My next door neighbours are an old gay couple, they have lived together for 40 years. They are both in thier sixties, still work hard employing 15 people in their business.

They would like some formal recognition of the commitment they have for each other but cannot.

They are great members of my community and have been involved in community projects for decades.

They are not perverts or in need of psychiatric therapy. Just two guys who love each other.

"If homosexuals wish for some type of ceremony , let them at it. but not marriage which is ordained for man and woman."

Who ordained this. Surely not a loving God. Christian Lobby groups strike again, why can't they leave others in peace?

The sole attribution of “homophobia” to religion, and Christianity in particular, is nonsense. I previously remarked how disapproval of homosexuals prevails in non-Christian societies. It is natural for the norm to reject the abnormal. Homosexuality may occur in nature, but it is not common. Whether it is caused by genetic factors or environmental ones, as far as I am aware, remains undetermined. Logically, homosexuals are less likely to bear children, so if their trait were truly genetic, one would have expected it to have been extinguished long ago. It is possible that homosexuality serves some purpose for the survival of the human species. It is also part of our evolution that we are having this debate to decide whether or not we should recognize homosexual relationships. I believe it is better for our species not to encourage such abnormality. Nicholson’s article is filled with emotional clap-trap, typical of a lawyer, on why we should recognize these abnormal relationships that are not at all in the best interest of the wider community.

Rob
Quote "It is natural for the norm to reject the abnormal. "
What you seem to mean by the term "abnormal" here is something not practiced by the majority. Correct? So using the same principle you'd agree with laws discriminating against red headed people & left handed people? After all the majority don't write with their left hand or have red hair. Ah you say but that's different. Red heads & left handed people were born that way. So were homosexuals.

According to the latest research rams, lizards, dogs & chimpanzees have all been observed in homosexual acts. So it is found extensively in nature.

One last thing Rob. The christian testament defined god as LOVE. The opposite of love is hate. Just like the opposite of God is the Devil. By defending hatred against ANY group you are taking a stand opposite God, since God is love. Perhaps you better think carefully about this issue.

I cannot for the life of me understand the argument that allowing same sex marriages will somehow undermine marriage as an institution. I’m married, and I’m not at all worried that same sex marriage might undermine my marriage. I would embrace a change that would allow any couple who are devoted to each other to be able to share the same status and legal rights that I share with my husband.

And why is it always argued that it’s wrong because such a marriage can’t produce children? There are lots of marriages that don’t produce children, either because the partners choose not to, or because they can’t. (Incidentally, other relationships that are certainly wrong and unnatural can and do produce children, such as incest and rape, so the production of children is hardly a strong argument of what’s right and wrong.)

Same sex relationships and same sex parents are a reality in our society and have been for longer than most people are willing to admit. It’s not good enough for people to say it’s OK as long as it goes on in private – that in itself is a contradictory argument – either you think it’s wrong or you don’t. Homosexuality is not illegal, and between two consenting adults, does no harm. It’s simply not fair that some people who live their lives in a happy loving union, work, pay their taxes, raise their children, contribute to their community etc, are unable to access the same rights as others who live in exactly the same manner.

Thank you Steve.

The invisible victims of the Government’s discrimination are couples like your neighbours – you can find them all over Australia.

But it’s not just recognition that they miss out on. The Medicare Safety Net doesn’t apply to your neighbours as a couple, so they pay more for their health care than a comparable heterosexual de facto or married couple. If one of them becomes incapacitated and needs nursing care, the Commonwealth can (and does) insist that their home be sold to finance it, where a federal guarantee prevents this happening to a straight couple who’ve been married for ten minutes.

There’s a whole raft of discriminatory provisions which apply to them, each of which would be resolved if they could marry, or formalise their relationship in some way that was recognised by the Federal Government.

Because Leigh and others around here can’t lift their heads out of their pants, can’t get beyond the idea that marriage is all about heterosexual sex, this unfairness continues. Your neighbours have a loving relationship built on decades of sharing and support. The mean-spiritedness of those who deny them equality is breath-taking

it beats me Robbie G how recognising a fact of life - that is same sex relationships - will some how undermine anything - these relationships have exisited for years - without any damaging effects on society.

To aford those in them the same rights as other couplings seems only fair - recognising them as a legitimate union also seems only fair.

Among my group of friends some of the longest and monogamous relationships have been between same sex couples.

And I dont get Leighs point where he says homosexuality is fine - behind closed doors - but to argue not to legitamise homosexuality - which is little more than saying its ok to be gay - or to not legitamise the union of a gay couple makes no sense; if its ok in secret its OK everywhere

Equally his view that Nicholsons liberty to express the views he has and in the manner he has is some how a marker to the road to ruin is equally as odd - even though recent moves by the government on any number of fronts question the strength of our democracy - last time I looked we still where one - so the author can say what he likes - and we are the better for it.

What one set of people do with their own and others genitalia is pretty marginal to them as human beings - to consider same sex relationships as unnatural and repugnant as well is just dumb - as some on these pages do - you might think what they do is repugnant (so stop thinking about it!)

but the relationship in itself miight be ticketey boo for all concerned - loving sharing nuturing etc etc the sex bit like so much we worry about particularly here really is just another side show.