Andreas you write

'Equality before the law (regarding marriage too) is universally accepted as fundamental human right, which must have priority over the rights of society.'

Who is it universally accepted by? Certainly not the majority of people in this world. Or are you referring to the UN who sees itself as God but is hopelessly lacking in any true morality.

Dear runner,

I am referring to the overwhelming majority of countries in this world, including Australia, which have established, developed, signed and support the UN Declaration for Human Rights.

Marriage is religions flagship institution so I can understand why they are so possessive of it. That said, the dwindling marriage rates are not the fault of lgbt people. I would be willing to concede that marriage isn't a right but a privilege some have, who meet particular requirements. But, if they do not adhere to this list of requirements, then marriage shall be stripped of them. How's that? Fair? I think so.
Adulterers, you are no longer married. Infertile couples, Nor are you. Elderly couples, back of the line. Oh, and the government is in charge of making sure married people foster children for the survival of the human race as, apparently, it's in danger. Should it see fit to curb our population growth, I take it all those in favor will hand in their marriage licences and abstein from sex. It takes only a second to put yourself in the shoes of the people being discriminated against. This is a civil rights issue and there is no legal, fair or secular argument to oppose marriage equality for all.

Personally, I think it is a big mistake to argue this from the viewpoint of Human Rights, Andreas Berg.

"I am referring to the overwhelming majority of countries in this world, including Australia, which have established, developed, signed and support the UN Declaration for Human Rights."

Could you bring us up to date, perhaps, on how many of these countries have legally recognized same-sex partnerships under the heading "marriage"?

I'm not arguing against the label, or the ceremony, or the right of any two people who choose, to describe themselves as "married". I am just leery of the entire Human Rights industry, and how it seems to require everything to be folded into its tender embrace...

Our author has run aground on the rock of Christian fundamentalism.
It is Christianity, and all religions, that first set out to control what we all do in bed.
Not being a believer I credit an understanding of the implications of wrong interbreeding for some of that.
It, rightly, has been said we are all moving away from formal marriages.
And religions too.
Let the Gays come up with a term,a name, then let them do as they wish.
Standing in the way you will find religion and a few who are fearful of any thing different.

Belly,
What gays do they have done since humans have lived on the Earth. They have even had lifelong unchallenged partnerships. They have never before in a democratic society considered they have no equal human rights. It is part of the immature agenda of socialism.

That they want to register their family is not a matter of marriage as two persons of the same gender cannot have a shared biological marriage; other gender persons have been included in the family mix. Such a mix would be considered bigamy
.
Marriage is not family, as adoption is part of todays family. Marriage can produce family.