Make that your para 3, Yuyutsu. Got to rush, c u.

Nobody wants to "trash" the Marriage Act.
That has already been done by our former
PM Mr John Howard. He was the one who
put in the words that "Marriage was to be
between a man and a woman, to the exclusion
of all others."

Gay Australians simply want to re-instate
the wording that the former PM John Howard
replaced. He was
the one who changed the wording to make
marriage between "A man and a woman," only.
Instead of between two people.

Had he not done what he did - we possibly
would not have the problems that we are
having today. All citizens of this country
are entitled to be treated equally and fairly
and not be discriminated against because of
somebody's version of what the "right" idea of
marriage should be.All Australian citizens are
entitled to be treated
equally and to celebrate their commitment to the
person they love as the rest of the country does.

That of course is simply my opinion from what I
have read on the web and watched on the media.
And I do understand the feelings of those who
disagree with this viewpoint. It would therefore be
appreciated if personal attacks and wrong assumptions
were not made about me simply because of my viewpoint.
Nobody likes or supports abusive, or illogical posters.

Good Lord Fox your nose will be a metre long.

As you very well know and have been reminded countless times before, all PM John Howard did was ensure the meaning and intent of the Act and how it was understood and practised by millions of Australians were protected from a sly backdoor legal attack.

Doubtless the mainstream of the homosexual population welcomed Howard's move, all excepting the interfering feminists and bullying Gay Pride activists of course.

The majority of gays, the mainstream who never wanted the State to control their lives and lawyers and Courts to make decisions for them, rue the day they sat back and let a few bolshie attention-seeking activists and the meddling feminists with their secondary agenda to take over leadership. As demonstrated by the Gillard(+Greens sidekicks) government, the educated middle class feminist elite drive their own agenda and what is good for their income, careers and to preserve their self-entitlement.

Of course you ignore the inconvenient facts raised in my post on page 14 [onthebeach, Wednesday, 10 February 2016 9:25:20 PM], but no surprise there.

Dear Foxy,

You shouldn't be too hard on old John Howard. He isn't what you might call a man of great knowledge.

You frequent the same club rooms, Misopinion ?

In the current march through the institutions of bourgeois society, is it intended that when homosexual liaisons are recognised as 'marriages', that widow's pensions will be payable to any survivor of such a 'marriage' ? To husband 1 or husband 2, whoever is the survivor ?

Equality in marriage. Yeah, right.

Joe

OTB,

I would like to respond to you in more depth.
All you need to do is cut the abuse, use logic,
and reasoning, and I shall be happy to respond.
Give it a go. It may surprise you. And me.