Philo, marriage is a social construct, not a "biological term".

Cornflower, who do you hate more - gays or Greens?

Why shouldn't gay couples who wish to marry be allowed to by the State?

@ Cornflower: "Moreover, the Greens are like bulls in a china shop, they really haven't thought through what they are doing."

Well, if you HAVE thought it through, tell us why marriage equality shouldn't be allowed. As Woulfe has pointed out, we're still waiting for an answer to this mind-bogglingly simple question. The closest you've come so far is to claim that gay marriage will, in defiance of history and current reality, lead to legal polygamy.

In algebra, your formulation could be expressed "if A equals B, A must also equal cornflakes".

This thread is truly bizarre.

@Philo: "The fact is that biologically persons of the same gender cannot marry, it is biologically impossibility. The purpose of sperm it to fertilize and fuse with an ovum to form a new person. If homosexual males copulate fertile sperm vaginally with a female are they biologically married, and fulfil the biological term marriage."

In the spirit of generosity, I'll put aside the basic fact that marriage is a social and legal contract and has nothing to do with biology.

I am, however, very interested in which Christian denomination you belong to, Philo. To my knowledge, no law or religious principle forbids marriage between infertile heterosexuals, yet this is clearly an article of your faith. Which church is that?

My option would be to have a Referendum
on same-sex marriage.

Let Australia decide whether it's time
to allow gay marriage in this country.

In a democracy it's supposed to be the
choice of the majority.

At present we have an attitude of -
"If it ain't broke, don't fix it."
Which is simply an excuse for inaction used
by the complacent, arrogant, or scared, as
I've stated previously.

Let the country vote on the matter.

In the biological world of breeding marriage means bringing together two of the opposite sex to form a new being. In the world of metalurgy marriage means bonding metals of different character together to form or strengthen a product. That is the root meaning of the word. Persons of the same sex cannot technically marry, as their relationship does not form a unit demonstrating difference in gene or biological character.

The term marry has preceded the Romans legal contract. A marriage itself is not a legal contract but a physical sexual union of gender difference.

Why should what gays do to each other be considered marriage? When you can answer that maybe you might understand why they cannot be accepted as being married.

Philo et al,

As biological technology and social norms change, so do the laws to reflect not only what is possible, but what has been deemed to be acceptable.

Laws from Roman times defined christians as lion food and slaves as property. I would like to think we have moved on.

As the number of births outside wedlock now equal those in wedlock, and that many gay (lesbian and other) partnerships are raising children successfully, the laws need to at least reflect the status quo.

The reluctance to allow gay marriage comes from two sources, religion and homophobia, which are not mutually exclusive.

With changes happening over the world, it is really a matter of when rather than if gay marriage will be written into law.

Everyone is keen to set an example to the world on climate change, but not on discrimination.

Philo,

So you would readily accept that the formation of a zygote is the marriage of genetic material. Does the union between a Man and Women achieve that state in itself? Would not the coupling of a Man and Women or two same sex persons be analogous to mixture, whereas an offspring analogous to a compound.