This debate is exposing the bigotry, hatred and dishonesty of the godbotherers.
They are becoming hysterical and vicious, willing to drag out the most vile arguments to defame those they disagree with.
How long before they start gay bashing and murders? Again.

You people are intolerant liars who would force your "sharia law" on all of us if you could.
Dont try to deny it. Your actions in the SSM debate are proof of the depths of evil you will stoop to to obey your fascist god.

Dont tell me I cant do something because of YOUR religious beliefs.

Keep your insane, superfairy beliefs out of my life.

Or you might just find that people get sick of your bullying and begin to really fight to destroy all religion.
Bring it on I say.

The law did not define marriage prior to 2004.

The Howard Government inserted the clause that
marriage is between a man and a woman to the exclusions
of all others in 2004. So if it was inserted it can also
be removed. As can the extrs insertions that were made
at that time. The following website explains:

http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2004/05/27/1085461876842.html

Of course - there are people who believe for religious
reasons that marriage is a sacrament blessed by God and
that can only be defined as involving a man and a woman.
While there are some parts of the Old Testament that vilify
homosexuals. The New Testament teaches that all are created
in the image of God and that all deserve love and respect.

I do not agree in the arguments that anyone who disagrees
with same-sex marriage or who agrees with it is either bad or
wrong. The reality is that people either agree or disagree
for reasons that are sound to them and carefully thought
through.

It would be a wise move on the government's side to let the
people have a say in this issue.
Put it to a Referendum and let the matter end there.

Foxy,

I agree, let the people decide; however the matter will not end there, however the vote goes.

Dear Is Mise,

I hear what you're saying,
but I think your fears are groundless -
although understandable.

For many people the institution of marriage
involving a woman and a man for the purpose of
having children has been one of the bedrocks of
Australian society and has been common across
cultures for generations. Therefore any changes
will be looked upon by many as the doom of this
institution.

cont'd ...

Ooops, I forgot to add that also the "Gay Lobby,"
will probably not give up so easily should they
lose support this time around.

Interesting times ahead.

Paul, unless you are dining with the couple overseas, they are not legally married and you simply have to accept that.

What I am suggesting is a compromise so we can put this issue to bed, so we can move on to more pressing issues. Issues like, what are going to do for jobs in the next year or two with our car manufacturers all leaving.

Y, I agree and in fact I touched on this some time ago where I said that gays getting same sex marriage passed was just the tip of the iceberg as they will never get the acceptance they want. So we might as well offer them a bone so as to say, then they can either take it, or leave it. But either way, gays will never have marriage equality as they are couples of the same sex.

I just wish they would get over it.

Mikk, what is wrong with my proposal?

Why can't gays just use an alternative meaning to the word marriage. Why do they want to change our world just to incorporate their queer existence.

There is simply no way that I, a normal heterosexual male wish to share my marriage with same sex couples, and why should I be expected to.

Besides it's the gays who want to be recognized, so why should we have to change our world to suit them.