What an appalling display of homophobia! What are you people so scared of? Gibo, if gays really snuggle up to you in public toilets then you must be giving them some very strong messages -- perhaps you should lay off the muscle shirts and the tight hot pants!

As it happens I think marriage ceremonies are pretty stupid anyway -- no government or religion should have any right to endorse or reject your private conjugal arrangements -- but if opposite-sex couples can do it then I don't see why gays shouldn't. As for raising children, THAT should require a licence -- but the criteria should be intelligence, health, freedom from delusion, a sense of humour and a stable personality, not what shape your dangly bits are.

In general, the arguments over this are very poorly constructed.

I think most Australians would like gay people to be left alone to live their lives as they choose. For all the hate the gay activists throw at Liberals, the most emotional press release the AG has ever put out was Amanda Vanstone condemning gay-hate crimes. And good on her.

But wanting to see tolerance does not extinguish the deep uneasiness ordinary people feel about messing with marriage as an institution.

I asked a gay colleague what he thought of it. He felt that he had no interest in GIVING UP the freedom he had taken for himself.

The important things are first the children of gay couples, and there are a lot of them. They deserve full equality. Second, the respect afforded gay couples should be as for other people. And third, the institutions of society should be managed in line with the standards of society.

That means the debate about gay marriage should not be closed based on political pressure on politicians or political ambitions of gay people and their PC supporters. Remember, gay activists are not looking out for society's best interests, but their own. It needs to be debated in the open.

It is my opinion that if we just carry on as we are, gay marriage will become a fact, because of gay couples with children showing the way.

Fuzzy Foxy is at it again.... each post revealing more of the 'inner' fox.

<<They are not asking for judgements in morality - they are requesting the same legal rights that the rest of society currently enjoys.

We are talking about lifestyle choices made by two consenting adults.
Why should society dictate as to the choice of gender?>>

They might not be ASKING for 'judgement' in morality but just as a Paedophile and a man wanting to marry his 'adult consenting German Shepherd'...they will jolly well get them!

Man....(1) plus (+) Woman(1)= 2
Man....Plus Man.. = immoral.(depraved)
Woman + woman =Immoral. (depraved)
Man + dog/sheep/animal=immoral (depraved)
Woman + donkey=Immoral (depraved)
Old man + pre-pubescent girl=Immoral (depraved)
Old woman + pre-pubescent boy=Immoral(Depraved)
Father having sexual relations with daughter=Immoral/Depraved
Mother having sexual relations with Son=Immoral/depraved.

Now.. have a whine if you like about 'who are you' to pass such bigoted judgements..... the answer to which is: "A member of a democratic soceity"... who happens to believe with all his heart that any type of union other than the normal, obvious, common sense type of responsible mature male with responsible mature female is asking for trouble, and also believes, on the basis of Gods self revealed truth that anything outside that common sense, obvious pattern is also sinful.

IF...... we take the view that 'its their choice' then we are basically saying "WhatEVER" choice people make is valid. Well sorrrrry, if our community took that view we would quickly descend into moral and social oblivion as 'every man did what was right in his own eyes' because "There was no judge in Australia" see Judges 17:6

WHY is not bestiality and incest just as valid as same sex marraiges?

I'll guarantee one thing...NO-one can give any 'moral' reason apart from Biblical law.
So.... when ur on a good thing...stick with it.

if marriage is a function of religion, that religion is entitled to say who may be married.

as a civil union, a contract between two persons to share wealth and support children, any two people should be able to participate. indeed, it makes sense to extend the idea to groups of three or more.

i can't imagine a gay couple demanding religious marriage in a religion whose custom or law denigrates homosexuality.

i can imagine religious bigots continuing to whinge about social evolution, but they're on the way out, not to extinction, but to irrelevance.

in the meantime, play together nicely, children.

I feel sorry for the gay folk. They will go underground again.
They have worked so hard for a great golden age when everyone would accept them ... but it is not going to be so.
The New World and ONE WORLD GOVERNMENT will have no place for them. Minority groups will be shunted off to some far distant back road and in many cases persecuted severely.
Once again concentation camps will grow and spread...here and there. Europe could posibly become a nightmare again. It will spread further...on to Australia me feels.
The ONE WORLD GOVERNMENT plan now, involves saving whats left of the world, from what we have already done to it.
Corners are going to get cut in niceties.
The Holy Bible talks about an evil world leader, the Beast, who will persecute far worse than Adolf Hitler; and his new economy the mark of the beast on either the right hand or forehead is going to be global. Enforced...but the christians abstain from the sake of their Lord.
So perhaps the gays shouldnt get their hopes up too much...though the Christian churches will always welcome them, if they are willing to turn from their sin to a Lord Who Will indeed save them from the devils manipulation of their lives.

Gibo, would you please stop saying sorry:

"Sorry if I offended."

"I feel sorry for the gay folk."

It's patently clear that you're not.