Brian Greig is obviously passionate about the gay rights movement.

As a Christian I find his persistence in pushing for government acceptance of “the rights to marriage” absurd.

Classifying Christians as “Middle Ages” is also offensive. After all this is largely a civil issue and has little to do with what Christians think. The legal system has been gradually and systematically eroded to the point of no return – all in the name of getting on with the times.

But I understand his frustration at the hypocritical stance of the Howard gang; for all extensive purposes gays and lesbians have most of their civil rights like normal couples. So to remain “middle of the road” must be frustrating to our voting compatriots.

I think issues of that magnitude should not be left to the government of the day to decide. A national referendum should be the way to go. Too much is at stake.

Historically, most governments have had no long term vision past the next election. They bend under pressures from the loudest minority group of the day instead of casting visions for our grand children.

Brian also being a Christian, and a modern thinker puts some traditional or fundamentalist Chistians offside, however there have been calls from the Liberal MP Peter Lindsay in the seat of Herbert, who is also a Christian, to move toward legalising a "gay union."

Whilst I am not gay, I do have a "gay" female friend. I find her to be a pleasant human being, no different in aspiration than anyone else I have ever met, so "normal" in fact that her sexuality is not taken into account by anyone who knows her. This being the case, I have always failed to see why she or any other gay person should be discriminated against because of sexuality.

The bible I read says "do unto others as you would have them do unto you" as a major platform, and I for one have no problem in complying with that teaching.Peter Lindsay says gays are no different to anyone else, and that 10% of his church is gay.

On that basis, the ALP should be more progressive on the issue than the conservatives, however not a sound from them. Perhaps their Leader who is a conservative Christian himself may have something to do with that, perhaps he is holding the ALP back at a critical time in their history.

"After all this is largely a civil issue and has little to do with what Christians think."

I wish I could frame that comment and distribute it around to some select individuals and lobby groups coach. It is exactly right - so why did so many supporters of the marriage ban bill in parliament churn out all the Christian/biblical anti-gay chestnuts?

Somehow, it almost always turns out to be the "Christian" organisations that are the greatest enemies of equal civil rights and responsibilities for same-sex couples.

I agree coach, “Classifying Christians as “Middle Ages” is also offensive.” Christan's aren't middle ages, prehistoric would be a more apt description.

Greg, stop trying to divide Australia. I don't care what your sexual orientation is, just get on with it. We are sick of hearing people like you whinge constantly about how you need more rights. But I can understand that you and the rest of your PC cronies, won't be content until you drag this country down into the abyss of chaos. Fools like you are so selfcentred that all you are after, is what you want and forget about the rest of us.

Being a christian only shows us how much more dangerous your approach is.

What about all the other minorities that may want acceptance of their beleifs and ways of life, I suppose you will support Islams desire to introduce Muslim controls upon us. Or the right wing christians desire to return us to superstition and their debauched religious institutions and leaders.

What if I wanted to marry two people of the opposite sex, or introduce a ban on marriage because it leads to divorce, unhappiness and economic disasters. Will you support that, what about a ban on political parties. They are proven to be dishonest, corrupt and damaging to the future of the peole and country

You lost your seat in parliament because your ego was bigger then you intellect. You could have done lots more for your people by supporting the majority. You must be terribly confused about your own sexuality, to want to drag it up and flaunt it, then demand we listen and take the action you want.

All my friends of both sexes, who are differently orientated, cringe when they hear you, the Eva cox's and Rodney Croomes of the world open their mouths.

But when you are PC, religious and insecure, we can expect nothing less. Get a life and get on with enjoying it whilst you can and stop whinging.

I would like to see the option for all couples - whether same or different sexes be able to formally and legally acknowledge their relationship as a civil union. This should replace the very confusing notion of de facto relationships which is too vague and sometimes comes about unintentionally.

It should be possible for two people to live together in a relationship without having to forfeit their rights if they split up. It should also be possible for two people to live together in a relationship to choose to exchange vows of love and responsibility towards each other and thereby have the same legal rights as those who are married.

'Marriage' is something different and special and I would personally prefer it to stay as it is.

Marriage is between a man and a woman. Homosexuals who flaunt their homosexuality appear to be envious of the marriage ceremony. Two people who have a dinkum relationship should be entitled to cover themselves legally for the same benefits but without the marriage bit.
A formal service of some kind will be just as satisfying .
And it is about time they stopped describing themselves as "gay", it is a good little word that has been hijacked and does not fit.