Future Vision:
Certain men are selected to be sperm donors, certain women to be ovum donors, and certain women (or enhanced petri dish technology) employed as incubators of human (genetically enhanced?) embryos.
Everyone else will have their sexuality suppressed by chemical means or by sterilization, and will be allocated to work tasks according to mental and physical ability, and allocated housing, food and recreation based on contribution to State objectives.
Children will be raised in State-run creches, and subsequently trained in State-run educational, military, technology or trades institutions.
No child will be left behind; education will utilise media presentation as far as possible; human interaction strictly controlled.
Population and Environment optimised; cyber- or robo-pets allowed, with 'real' pets limited to a select elite; holidays to 'nature reserves' allocated by (State-controlled) ballot.
'Marriage' and all physical relationships relegated to 'history'.
Cyber recreation will be universal, monitored, and controlled.
Travel will be controlled and limited to public transportation; international conferences held only via cyber-forum; international and cross-border movement controlled and near-eliminated.
Voluntary Euthanasia will be universally adopted.
There will be no money, no 'wealth', no non-State assets; no war; no vested interest groups or movements; and criminals and 'reactionaries' will be placed in offshore detention with minimal provisions for survival.
Brave new non-humanist world, with unlimited Valium on tap.
Mood stabilizers will prevent most from praying for Armageddon.
Notions of ethnicity or 'culture' will be abolished.

Did I mention, 'Marriage' and all physical relationships will be relegated to 'history'? (Problem solved?)
Religion? You wish!

>>To settle several issues at one fell swoop shouldn't any plebiscite test public opinion of Josephus' view of marriage being legitimate only when it involves two people who have coitus (without interfemoris, interruptus or reservatus) with each other and no-one else during their entire lives?<<

That sounds like a capital idea WmTrevor but I wouldn't word the question like that because most people probably think coitus interruptus is one of the Unforgivable Curses.

>>Tony what is that about civics?<<

I'm pretty sure plebiscites aren't binding which means that a certain Liberal politician whose first name I'm unfortunate enough to share doesn't have to pay any attention to a 'yes' vote when he becomes PM in september. Can you really see Tony 'Mad Monk' Abbott letting the will of the public get in the way of him getting in the way of gay marriage? The other Tony takes his orders from a higher power than the great unwashed.

Cheers,

Tony

"The other Tony takes his orders from a higher power than the great unwashed."
Tony the other Tony, are you telling me Archy Pell takes a tub now and then? Is that with his clothes on, I know he doesn't support nudity.

.

Dear Paul1405 & Tony Lavis,

.

Paul wrote:

"Tony what is that about civics? Is not a plebiscite of the people the ultimate act of a democracy.
plebiscite; a direct vote of the qualified voters of a state in regard to some important public question."

Tony replied:

"I'm pretty sure plebiscites aren't binding which means that a certain Liberal politician whose first name I'm unfortunate enough to share doesn't have to pay any attention to a 'yes' vote when he becomes PM in september. Can you really see Tony 'Mad Monk' Abbott letting the will of the public get in the way of him getting in the way of gay marriage? The other Tony takes his orders from a higher power than the great unwashed."

"Plebiscite"(Online Etymology Dictionary):

"direct vote of the people," 1860 (originally in ref. to Italian unification), from Fr. plébiscite (1776 in modern sense), from L. plebiscitum "a decree or resolution of the people," from plebs (gen. plebis) "the common people" + scitum "decree".

In Australia, a non-constitutional referendum is usually called a plebiscite.

Also, it is interesting to note that, according to the Oxford English Dictionary, the plural of referendum is referendums when only one issue is to be decided. Referenda necessarily connotes a plurality of issues.

In Australia, we usually vote "No" to referendums or plebiscites. Only 8 out of 44 have been carried since 1906.

In France, where I have been living for nearly half a century, the situation is pretty much the same. Voters usually seize on the occasion to say no to the president and/or the government irrespective of what the question may be.

It inevitably ends up as a "no confidence" vote to the politicians even though there may be a majority in favour of whatever is being put to the vote.

Only a small minority of conscientious voters actually vote on the question they are asked to vote on.

I guess that's what we call democracy.

Recourse to public opinion polls is probably the only way to find out what people truly think about any particular issue.

.

This website explains plebiscites and referendums very clearly:

http://parliamentflagpost.blogspot.com.au/2011/06/quick-guide-to-plebiscites-in-australia.html

Cheers,

Tony

onthebeach,
Do not expect a definition of what marriage means to a homosexual. Homosexuals and their supporters do not define marriage by the nature of their sexuality, they prefer to hide it and change the meaning of the word "marriage" to mean, "two people who love each other", as they have done by calling themselves "gay",whatever that now means. It does not mean a person who is joyous and happy, or a name of a girl. Their radical supporters love perversion of the language to hide the reality of the homosexuals life.