"One way to make homosexual lifestyles better is to discourage their unhealthy promiscuity. Same sex marriage can do that."

How can SSM discourage their unhealthy promiscuity?

Isn't it more likely that they would continue to do what they do anyhow? They will define marriage to suit their lifestyles and 'love' choices, wouldn't you imagine? The risk-taking would continue, as would for instance, the 'bare-backing' that conservative homosexuals abhor. Stupid is stupid and stupid is common, particularly affecting the selfish and soft-sighted risk-takers, bi-sexuals too.

Dear onthebeach,

If the alternative doesn't exist one cannot predict what people will do if they had the alternative.

Heterosexualism would not disappear if people could not unite in heterosexual marriage. However the heterosexual life style would change.

If people can form recognised lasting bonds either heterosexual or homosexual it is reasonable to assume some will do that, and others won't.

Stupidity is neither a homosexual nor heterosexual characteristic.

Same-sex marriage will give homosexuals the opportunity to make marital commitments. Why not give them the opportunity?

David F,
I think we need to understand that the Marriage Equality and LGBTIQ movements are recent inventions of what have come to be known as "Social Justice Warriors", they may intersect with the traditional Gay movement but they are not of the traditional Gay movement.
It's this forced intersectionality which is causing the confusion, Gay rights has always pursued a separatist agenda and what it explicitly described as homosexual Communism and in the last 50 years or so they've been remarkably successful in building their own communities.
It's therefore wrong to sheet home all the blame for the Marriage Equality nonsense to the Gay movement or the Gay community at large (even though a minority of Gays do support it) when the fault lies with it's inventors the so called "social justice" advocates.
The people promoting Marriage Equality and the LGBTIQ foolishness are doing so for their own reasons which have been examined in detail elsewhere, they don't represent homosexuals nor do they have the interests of the mainstream at heart.
OTB is right in that on one level Gays are still going to be Gays and pursue their traditional lifestyles due to the fact that legalising same sex marriage does not affect them in any way, however social justice activism has a well documented history of producing negative outcomes for the people it professes to champion.
What is notable though is that "Social Justice" activism can only thrive where there is tension and friction and social justice warriors, like all fanatics constantly need a war to fight. This bodes not well for Gays in the long term as SJW's will manufacture tension between homosexuals and other groups in society with the inevitable backlash against the marginal group.

David, it's illegal to drive at 110 in a 100 zone, it's also illegal to accept a lesser price knowing you are not paying the GST.

Just because people don't get caught and punished does not mean these offenses are not illegal.

Il stick to my assumption that they people are arriving illegally thanks.

Dear rehctub,

You may make any assumption you like. Exactly which law are they violating? What statute book is it found in? It just seems to me you are calling them illegal unjustly. Cite the law you think they are breaking.

//David, it's illegal to drive at 110 in a 100 zone, it's also illegal to accept a lesser price knowing you are not paying the GST.//

But it's not illegal to claim asylum in Australia. They haven't changed that rule yet... give them time.

//Just because people don't get caught and punished does not mean these offenses are not illegal.//

What offences? Which part of 'it is not illegal to claim asylum in Australia' do you not understand?

How easy do you think it is to avoid capture when your front up to the Man and say 'Hello Sir, I would like to claim asylum'? People are going to be 'caught' the moment they claim asylum. Whether or not they are convicted depends on whether they have a legitimate claim to asylum - in which case they are granted refugee status - or whether they do not - in which case they are deemed illegal aliens and dealt with accordingly.