Foxy, I consider myself a reasonable person and that is why I believe we must all come to a compromise and allow gay relationships to be recognized, something i was opossed to a few yearsago BUT, there is no way their marriage should be anything like a normal marriage because they are not normal people in normal relationships because if they were we would have all been born with both male and female genilals, meaning one could play the role of husband, and the other of wife.

It is for this reason I suggest one of two options to accommodate the union of two people of the same sex.

Option one, which gays won't have a bar of, is to find another word that discibes their abnormal union, and like it or not, it is an abnormal union when comparing it to that of a heterosexual marriage, which is essentially what gays are trying to do.

Option two, add the words 'a union between two people' to the marriage act as this would allow both gays and hetro's who support GM to be recognized as married, but not in the same manner as normal couples.

To me it's such a simple solution but while gays bang on about marriage equality, they have a hidden agenda which they simply won't disclose.

Even if we do take this to the people, gays won't accept the verdict if it doesn't favor them. They will also continue to fight for the recognition of their union to be treated equally which for many paople simply won't happen. Thisnis why this BS will continue to waste so much if our valuable debate time for decades to come.

Shame on Bill Shorten and crew to promote this issue as having such importance when we as a nation are teetering on going down the gurgler as no amount of gay marriage debate is going to address issues like the looming unemployment crisis, or the displacement of millions globally.

Surely these are far more important issues to debate other than the union of two queers.

Dear Rehctub,

I think that if the clause that the Howard Government
inserted into the Marriage Act in 2004 would be removed
then this could possibly accommodate everyone.
However, I still feel that the best way is to let the
country decide what it wants with a Referendum.

Fox,

It is entirely predictable that you doggedly broken-record the gay activists' and Cultural Marxists' lie that PM Howard somehow changed the meaning of marriage. That is absolute rubbish and you know it.

To go over it again, you are already aware of the opinions of the High Court justices and others since the year dot, confirming that marriage was exclusively understood as one man and one women for life. The High Court judges have confirmed that on a number of occasions over many years and also commented that was the clear and well understood intent, meaning and application of marriage in Australia from 1901.

That is also the understanding of by far the greatest majority of people in developed countries, world-wide.

Howard acted to preserve the meaning of marriage from a back-door assault, there being the prospect at the time of demands for recognition of homosexual marriages obtained overseas.

You and the Cultural Marxists are not about equality, or else you would also be representing the rights of those who want recognition of multiple partners, eg., Muslims and you would be saying they have children too.

If you want same sex marriage, get a Same Sex Marriage Act through. It might be a good idea if first there was an independent national study by one of the leading universities to ascertain what homosexuals think of the changes wrought already that affect them (and they were not asked about!) and what they really want.

Hi there SUSEONLINE...

I'm dumfounded and disappointed, concerning the attack you've made on me personally ? I've always valued your opinion, treated you to the respect you're due, and on some occasions supported your position on several issues.

Descriptions like 'ignorant ranting's'; 'homophobia', 'couldn't give a damn about gay couples, kids, adopted or otherwise'. All pretty stunning and hurtful accusations to be sure ?

Am I homophobic ? I honestly don't know. What I do know, I've had years dealing with many of them, generally in pretty adversarial settings. Rape by homosexual male (on one occasion) upon a heterosexual youth. Rape by homosexuals upon homosexuals, and many other acts of indecency, involving homosexuals, often committed in parks, public conveniences and public places ?

So SUSEONLINE, though I've not had the clinical exposure with homosexuals that you've had in your nursing profession, I've nevertheless seen and dealt with many of them, in some of the most disgusting and sinister circumstances around Kings Cross and it's environs, one could imagine ! For this reason I'll not quietly submit to anyone on this Forum, who would seek to lecture me on my lack of knowledge on this subject.

One more thing too, I couldn't count the number of occasions I in company with other detectives, have had to wait quietly at the St Vincent's Hospital Casualty Section, to interview homosexual stab victims !

Nor could I possibly enumerate the number of arrests I've made personally, of homosexual paedophiles, picking up young boys at the 'infamous Wall' opposite St Vincent's Hospital, a very well known haunt.

To repeat your allegation - am I homophobic ? I honestly just don't know ?

Hi there FOXY...

I'll need to calm down a bit, I've just copped a decent serve from SUSEONLINE and have just answered her ?

Thank you for that link you provided me, and I've read it. I couldn't agree more with the gentleman who authored the piece, with some of the myths and untruths surrounding homosexual practices. I've never doubted for a moment, there are some homosexual couples who've entered upon and enjoyed a very successful union with each other.

Furthermore, a Jewish girl (lady) with whom I had a previous relationship (back in the 1960's prior to my first marriage), well I met up with her quite accidentally back in 2002 or 03, and she'd formed a very sustained, loving lesbian relationship ! After carefully re-evaluating my shattered male ego somewhat, I was genuinely pleased for her. And I accept there are many men in similar quality relationships who lead very good, high valued lives ?

I don't know FOXY, I guess I'm just a dill ? I can (perhaps) see a time in the near future where homosexual activity will become so high profile, so common place, and in some instances, so trendy, governments will need to amend or repeal many pieces of legislation.

With a legal 'referential construction' similar to:-

'Where a term referring to a 'male or female person' is found; henceforth it shall be known as a 'male, female and homosexual person' ? Creating in statute at least, a 'third sex' if you will ?

As an old ex-native of an LA library, you'd well recall the reputation 'South Rampart' had, with the good men and women of the LAPD ? The epicentre of the biggest homosexual assembly outside of San Francisco ? More murders, stabbings, and crimes of violence, than anywhere else in the greater Los Angeles basin !

Anyway I'm too old and too set in my belief systems, to change those beliefs. Am I homophobic, 'intense aversion to homosexuals and their practices' ? I don't believe I am. I'm certainly not prejudicial or judgemental about them as individuals. Still.........?

Foxy, removing the words from the act would effectively make all marriages equal, and they're not, which is what the whole debate is about. While the people themselves are considered equal, their relationship is most certainly not, and I'm also not suggesting theirs is any less important, it's simply not the same and, because it's noit the same, it can't be considered as the same and that pretty much sums it up.

Imagine the world had Noha saved same sex couples of everything for the ark. Not that I'm particularly religious mind you, but it's a fair point wouldn't you say.