised legally.”

How do you know that is what they want? They could also want the government to affirm homosexual relationships regardless of the legality of marriage. Perhaps they don’t want legal marriage at all. The legal aspects of marriage might simply be irrelevant to them. They just want the government to say that homosexual relationships are the same as heterosexual relationships. How could you tell the difference in their motives?

It would be extremely naive to believe them when they say they want the same legal rights as heterosexuals. It would be much more likely to presume they are after something else altogether which is government affirmation of homosexuality since the ‘legal rights’ are hardly of any great importance to even heterosexuals who marry.

leoj:

Manipulation is the key word. They have been able to manipulate society by seeking sympathy. As if not being able to marry ever caused anyone real pain. If ‘love is love’ then it exists whether or not you are married but they have tapped into the whole love and marriage meme. There is a multi-million dollar industry dependent on maintaining the connection between love and marriage and they have a lot riding on keeping that connection alive.

It is about society’s skewered attitude to love and marriage that has enabled SSM homosexuals to have such power and influence. Stupidly they see it as an affirmation of homosexuality when in fact it is about adding fuel to the love and marriage neurosis. It is not really about them at all.