The title of this thread is "What a Circus !".
It is indeed:

Great panic about same sex marriage.
We all know why there is such opposition to a plebiscite.
They are frightened it would fail to pass.

Great panic about electricity prices.
Put believers in global warming in charge of the electricity
system and they handicap the generation of electricity.
If they had their way we would not have electricity at all.

Great panic about aboriginal recognition.
At current rates in a few hundred years they will all be absorbed
into the general population and almost no one will be able to tell
who is an aboriginal descendant without a DNA test.

Great panic all about a bomb plot to blow up a plane.
No need for panic, Islam is a religion of peace.

Dear Paul,

I'm looking forward to
the results of your vote as well as to - what is going to
happen with the proposed Bill for Same-Sex
Marriage. Will they decide to have a conscience
vote in Parliament or not. I think that there's
a Cabinet Meeting for the Coalition in the late
afternoon tomorrow. It will be interesting to see what they
decide and what the end result will be.

Hi Foxy, back home from NZ, been a hectic week for us. On the subject of a "conscience" vote by MP's, not something I favor in principle. Members are put there to carry out the wishes of those who elected them, and so they should. Otherwise we could grab any 150 other Australians and have a "conscience" vote conducted by them, would carry as much validity as a vote by parliamentarians based on their conscience, and what makes theirs so special. I never voted for anyone based on their conscience or lack of. I suppose in fairness to these people in parliament, well those members who actually have a conscience, not sure what number that is out of the 150, could be as low as zero, they could abstain from voting if they felt the conscience couldn't take it, to vote yes and satisfy the wishes of the vast majority.
Anyway, vote or no vote, life will carry on for gays, just as it will for the rest of us.

Dear Foxy,

I have little doubt that they will decide to have a "conscience vote" in Parliament, because it's in their political interest.
(the quotes are because I agree with Paul: how can there be a "conscience vote" by those who never had a conscience?)

This has nothing to do with homosexuals and nothing to do with marriage: homosexual marriage is ALREADY legal - it's all about handing more people a bureaucratic piece of paper.

Expanding the scope of state-sanctioned "marriage", or state-sanctioned anything for that matter, is always in the interest of politicians who want to grow their bureaucratic empire.

I have just read about the proposed bill and what hurts me most is that it will, once again, prejudice in favour of the established big churches against individual faiths. Quoting from the article in "The Australian":

"the bill will extend religious freedoms to all religious ministers, while service providers — such as bakers, florists and photographers — will need to prove a link to a religious body to object."

This means that bakers, florists and photographers whose private religion (or simply conscience for that matter) prevents them from supporting certain marriages will be persecuted, while bakers, florists and photographers who belong to an established church will be spared - how disgusting! When organised "religion" colludes with the state, that's what gives religion a bad reputation.

Dear Paul,

Welcome back.

I have mixed feelings about all this.

I'll wait and see what develops tomorrow in
Parliament.

Dear Yuyutsu,

I believe that the Liberal member from WA who's presenting
the Bill in Parliament has added certain amendments that
protects the rights of those who do not wish to
either cater to same sex weddings or perform the ceremonies
will have the right not to be forced to do it.
Tomorrow we should know what is decided in Parliament.

Hi Foxy, all that came out of yesterday was another example of how divided this pathetic government is. I didn't expect anything less. The conservative faction is doing its best to thwart the wishes of the vast majority of Australians on the issue. Talk of a plebiscite, or a postal plebiscite, that will boost the income of the post office, is a diversionary tactic by those who don't want to face the reality. Like the bulk of Australians, my gay friends are over it, they don't much care as to what a bunch of old crusty conservatives want or don't want, what they think or don't think. Its now going before the unrepresentative five percent the 'Nationals' to pass their judgement. Joke!