missantar,

Regrettably, the answer to your question is "no".

Furthermore, Grace has demonstrated conclusively with her infantile behaviour in her last few posts that she has nothing worthwhile to contribute to this debate.

I'd have been prepared to bet that whichever way DM answered Grace's earlier question regarding faithfulness, Grace would have triumphantly claimed she had just proven a point. Sadly, her entire argument seems to be centred around elegant diversions designed to side-step the facts. Pity her bogus claims appear to fly in the face of statistical evidence.

Interestingly enough, in the United States (I think Utah to be exact) a group of polygamists are fighting for the right to 'marriage'. Their argument is that if gays can argue for 'marriage', why can't they.

Hello,

I honestly don't think it would make any difference to heterosexual marriages if gay people were to get married.

Yes - heterosexual relationships are generally great things that ensure the 'survival of the species'. But gay relationships can also be wonderful relationships based on love, trust, honesty etc. all the great things.

The two are not mutually exclusive. We need to stop creating an 'us' and 'them' type of argument with this marriage/family debate. I can't help but think the Australian Family Association don't actually have any policies on dealing with the real problems confronting families - instead they scapegoat gay people. I think its really sad that with all the lessons of the 21st century such as the apartheid and the holocaust, that people still think its just and right to attack a group of people in society based simply on who they are.

I recommend anyone interested in this topic check out the '2001 moral majority' Morgan Poll. The poll found 59% of Australians disagreed when asked if 'homosexuality is immoral' and 36% agreed. The demographics of this are fascinating.

Men (45% said yes it was immoral)
Women (only 27% said it was immoral)
We all know men have anxieties about homosexuality because its an imagined threat to their masculinity.

63% of city people do not think homosexuality is immoral
54% of country people do not think homosexuality is immoral
I guess because country people are not as exposed to gay people and therefore do not see how normal/nice/human they really are.

75% of people with no religion do not think homosexuality is immoral.
60% of Anglicans, 57% of Catholics and 56% of Methodists do not think homosexuality is immoral.

on the other hand the majority of Baptists and Presbyterians do think it is immoral.

There was a direct correlative found between the amount of education you have and your tendency to think homosexuality is immoral.

Primary School Level Only (56% think it is)
High School Level Only (finished year 12 - 37% think it is)
Tertiary Educated (only 26% think it is)

Also, people who vote for One Nation or The National Party are more likely to think homosexuality is immoral.

So the basic profile for someone to think homosexuality is

OVER 65, MALE, ONE NATION VOTER, FINISHED SCHOOL IN PRIMARY SCHOOL.

Thank goodness more and more people are going to university!!!!!!!! Or we would all be confused bigots.

Most Australians probably do not agree that gay people should be able to get married - but this will change. But it is clear the majority do not question the moral legitimacy of same-sex relationships. Groups like the AFA want to wind back the clock to a time when homosexuality was illegal. They do not simply want to maintain the current definitions of family - they want gay people wiped off the face of the planet. THAT IS TERRIFYING!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

OFhust

The Morgan Gallop Poll and many others like it also found that Labour was going to win the last election convincingly.

Well I guess that is good reason to keep discriminating against a group in society then?????????

Nobody is discriminating against gays by merely pointing out facts. The gay community, as a lobby group, reminds me of a caricature drawing. They are a very small body of people, with a very large voice. And yet they continually cry 'persecution'.

You have very good representation in the media and in the legal profession. Why do I mention the legal profession? Because I know for a fact that in actuarial studies, the profession that has the highest risk of aids is the legal profession.

The contributors here have not discriminated against gays. In a nutshell, they have merely said that if gays want recognition for their 'pairing', in a democratic country they can do so. But don't call it 'marriage', because marriage it ain't!

Words and their meanings are of critical importance. The community spends millions of dollars each year paying lawyers to determine the meaning of words. The outcome of which determines the fortunes of people.

That is why the gay community is working so hard to change the meaning of the words 'marriage' and 'family'. You wish to change people's perception of 'marriage' and 'family', in order to give homosexual unions respectability and power. The population has already voted that, in the best interests of society and future generations, they do not wish to give this respectability to homosexual unions.