Rechtub,

They might not accept a 'no' decision, but there is not much they can do about it unless a future Labor government ignored democracy and brought it in - always a possiblity.

Or, the whole thing could fizzle out. I often wonder how serious some of these activists are. It is hard to believe homosexuality has afflicted so many people. Many of them could be just immature kids, vulnerable to fads who get a kick out dressing up for a Mardi Gras out of sheer boredom.

How many of them overseas ACTUALLY GET MARRIED after all the fuss has died down?

I can accept that there are genuine homosexual people who did not choose to be different; many of whom don't expect or want special treatment. But, I also believe that many people, particularly young ones, could be just experimenting, thinking it is the in thing to claim to be gay.

If there is any chance of all of that, it would be a huge mistake to overturn ages of tradition for something as petty and meaningless.

ttbn "the fact that Abbott is continuing to spend money that we don't have instead of reining in the Coalitions excesses, there will not be the usual surplus for Labor to plunder."

Maybe that's their "strategy".

People expect the goodies when Labor's in office, but there won't be any. HA-HA!
Then we see Labor in its true pathetic light.

onthebeach, yes the "progressives" are using gays, like they use anything else, as part of their wrecking ball.

Weren't progressives telling "wimmin" that marriage is a prison, slavery, in the burn-your-bra 70s?

How else can you explain progressives simultaneous enthusiasm for gay/women's rights *and* for Muslims (the most sexist homophobic people on Earth).

They will do anything to undermine "the establishment"/"the system".
Even if they contradict themselves.

Yes, now gay relationships are "recognised", Centrelink has to interrogate *all* shared living arrangements, lest any "relationship" slip through the cracks and get two full payments!

There was quite a lot of bitching in the gay community when they were "liberated" by that "reform".

"Gay" is not a leftist issue. If only more gays would see this and stop voting for these drongos.

There is always the horrifying prospect that warmair could be right, & Labor/Greens could get back into power.

In that case poofter marriage or no poofter marriage would be of no importance. The country would be such a disaster zone that any thinking people would have to become boat people, illegally immigrating to somewhere with more prospects of a successful economy, such as PNG or the Solomon Islands.

Just a few seconds looking at the stupidity of the Labor ladies club here in Old will show they have learnt nothing.

Hasbeen, Australia is financially sovereign: we own the Reserve Bank and can always borrow from them if we need to. So even if the Liberals left us with twice as much debt as Greece has, we would still have as much ability to afford a stimulus as we would if we had no debt at all.

Because the Australian population is purchasing the majority of their goods from overseas, money is leaving Australia creating unemployment and debt to Government coffers while we have an ageing population and increasing need for welfare and medical care Australia is running into greater debt.

All relationships outside of marriage if it involves property and family need a civil contract.

Government, particularly the previous Labor governments that were in for six years, but the LNP too, have failed the public by allowing the superficial pro- and anti- rhetoric of either end of the spectrum to dominate. It has been a circus.

There has been very little independent information given to the public to assist ordinary citizens to examine, to soberly compare and contrast the consequences of pursuing either path. However there is a central path of compromise too, a far less disruptive choice where both sides can profit, that is strangely always ignored by the gay marriage activists.

The public needs to understand why that is so too.

Why is it that unnecessarily disrupting the whole meaning of marriage as it has been practiced and understood by millions of Australians, migrants too, is seen as essential by gay activists and the Cultural Marxists and radical feminists behind them? It should not be forgotten that millions have entered into contracts with a definite, traditional expectations.

However the forces behind the present gay marriage push have always disrespected marriage AND FAMILY (the feminists have even sternly criticised and sledged mothers who breast-feed), stating outright that it is all highly unacceptable to them and should be dispensed with forthwith.

It is difficult to believe that such forces do not still perceive the trashing of marriage, family and fatherhood as their primary aim, to re-engineer society to match their political idealism, and gay marriage is just a stepping stone towards that.

What hope for the public to get what they want when they are being denied independent information as an educated, politically-astute elite dominates with their highly manipulative, brain-busting Hegelian-Marxist dialectic?

Make no mistake, the future for marriage as far as those media-savvy feminists and Cultural Marxists are concerned is anything but an exclusive one of one commitment, hopefully for life.

The taxpayer-funded national broadcaster is a shameless advocate, not a reliable informant for the public.

Thinking about the future, this is an informative article,
http://www.frc.org/get.cfm?i=IS04C02