Dustin,

I have no idea what the relevance is of any of that to what you had quoted of me.

<<Let’s ignore the confected divisiveness of the gay lobby who want every man, woman and child to pitch in $5 to vote on the validity of their delusion.>>

What’s the reasoning behind this, and why is same-sex marriage a delusion? I take it that it has something to do with the ever-elusive 'eligibility'?

<<Looking forward to your support for traditional marriage.>>

Since when have I not supported it? In fact, I have argued in favour of it when disingenuous libertarians try to argue that all marriage should be abolished.

Or do you mean traditional-only marriage, to the exclusion of same-sex couples? Yeah, not sure why you would be looking forward to that from me. Sounds like you think think you've spotted a contradiction in my logic that simply isn't there.

<<Thanks in advance.>>

You’re welcome. I guess…

Oh look, a whole barrel of three-headed monkeys!

//I don't see you having a problems with Mosques overflowing into the streets//

Yeah, if that is really happening then they need to sort that out. Overcrowding buildings is a serious health and safety risk. The obvious solution being to build more mosques to reduce overcrowding in existing ones.

Of course, is the issue is just large numbers of Muslims congregating outside mosques immediately prior to and following services like Jews do outside synagogues, I'm failing to see the problem.

//and the country looking like the beginnings of the UK//

The beginnings of the UK? Do you mean the Acts of Union of Great Britain and Ireland, which united Great Britain and Ireland as the United Kingdom in 1801? I don't think there were any overcrowded mosques in either Ireland or Britain in 1801, Armchair.

//I really don't see why you should have a problem with 'God Hate's Fags'.//

Really? You can't? Because pretty much every Christian I have ever spoken with on the subject, regardless of their denomination, think that the Westboro Baptist Church are a massive bunch of dicks who have failed to understand what Christianity is actually about.

Here's a video from a woman who was raised in the Westboro church and left. You never know, you might just learn something:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bVV2Zk88beY

//Do you think the Muslims embrace gay culture?//

Doubt it.

//You support them but do you not think they are supportive of homosexuality?//

I believe that you don't have to agree with what somebody believes to agree with their right to believe it. That's one of the ways in which you and I differ, Armchair.

//Tell me if this passes how long till some gay sues a church leader for not marrying them in a church?//

That rather depends on whether or not they'll be allowed to, which I very much doubt they will. The Government have already said that the bill which goes before parliament if the yes vote wins will have explicit protections for wedding celebrants. And I'd wager that this is one promise...

... they're going to keep.

//I'll give it one week from when it passes to when the first...//

Oh good, somebody whose TARDIS isn't on the fritz. Say, you don't think you could pop over and take a look at mine, do you? Sunday about three weeks ago (30/7) would suit me well, I don't recall having had any other pressing engagements that day.

//Do you support safe schools?//

Nah, kids have it too soft these days, so I'm in favour of dangerous schools: arsenic in the bubblers, rattlesnakes in the lockers, electrify the monkey bars, packs of rabid hyenas roaming the playgrounds, and at least one kiddy fiddler in every P.E. faculty. Actually, I think they're already on to that last one.

//it's the same as forcing Muslims to all eat a big plate of bacon everytime they visit their Mosque.//

No it isn't. The idea is to make SSM legal, not compulsory. If Christians believe that gay marriage is wicked, guess what!? They don't have to get gay married! They don't have to go to gay weddings! They're not being forced to do anything! 

Because we live in liberal democracy, not some totalitarian state, and as long as they obey the law people can pretty much do as they see fit. I think that's a good thing, BTW.

//If you want this freedom to victimise Chritian bakeries over dick cakes//

I didn't even know you could make cakes out of dicks. You learn something new everyday. Would this be some sort of Chinese cuisine? Apparently there's a restaurant China whose entire menu consists of penis-based dishes. People are weird.

//force kids to be indoctrinated with gay and trans agenda//

What's a gay agenda?

//I support gay suicide//

Classy. Nothing sells your case like making light of serious mental illness, Armchair.

And these are the people you're standing in solidarity with, Dustin. I hope you're pleased with yourself.

//Start acting more respectful of others//

Good advice, Armchair.

Yeah well your opinion's biased Toni, since you're a bloke with a girls name...

ttbn writes: “I have to confess to knowing only three homosexuals (they are not particularly 'gay' people) and they have no wish to 'marry', and will be voting 'NO' in the upcoming postal survey.”

And yet I bet that not even they could present a single rational argument against same-sex marriage.

It astonishes me just how lacking the opponents of marriage equality are in any rational argument for their position. I’m nowhere near as passionate about this issue as I come across. I more can’t stand irrationality, and you’d be hard pressed to find an opinion that is quite so irrational as that of the opposition to marriage equality.

That’s pretty selfish and heartless of them, by the way, voting ‘no’ just because they personally don’t want marriage when so many of their fellow gay people do. Especially when marriage equality will not affect them adversely in any way. Why couldn’t they just not vote at all? At least homophobic straight people have their bigotry to blame. What do these apparently self-hating gays (and they do exist) have?

//Yeah well your opinion's biased Toni, since you're a bloke with a girls name//

Well that's a bit rich coming from a girl with a piece of furniture's name.

How many time is it now that I've explained to you that if you start with the name Anthony and the A, N & H you get left with Tony, but that if you start with the name Antonio and remove the A, N & O you get left with Toni? I'd get to a doctor and have that memory problem checked out - it could be indicative of serious conditions like Alzheimer's.

Or it could just be because of your drinking.

Still, it does speak volumes about the quality of your arguments when the best rebuttal you can manage is "Oh yeah? Well Antonio is a girl's name, so there, nyah nyah nyah". Very mature. Can't wait for your next rebuttal, I'm dying to see whether it will be "My daddy's bigger than your daddy and he's going to beat your daddy up" or the old classic "Well you're a big stinky poo-bum head".