It's interesting that those against equal recognition for same-sex couples, write about how gays and lesbians allegedly violate societal norms and morals. Yet they also indicate that society generally accepts homosexuality. Therefore, is not their irrational anti-gay bias a violation of accepted societal norms and morals? Are they not "weird" and "pathetic"?

Religion should also not be used as a basis for law. We would have to decide whose religion to use! For example, if the state followed Hebraic law, we may outlaw the sale and consumption of pork. You may not think it hurts anyone to eat that ham sandwhich, but remember, it goes against someone's religious beliefs.

Davo: You don't understand bi-sexuality. It is not being involved with two people at the same time, one of each sex. It's simply about being ivolved with either gender. A bi-sexual person can be just as happy being involved with one partner, as anyone else. It just means that partner will be of either gender.

Polygamy is a diversion tactic, used when people don't have a rational, logical argument against same-sex couple marriage.

The existence of our species is not an issue that is dependent upon whether or not same-sex marriage is accepted.

I see precisely the same logical fallacies, fear and ignorance used in this debate in this forum, as I regarded during the same-sex marriage debate here in Canada. It was 3 years ago that same-sex marriage was legalised in the largest Canadian province of Ontario. All the ridiculous fears have proven unfounded.

Enough is enough, people. I registered as a blog user because this was a site devoted to current events. I did not expect to find blogs being used to vilify total strangers or deliberately hurt others in thread after thread. I recently went back over other threads and found that the same few people, time after time, turn blogs into religous tirades or demonise others.

Each one of us has freedom of speech and policies to protect those freedoms. These ensure that what we say is neither defamatory nor discriminatory by reason of race, gender, or creed. Yet I find myself both defamed and discriminated against on each of those counts throughout many of these threads - albeit I haven't even entered into the debate.

Responses to articles are intended to reflect our personal views on the article - not our personal interpretations of specific christian dogma. This was an article about civil law.That outburst of racism was not only offensive but entirely irrelevant.

I do not need anyone else to speak for me:I resent sweeping generalities which state that "all"...christians/women/foreignors/men/gays/non-Christians/heterosexuals/Australians/'normal' people think or behave in a certain way. I, and everyone else in the thread falls into certain of those categories and I very seldom find myself agreeing with the sentiments expressed. I've also been quite distressed by some of them.

Surely we should say "I believe/feel..." rather than the spurious "All good Australians believe" or "All normal people" think or do something? And surely BOAZ and Coach et.al, you realise that many people who consider themselves good Christians or good Australians for example, don't have exactly the same opinions as do you?

I think that if people consistantly divert discussion away from the topic and on to their religious beliefs we should simply ignore them until they can behave acceptably. Blogging is supposed to be fun, stimulating, educational and a good hobby. Everyone's allowed to play, you know. I and others have often been put off contributing knowing we'll invoke a tirade of personal abuse. That's not fun. Neither is it fair.

lol@Coach,

Coach gives himself away with this absurd statement:

"I am not anti-gay as you put it. For me same-sex sodomy or lesbianism is an abnormal behaviour that should only be recognised in the clinical / criminal realms. There is nothing 'gay' about unnatural pathetic lustful antisocial conduct of so called “consenting adults”. Note the Germen accent on the last line.

Of course, Coach never turns his head in lust when the blonde bikini girl walks past. Coach is Dudley Doo Right! He is probably not even heterosexual.

Not anti-gay? Under your definition, neither did the NAZIs, the SS Hiltler, Himmler, Goebels and so on, "hate" the gays in the holocaust during the Third Reich ... in those "criminal relms" as Coach puts it, using such "clinical" experiments, as Coach prescribes, as any neo NAZI would.

He doesn't hate homosexuals? Hate? Oh good heavens no! He just thinks that heterosexuals are superior, and gay people are inferior, or as Hitler put it, "the untermensch" (subhuman). This is "heterosexism": the other assumed inferior.

He just wants the untermensh in a holocaust, or torture them to death failing to "cure" the "uncurable". Or just use them as lab rats.

Coach is right. He does not "hate" them, he "fears" on them. That is what "homophobia" means. The superiority thing is a front.

The verdict. In the EU, Coach's statements could still be seen as hate-crime under their crimal code. That is a law in civilised countries.

This begs the question: with such a frightened NAZI like Coach shivering in his brown shirt and jack-boots: why does he keep coming back to this page?

Psychiatric diagnosis? Latent homosexual. Coach, you are a classic case. Are you feeling a little queer? You do take a great interest in the topic. Yet you can't wait to get your hands on them "faggots". Nothing positive comes from you, just poison.

Are you just here to bully people around or are you crying for help?

Hate and malice to minority groups is socially unacceptable not gay people.

I'm not that intersted in the civil union thing - it should be allowed - call it what you like.

I am interested in Boaz's position that he would not like an openly homosexual couple living next door to him - He did allude to reasons - role model etc - but I need to ask what action might he take if a couple did in fact settle down next door

Saintfletcher & co.,

Oooops - I better come out of the closet now - please don't shoot me!

It just shows how morality has declined to the level that a 20 year old cannot see what the fuss is all about.

For those who believe that religion has nothing to do with it – well you’re right – if you take God out of the discussion nothing really matters does it? We are all animals guided by our instincts and when we die it’s all over.

When someone expresses their opinion they are crucified for being intolerant and illogical. Go figure.

Having said that I truly apologise for my bluntness that has hurt some people.

My objective is to make my feelings known without being a hypocrite.