BOAZ_David. I agree and I believe if Homosexuals want us to respect them they should have the decency to respect us too! This push for homosexuals to present themselves and 'the same' as 'hetrosexuals' is draining to the extreme and a terrible example to be set for the kids.

I strongly believe that marriage is between a man and a woman - period......

Wow - here's where my conservative religious background meets my small 'l' liberalism.
I do not believe that there is nothing wrong with homosexuality - but I do not support discrimination for its own sake either.
If there is no compelling reason for isolating judge's entitlements to their lawful spouses I have no problem with Kirby J's partner receiving his entitlements. The same goes for the fifty-seven pieces of legislation which purportedly discriminate against homosexual couples - unless there is some aspect of the right/entitlement which is distinct/peculiar to heterosexual couples then I see no reason to discriminate.
If the right/benefit/entitlement accrues by virtue of one partner's work/effort etc then it should be capable of being assigned to whomever that person wishes - male/female or anything else I suppose.
I would draw the line, however, where it meets the rights of other people and particularly the rights of minors. This is (to a large extent) an argument for another day but I believe children are best served - where possible - by loving fathers AND mothers (I know, I know - don't tell me about the bad hetero parents and loving gay ones - I told you this ain't an easy topic for me).
I also wouldn't extend the argument to marriage. Marriage is a peculiar creature that, by definition (at least to me) must be exclusively between a man and a woman. If gay couples want some form of commitment recognised by the State (not exactly sure why they would - perhaps that's something someone could enlighten me on) it wouldn't be a 'marriage' IMHO.
Ok - let the cries of bigotry begin.

There are many good reasons to extend equal relationship rights to same-sex couples.

1) Equality and the fair go are basic Australian principles. Most of us believe equal love deserves equal rights.

2) All healthy, adult relationships fare better with the support and recognition of the wider community. Relationships should be celebrated and valued for the benefits they bring to couples, families and communities: eg. happiness, stability, finances, health benefits.

3) Relationship recognition will give legal security to same-sex couples who are already raising children. Children shouldn't be punished because the Government doesn't approve of their parents.

4) Australia is falling further behind other Western democracies in the recognition of gay couples. At least five countries allow gay marriage (South Africa, Spain, Canada, Netherlands, Belgium, Massachusetts USA), and about 30 regions of the world allow civil unions. Australia doesn't even allow equal de facto rights for same-sex couples.

5) A recent Galaxy poll found that 71% of Australians support de facto rights for gays, and 57% support gay marriage. As Australians move forward, the politicians become increasingly out-of-touch.

For these reasons, thousands of Australians will be participating in events nationwide this weekend calling for relationship recognition.

More info:
http://www.australianmarriageequality.com/nda.htm

Anthony Marinac implies that children raised in a loving 'same sex home' will not be disadvantaged. Big call Anthony! I think they will be utterly disadvantaged, as are children raised in dysfunctional homes with a Father and a Mother. The question is do we really want to allow even more children to be disadvantaged? The list for adverse consequences on the development of a child are seemingly endless, given what we know about the effects of nurture - love is simply not enough!

JSMill,

I'm not going to call you a bigot but I do have a question, is it purely semantics that prevents you from supporting gay marriage? If it was called something else but carried the same weight under law would you support it?

Homosexual couples should have the exact same rights as heterosexual couples.
Homosexuality is natural; otherwise it wouldn’t occur in nature. About 10% of animals are homosexual, and I think it’s about the same figure for humans.
Even if it wasn’t ‘natural’ I don’t see a problem with it. Why would I be concerned with someone else’s sexuality?

Dangerous? I wonder why homosexuality puts you in danger, BD. Do you fall over when a man blows you a kiss?

In the Netherlands, homosexual couples have the exact same rights as heterosexual couples including adoption and lesbians have access to IVF.
I think that it is a wonderful idea and fully support it.

I agree with Anthonymarinac on this: it’s the stability and love that count, not the sex of the parents.
At least all homosexual couples are totally motivated when they decide to start a family. We can’t always say the same about heterosexual couples who may fall accidentally pregnant or have babies because it’s the thing they’re expected to do. Not saying that this is wrong, but they don’t have the moral upper hand over homosexual couples who choose to have a family.

I do understand why communicat worries about this child, but some children of heterosexual couples also have early interest in the opposite sex.

My mother (in Amsterdam) lives in a street with several homosexual couples with children, who seem very happy, balanced, have good results at school or uni and normal relationships with friends, they behave no different than the children of heterosexual couples.

My children are free to be who they are; both I and my husband would be fine with it if they would turn out gay.
I wonder, would Jolanda or BD reject their own children if they’d come to you one day and tell you that they’re gay?
Even if they’re in a heterosexual relationship now, some people do not find out till later in life that they have an interest in the same sex.
What would you do when that happens?