$160000000 is a huge sum: a typical person's lifetime's disposable income is around $1000000, so if the plebiscite goes ahead, it's akin to 160 people losing all their life's earnings!

Moreover, it is likely that government will continue its despicable tradition of compulsory voting, further intervening in people's lives and forcing them to be involved with the state, even if they never agreed to have anything to do with it.

Therefore, it is better not to have a plebiscite (also elections, for the same reasons).

Anyone who respects themselves and their fellows, regardless of sexual orientation, will not register their personal relationship(s) with the regime anyway - and shame on those who would.

If parliament is to represent the will of the people then we should realise that the Liberal party does not represent the majority of people. The non-liberal parliamentarians are in the majority. Let us hope this majority will govern.

The coalition took a plebiscite to the elections and won a mandate. As polls suggest that 2/3 people want to have a plebiscite, and a plebiscite in February could see gay marriage legislated by April 2017.

Considering that the alternative is that a vote is blocked in parliament until 2019, it looks like labor and the greens are prepared once again to sacrifice their principles to score points.

P.S. compared to the $11bn that labor and the greens wasted on border control it is a steal.

We can't have government by poll. Polls are notoriously inaccurate for various reasons I don't need to tell anyone here about. Further, I do not believe that we should be trusting any politicians to make decisions like this for us. Further again, and most important, I do not believe any politician should have the right to impose a minority demand on the majority.

Now, to save people saying that "marriage 'equality'" will not affect me and others, I say, yes it will. The fact that the Marriage Act, marriage itself in its current form, means a hell of lot to a hell of a lot of us. Any alteration will affect us. Any alteration will affect us all as human beings. No matter what is thought about homosexuality, or the 'rights' of homosexuals, two people of the same sex were not made to partner up with each other. There are two sexes for very obvious reasons. If two people of the same sex wish to conjoin in the same manner as two people of the same sex, I could not care less. In every way except for legal marriage, they are treated no differently from heterosexual couples. They do not need anything that a defacto heterosexual couple has to lead their lives safetly and happenly. Good luck to them, too.

But it is intolerable that these very few people should be able to dictate to us. I am amazed that a plebicite has been made available. But it has, and it is time to test the validity or otherwise of the claims, based on informal, unofficial polls, that most Australians are comfortable with altering the Marriage Act. I don't believe that they are but, if I am wrong, at least I will know that the matter has been settled in a democratic manner.

A decision by parliament is not democratic - despite the lie that we vote for them to make decisions for us - if would be totalitarian, the thin edge of the wedge of a total collapse in democracy, which is what some people want.

One more thing. Let's not hear any more of the bulldust about the cost of the plebicite. Democracy does cost, and the people hypocritically using the cost excuse are the very same people who want to borrow and spend others peoples' money when it suits them. And, while I'm at it, the same anti-plebicite mob who are now imagining all sorts of abuse being hurled at people leading up to a vote, were the first to cheer the Irish vote for what a great victory it was for democracy, something they now say that they do not believe in, preferring elected dictators to do the job for them. If the plebicite is knocked back by the ratty senate, Turnbull needs to end all talk of the subject as long as he is PM. If he does not, he will not be PM for very long. And, if he did not act on the plebicite showing that a mojority of Australians approved of altering the Marriage Act say Wong et al says he could, then he would last even less time as PM.

It has to a plebicite or nothing.

The opposition, greens etc want to rush it through parliament because
their deals have tied it up.
They are opposed to a plebiscite because they feel sure it will be lost.
If it goes through parliament everyone will say we were cheated, we
were promised a plebiscite that was going to say no.
The Labour/greens etc knew that which was why they opposed it.

You won't save the argument, you will generate it.

Does anyone believe the plebiscite is opposed because they believe
it will say yes ? No they oppose it because they believe it will say no !
That's it, don't let the people have a say, they will say no !
We already have the pollies standing in a line saying YES YES YES ! or else !