David Boaz as a gay man in a committed and loving relationship, of 31 years.

Do you really consider we should be treated as first class Australian tax payers and second class Australian citizens.

Do you believe that our assets accrued, in our relationship should not be protected.

Do you think that it is right, that our respective superanuation and pension, should be denied to either of us, when one of us dies.

Do you find it acceptable, that if either of us is seriously hospitalised, we be denied access to each other or involvement in what treatment is prescribed.

Do you condemn hetrosexuals couples, who cannot procreate, or choose not to have children.

You type yourself as a "christian", though in comparison to our christian belief parents, you appear to be a selective "christian". Which is contradictory to the beliefs of "The Man", whom you say you follow.

My posting was in response to David Boaz. To whose pension and benefits we pay our full rate taxes!

It's not often I say this, but I wish the Democrats every success with this effort.

In the 21st century it's outrageous that a section of the community should be discriminated against in this way.

Individuals are entitled to their views about homosexuality (even weird ones like Boaz_david).

But equality of citizens before the law should be fundamental in a modern liberal democracy.

I witnessed the trauma and deep unhappiness of a deeply devoted same sex couple who had been together for over forty years. One had had a stroke, and being hospitalised his family were allowed by his side, but his partner was not. The family denied his partner
access. This was extremely cruel to both of them. On release of the stroke-victim, his partner devoted all his time and love to care for him - the family never even visited.

I believe in a civil service for both same sex and heterosexual couples to be married. As in places in Europe, a civil service precedes the religious service, and to all intents and purposes, the former is the legally binding contract.

Often the long-time love shared between same sex couples, shows heterosexual couples much to be desired. If truth be told, sex is not necessarily part of a long successful
marriage.

Also, the divorce rate indicates that heterosexual marriages are far from necessarily successful, despite the solemn oath "to death do us part". Deeply religious people would see a divorce after such an oath, and often serial marriages, surely deeply sinful.

On the purely pragmatic issue of pensions, unemployment benefits, etc. same sex couples would be in the same category as married couples, and indeed defacto couples, and thus save monies from the public purse.

I don't believe in any law that discriminates against others in society.

I witnessed the trauma and deep unhappiness of a deeply devoted same sex couple who had been together for over forty years. One had had a stroke, and being hospitalised his family were allowed by his side, but his partner was not. The family denied his partner access. This was extremely cruel to both of them. On release of the stroke-victim, his partner devoted all his time and love to care for him - the family never even visited.

I believe in a civil marriage service for both same sex and heterosexual couples. In places in Europe, a civil service precedes the religious service, and to all intents and purposes, the former is the legally binding contract. Some religious groups bless same sex couples, others don't.

Often the long-time love shared between same sex couples, shows heterosexual couples much to be desired. If truth be told, sex is not necessarily part of a long successful marriage.

Also, the divorce rate indicates that heterosexual marriages are far from necessarily successful, despite the solemn oath "to death do us part". Deeply religious people would see a divorce after such an oath, and often serial marriages, surely deeply sinful.

On the purely pragmatic issue of pensions, unemployment benefits, etc. same sex couples would be in the same category as married couples, and indeed defacto couples, and thus save monies from the public purse.
Posted by Danielle, Wednesday, 8 August 2007 5:13:56 PM

My partner and I have been waiting years for the opportunity for gay men to marry. A number of countries take the ethical position that equal human rights should apply to all their citizens. Spain passed a law allowing gay marriage and removing discrimination despite the vehement opposition of the Catholic Church in a Catholic country. That takes political leadership and passionate belief in the principle of separating church from state.

South Africa similarly enshrined basic human rights equality into their constitution thanks to the leadership of Nelson Mandela and the instrumental role of imprisoned gay activist, Simon Nkole. Consequently, South Africa has become the first African country to recognise same-gender unions.

In the United States, a candidate's attitude against gay marriage is one of the key litmus tests that was put to 2008 Republican Presidential hopefuls to help guage how attractive they are to the religious right.

In several Islamasist countries, gays and lesbians face death, torture and persecution by living their lives honestly, true to themselves in loving relationships. Why? Because Religious Law (written around 700AD) = State Law.

Howard seeks to play politics with our lives, denying us equal treatment to look good to rigid thinking, religious conservatives at home and abroad. Howard brought (selective) religious sanctions (written decades BC) into Australian law thanks to the complicity of Beasley. Thank God for the outspoken positions of the Democrats and Greens.

Gays and lesbians are a minority group that Howard uses as part of his religious wedge politics. It's the politics of a mean and tricky politician, great at playing the marginal seats, a master at playing on emotions and ignorance, appealing to Christian, Jewish and possible Muslim conservatives.

In the 2007 federal election, will these plays be enough to save Howard from the judgement from the overwhelming majority of Australians who believe in a fair go for all?

When will we have leaders in Australia who will make laws that make us all feel proud to be Australian, focus on the real challenges facing us and motivate everyone to give their best to this wonderful sun-burnt country.