First, I completely agree with the author.

In the past I have warned the Christian-based traditionalists time and again: "Beware! If you support the state and its coercive powers because it's on your side, it won't always be so! If you want your own freedom of religion, to follow God's ways, then never deny other people's freedoms".

- But they would laugh and not listen.

Now they come to grief, now the Marxist mob rejoicest, using the same traps which they have earlier set - and no saviour is in sight.

"Whoso diggeth a pit shall fall therein: and he that rolleth a stone, it will return upon him." [Proverbs 26:27]

' In the past I have warned the Christian-based traditionalists time and again: "Beware! If you support the state and its coercive powers because it's on your side, it won't always be so! If you want your own freedom of religion, to follow God's ways, then never deny other people's freedoms".'

Yuyutsu

you are right Yuyutsu especially when you have regressives who know nothing of truth. To put your trust in them is totally naive. As citizens we do have a right to influence and put our case. The Marxist lot in Govewrnment now are gutless and a disgrace. Their are still a few goods men like Andrew Hasting who not only put his life on the line for the country but is a man of high principle.

Wow Nicola, you must be one of the very few people in Oz who actually expect any truth to come from Malcolm Turnbull. He knows he's gone, & like Gillard before him is doing as much injury as he can to all those who rejected him.

A more realistic way of looking at the postal vote result is that only 48.97 percent of all eligible voters voted Yes.

"Before and during the postal survey, assurances were given, by the Prime Minister no less, that 'religious freedom…will be protected in any bill that comes before this parliament.'"

Once again the PM has shown that he is a man of his word. The problem is that his 'word' does not mean anything.

As has been the experience in Canada, the way is now clear in Australia for the totalitarian homosexual culture to suppress the fundamental freedoms of religion, speech, conscience and parental rights, for the 'benefit' of a few thousand same-sex or gender-fluid couples.

Rayco. If you want to play with figures, only about 30 percent of the eligible voters voted NO, so where does that leave your argument.

David

While talking about the freedom to discriminate, what about the discrimination against singles?

"Why should a single person be forced to contribute to, to subsidise, the love choices of others?

There is no denying that anyone who is able to claim 'married' status, which includes 'relationship' (de facto) is able to claim an array of entitlements and discounts that are denied to singles. There is an array of extra taxation, financial and work-related benefits that the Human Rights Commission say Gay couples should be getting. But the AHRC says nothing about singles who miss out but still have to pay.

Why should a single worker be subsidising through his/her taxes and through workplace agreements, to married entitlements that he/she is automatically excluded, barred from, because of his her/single status?

But singles are also being singled out to subsidise in other ways. For example, cheaper health fund for 'marrieds', a category vastly increased by Labor through expanded definitions of 'relationship' by Labor over the years.

Of course it goes without saying that the main beneficiaries have been the middle class. That is where SSM advocates Ms Penny Wong and ors come in, of course. But there are many thousands the same in the public bureaucracies, university staff and of course politicians, to name some.

Now, that really IS discrimination. Why should individuals who just happen to be single, ie not in a State defined 'love relationship' they can take advantage of, be forced to subsidise the love squeezes of others? It is not fair. That AHRC list of entitlements that Gays should now be entitled to and getting (a beaut pay rise in effect and just for being 'married') makes it very obvious.