rehctub,

Regarding your question that started the thread, I'd rather have my say.
But I'm not prepared to compromise the economy of Australia just to have my say. Especially as the issue appears to be lost already.

Most of the arguments we've heard on both sides are absolute crap. Too many opponents of same sex marriage have shot themselves in the foot by resorting to hateful homophobic rhetoric. And the ridiculous claims that it's about the kids have also harmed the cause. If it were really about the kids, I'd vote YES!

Nobody has properly advanced the argument that it's about values not rights. They've even failed to challenge the lie at the heart of the debate: that each person is either gay or straight. And now it's too late. Had Abbott put it to the people sooner, there would've been a good chance of a NO vote, but now most people have already made up their minds to legalise it.

Also, a plebiscite that the politicians can ignore is just a waste of money. We should have a proper referendum. Although the constitution doesn't require a referendum, nor does it prohibit legislating for one. But the politicians prefer to give us the illusion of the chance of having a say.

The Liberals are too great a threat to our economy to risk it.

mhaze,

I should also add that if it’s really about the children (as it so often is with those who predict that a threat to the nuclear family will spell the end of civilisation as we know it), then it seems to be quite the blind spot in the vision of such doomsayers to not show concern for the children of same-sex couples.

This prediction of the sky falling in is nothing more than the Slippery Slope fallacy. While the nuclear family was quite possibly beneficial to (and obviously played a role, however big or small) to the progress of civilisation as we know it, there is no evidence to suggest that its slip back to a less common form of family will spell the end of civilisation as we know it. It hasn’t had that effect so far.

Contrary to your fears, overall crime rates continue to drop as the world becomes more tolerant and the world has never been less violent as it is now, despite the picture that the 6:00 news portrays.

phanto,

I shouldn't have said before that I hadn't heard any reasoned arguments. It's more a case that I haven't heard any well-reasoned arguments. I'd also add that the only sincere argument so far seems to be mhaze's (usually religiously-inspired) prediction that the sky will fall in if same-sex marriage is legislated for. In my experience, these people actually believe that crap.

I must say, though, that I find your assertions as to how I should behave, given my beliefs, to be quite presumptuous, counterproductive and just downright bizarre.

Jay of Melbourne,

Yes, "fighting bigotry". Such a noble cause, even if I do say so myself. But really, I’m just your average guy who understands a bit about sociology and gives a toss about facts. Although, I'm not sure why fighting for equality cannot be a part of my motivation as well. The two are not mutually exclusive, after all.

AJ, I've given you the facts, Gay marriage, though legal has thus far been rejected by 97% of eligible homosexuals in the UK, same sex attracted people don't care for the idea so why should I vote for it?
The worst part of the so-called debate on same sex marriage has been that it's further emboldened self righteous, bourgeois prigs in giving them another excuse to punch down lower strata and given licence to the worst aspects of globalist-capitalist manipulation of public opinion.
It's as if the middle classes have given up control of both their minds and wallets to the transnational merchant class exemplified by Tim Cook, Mark Zuckerberg and George Soros.

//Gay marriage, though legal has thus far been rejected by 97% of eligible homosexuals in the UK, same sex attracted people don't care for the idea so why should I vote for it?//

You shouldn't if you don't want to. It's called democracy.

But when other people do, you shouldn't sprout sour grapes if your team loses. Democracy works out like that sometimes.

That goes for the rest of you mob: since you're so keen on this plebiscite, it's pretty weak if you turn around and start whining about the result if it doesn't go your way. Nobody likes a sore loser.

May the force be with you all as you vote tomorrow.

Aiden, if its about rights and not values, then why cant the gay community simply choose another word.

It would have the exact same value, and protect heterosexuals rights.

rehctub,

"Aiden, if its about rights and not values, then why cant the gay community simply choose another word."

By that, you seem to be saying that for you it's not about "values"...you simply don't like the word "marriage" being used when the social contract applies to SSM.

So for you, it's down to semantics.

"It would have the exact same value, and protect heterosexuals rights."

Where are heterosexual rights being threatened?