Wow. I can only say the Liberals are in deep trouble.

The truth is that the ALP's changes do not attack marriage; they merely seek to replicate the rights heterosexual de facto couples enjoy.

Marriage is a way under capitalism to produce the next generation of wage slaves. It's why capitalist society and "apologists" (I use the word advisedly in relation to the Senator, because that implies some ability) propagandise ad naseum about heterosexual marriage and child rearing.

However the women's liberation movement in the 60s and 70s challenged the old shibboleths about a woman's role in society and openned the way for same sex relationships to flourish (coupled with the militant struggles of course of gays and lesbians for their own liberation.)

The ALP in the ACT had its gay marriage laws stopped by the ALP federally. The ALP feds share much of the Senator's views about the so called bedrock of marriage.

Me? I couldn't care what sex people are when they marry. One day it will be that Australia will have laws that allow same sex marriage. If two people love each other why shouldn't there be a ceremony to celebrate that, with legal consequences?

California already has such laws. I would guess twenty years for Australia.

In the meantime the Coalition holds up a socially useful change in the Senate and denies equality to same sex couples. Why? Because in the leadership battle Nelson's supporters are reactionaries who don't want to support the changes at all, and will use any arguments to defend their homophobic positions (including dependency relatonships, which are not relevant to this arguement.)

Nelson's failure to support this change immediately, while it may pander to the reactionaries in the Coalition, certainly isn't winning him any support in the wider elctorate. Keep up the pathetic work Liberals.

And no, I am not a member of the the alternative conservatives, the ALP. Just a liberal and libertarian. Cranky too about this nonsense article.

Grateful thanks to all contributors on this one. As I am about to embark on a Sociology unit entitled, "Individuals, Families and Households" and need other perspectives I was delighted to read all reactions. My own feeling is reform is long overdue. The Netherlands led the way for same sex union to be out in the open and contributing to healthy society. There are enough pressures on "working families" (sorry!) already.

The promotion of homosexuality is unhealthy for our nation. Marriage of same sex couples is as sick as marriage between a woman and a cat. We should be helping people caught up in this unnatural lifestyle not encouraging it. Why Australians tolerate this polictally correct and yet morally bankrupt rubbish is bewildering. The acceptance of defacto relationships (living in sin) has had a large affect on dulling peoples consciences. It is obvious that the secular humanist have succeeded in deluding so many. No wonder we have so many fatherless children, teenage drug use, abortion and crime. Now we want to add more perversion to our legal list and will be dumb enough to ask why we have so many problems in society.

Same sex marriage. Same sex nearly every day of the week...sex nearly on Monday, sex nearly on Tuesday, etc etc...boring..ho hum.

But really folks, if the parents are dedicated, and work together for the common good of the family unit they are forming (which is the most common reason why 'marriages' occur) it is a wonderful event in any persons life to experience a life partner, irrespective of the homo/hetero issue. I recently sat listening to an interstate couple who had been together for 63 years after meeting here in Darwin during WWII, and listened to their story of life together.

For this to translate into bringing child/children into the world, likewise is becoming a less common scenario these days.

Again the Marxist quote: (Groucho Marx I believe) who said - "Marriage is a great institution - but who wants to spend the rest of their life in an institution?" 15 to 20 years would see most first marriages done and dusted it appears. Most jurisdictions only sentence murderers to 12 yrs with good behaviour. Unholy Deadlock it may well become.

Prima facie the Icelandic perspective on marriage could have merit, but not within a Christian perspective. Who would want to endure how ever many years of misery with an incompatible, cruel, uncaring, wife/husband for the sake of religion? The Bible has its own words on that matter also, similarly the Koran. What of the Child Support Agency, Centrelink, all these harbingers of bad karma and their ilk?

History though, will be forever full of examples where people have endured the negatives of a bad relationship and the other member has then "seen the light" or welcomed a 'deity' into their life to be changed for the better. Does this then mean we all should wait, sometimes at great emotional and physical peril to ourselves and our children until that event transpires?

Nothing however, can compare to two parents, lovingly and selflessly contributing to bringing up their offspring - that is a known fact in just about every society upon the face of this fuzzy green planet.

Good on you Cory for standing up for marriage. Anyone can see that the latest Labor government legislation is not about ending discrimination but about granting the same special rights to homosexuals that married persons receive, otherwise they would address the legislation on a n inter-dependancy model like was done in South Australia.

Marriage is the bedrock institution, from the beginning of time, for the rearing of children. To quote a wise man:

"It is in principle impossible for homosexuals to procreate. Therefore, they cannot marry. It is a simple logical syllogism, and one can wish all one might, but pigs don't fly and we can't change the course of nature."

Should the legislation be passed on an interdependcy model, this will affect all people on a pension.

People sharing accommodation will be seen as interdepent, accordingly their pension will be reduced and paid as a couple.