How free is freedom.
Why do we think it is our right even duty too tell gays how to live.
Runner puts his/her religions views strongly.
Am I ?,truly, Am I? free to say in my belief no God ever existed.
And that while man,who invented each of them showed how brilliant his/her mind is, in writing the first ever.
Service Manual/Power Point presentation for life/living.
We no longer must have Children to defend our group.
I am not gay, not even happy some times.
But in my single life time we have seen the end of white Australia,a very real fall in Church attendance and influence.
I agree only with this, Church's should have the right to wed or not wed these folk.
But they too, should have the right to produce their own Church /God and we should let them.

Why do we think it is our right even duty too tell gays how to live.
Belly,
with all due respect but isn't it the gays who constantly dictate to us ? Isn't it them who keep flaunting their preferences instead of simply living their lives in peace & quiet ? I'm sure they'd cop far less criticism if they simply accepted their situation instead of pushing it more & more.
I don't believe in gay marriage but I accept a gay union. Marriage is between two individuals of different sex full stop.
We should not change the meaning of words.

Marriage is about commitment, not politics, nor
is it about anyone's religious beliefs other than
the couple in love. I believe that you should have
the right to get married when two adults are in
love and want to get married. Their sexuality is
irrelevant. There are lots of people making a
mockery of marriage. Marrying for visas, money,
and so on and no one says anything about that.

Murder is defined by the state. Superstitious bodies which follow the book of fairy tales called the Bible do not object to the state defining murder although some of them may show their vindictiveness in their support for the death penalty while others consider that murder by the state.

Nobody that I have heard of is suggesting that religious bodies perform any form of marriage they do not wish to perform. I do not see why they should object to a change in the definition of civil marriage that they are not obliged to follow.

The nature of marriage changes in the book of fairy tales called the Bible. Jacob was married to Leah and Rachel. King Solomon had many wives and many porcupines. Changes in the nature of marriage should not be restricted to fairy tale books.

The nature of marriage and murder are determined by the state. Neither should be a matter for superstitious consideration.

I would draw the line at marrying porcupines; I just dont see any point in it

BAYGON, I've heard that they can be real pricks.

david f, I don't know if it's still an issue but I have heard enough people in the past really upset because a church (or preacher) would not agree to a second (or latter) marriage being held in the church or conducted by the preacher. They may have liked the look of the church, they may have wanted the sense of their wedding being blessed by god and church although it was clearly contrary to that church or preachers understanding of biblical teaching. I suspect that to some extent the same issue would arise again.

Simplest to withdraw all special tax/rate breaks and other privileges from the churches and allow them to do what they want (or not) within their walls.

R0bert