Susie,
It doesn't really matter if a politician is part of a minority group or not. But some people are very serious about their beliefs. Hence foxy, and others, often referring to religion and casting aspersions about Tony Abbott's ability to not be influenced. They see a political gain from making a connection.

While Shorten may well be angling for the support of homosexuals, he could well be shooting himself in the foot, as many Labot party members may have more traditional views.

Shorten himself raised the matter and, in my view, not a good move for one who aspires for leadership. Many will wonder just how strong is his support for homosexuals and will he consider their desires before that of the general public.

Banjo, what 'desires' of homosexuals would be detrimental to the majority of the electorate?

If you are talking about Gay marriage, well that won't affect anyone else.
Gay people are already in politics, so I can't see what dastardly changes you, or Bill Shorten, are expecting.

To my mind, ALL people should be able to run for politics and be chosen on their own merits.
The only problem I see is that old-fashioned middle to old aged white Christian male politicians may refuse to give anyone else a fighting chance, after their domination of politics for so long.

Recent surveys have shown that over 60 per cent of
Australian voters are in favour of same-sex marriage.
Perhaps Bill Shorten is simply reflecting his Party's
stand on the issue. After-all Labor is supposed to
represent the vunerable in our society. And perhaps
a Referendum on the issue might just be the way to
settle this matter. Let the people decide what they
want.

I shall repeat what I've posted in the past -
Each society views its own patterns of marriage,
family, and kinship as self-evidently right and
proper, and usually God given as well. Much of the
current concern about the fate of marriage, family,
and kinship stems from this kind of ethnocentrism.

If we assume that there is only one "right" marriage,
family, and kinship form, then naturally any change
will be interpreted as heralding the doom of the
whole institution. John Howard had the Marriage Act
amended to suit his conservative views. It is
something that can now be amended again to reflect
the views of the community. It is important
to recognise, therefore, that there is an immense
range in marriage, family, and kinship patterns; that
each of these patterns may be, at least in its own
context, perfectly viable; and above all, that marriage,
family, and kinship, like any other social institution,
must inevitably change through time, in our own society,
as in all others.

Bill Shorten needs to understand that politics in Australia rise and fall on intellectual capacity to suggest any sector has greater capacity than another and is entitled to special treatment is ignoring the principle 'promotion on merit'

The first two words that come to mind are...OH DEAR!

Dear rehctub,

Venison for dinner? Oh deer!