With the politicians playing silly buggers with the issue of same sex marriage, will we see this issue put to bed any time soon? On the one hand the government is calling for a plebiscite, whilst on the other the opposition is calling for a much quicker and cheaper parliamentary vote on the issue.
With Nick Xenophon opposed to a plebiscite, but saying; “This issue needs to be dealt with - one way or the other - sooner rather than later," the chances that a plebiscite will be held have increased.

My opinion on the issue is, that a plebiscite is unnecessary with overwhelming community support for marriage equality . A parliamentary vote is all that is needed to amend the marriage act. What is your opinion?

seems like the regressives are now running scared. After 12 failures in parliament over the last few years now they think all their mock polling is wrong. They are scared the public will reject changing the dna of marriage. The regressives are now demonstrating how much they hate democracy.

paul1405: My opinion on the issue is, that a plebiscite is unnecessary with overwhelming community support for marriage equality. What is your opinion?

With the GTLB Society claiming "overwhelming community support for marriage equality" for many years, just what is their problem with the Plebiscite? Are they afraid that they have really been wrong all these years? Are they afraid of the Truth really coming out.

Apparently the Proposed question is a choice of two; Are you in favour of Same Sex Marriage? or Are you in favour of Marriage Equality? Which of these two is yet to be decided. Personally I don't care which one it is, as long as there are only two boxes to tick. "Yes" or "No."

Let the people of Australia decide. This Question is one of many that have been in debate for 50 or more years & no Parliament has come up with an Answer. If the Parliament is at an impasse over these Questions then it is right that the Government of the Day go to the People to get a decision.

The State of play at the moment has cost Australia Billions of Dollars, which it can't afford to spend, on these sorts of Questions for no result. If the people vote "yes" or "No" then that is exactly what should happen, immediately. No crying foul, unfair or another 50 years of debate about exactly what was meant by the side that has lost.

Apparently the ALP has now stated that it will vote against having a Plebiscite. It's the old, "What ever you are for, we're against, regardless." coming into play, again.

This is exactly why a Plebiscite is needed.

Let's clear a few other things up at the same time; Euthanasia, Nuclear Waste Storage. Does anyone want to add to the list.

Jayb.

Yeah, I think another plebiscite is needed. It should read:-

Should Australia ban immigration of muslims and people from other groups that have shown they will not integrate into our society?

Paul,

Media coverage on this issue has been overwhelmingly one sided, which is a problem because most of the arguments on both sides are completely wrong. It's not about the children; they're there anyway, parenting is something we should encourage regardless of sexuality, and parents not being married is nowadays so commonplace that it can't be a serious consideration.

It's not about rights. People can already do what they like, but we need to decide how the nation responds to that. Though all people are equal, that doesn't mean that all relationships are equal. Indeed many of the people who support gay marriage on the grounds that it's a requirement of gay people being equal, hypocritically oppose polygynous marriage – do they not see polyamorous people as equal? A similar argument applies to the people who claim they want the government to have nothing to do with marriage.

Having said that, the argument that it's a slippery slope is also wrong. The slope is there, but it only becomes slippery when we lubricate it.

And there are a few rights issues that will need to be addressed if we don't allow SSM, but unlike most of the countries that have already legalized SSM, Australia has already addressed most of the rights issues involved.

The real question is one of values, as the nation's laws should reflect the values of the people. Do we really think that spending the rest of your life with someone of the same sex is just as good as spending the rest of your life with someone of the opposite sex? Even for people perfectly capable of a normal heterosexual relationship (not just as an ersatz option for people who feel incapable)?

Personally my view is NO, but I think it's a question worth asking. And I don't think it's something that most Australians have seriously considered yet. Despite reality being more complicated, many people are under the illusion that each person is either straight or gay – and I'd expect nearly everyone with that view to support SSM.

(tbc)

(continued)

A plebiscite that politicians can ignore would be a waste of money. But we should have a referendum on the issue. Though the constitution doesn't require one, nor does it prevent parliament from legislating for one. Parliament should pass a change to the marriage act that's conditional on a majority YES vote. The legislation should prohibit parliament from overriding it, and should set a minimum time (twenty years, possibly?) before another referendum can overturn it, whatever the result.