Paul1405, I do appologise I am not as witty as most people and unfortunately I have had trouble separating the the wit from the s#!t. I try to make my position and comments as clear as I can. I try not to detract with levity or go too far off topic. I am never sure who is for and who is against on the forum. The comments and their respective responses do not always say what they mean, adding to my frustration. For clarity and transparency may I ask if you are a YES or a NO.

Steele:

Resistance by the church to SSM is based on their fundamental stance in regard to homosexuality. They do not approve of homosexual relationships and see it as a fundamental moral failing. Morals are not peripheral to their existence at all.

The AFL do not have a tradition of being involved in moral questions and would not see the issue of SSM as a moral issue. Certainly they have not said anything about the morality or otherwise of homosexuality. Homosexuality does not threaten their core reason for existence.

Hi ALTRAV, I don't take the Forum all that serious at times, its mostly a little club with a few regular contributors, its not changing the world, but I do enjoy the debate the goes on, I think I've been here for about 7 years, so it must have something going for it. I think I can be satirical at times, serious sometimes, but unfortunately stinging at other times. I tend to get up the nose of some of the more conservative contributors. Every now and then when I go over the top, Graham will put me in the cooler, deservedly so, spent a day in there last week.

Enjoy the interaction with other 'Forumites', some come and go, others have been here for yonks. All having their different cyber personalities, those differences is what makes it fun to be a part of. Imagine if we were all the same, posting the same opinions. all in full agreement....how boring that would be. I wouldn't last 5 minutes.

To answer your questing I voted YES.

'Today Tonight' poll 21/9/17:

Always planned to vote YES 15%
Recently changed vote to YES 1%
Always planned to vote no 66%
Recently changed vote to NO 18%

In Hobart, YES thug head butts Tony Abbott.

Reliable stuff there, ttbn.

Those results are hardly surprising given the demographic of TodayTonight’s viewers, I mean, who actually watches the evening news now, anyway? All randomised polls over the last 13 years, including a 13-year study involving the same 17,000 subjects, find the opposite.

<<In Hobart, YES thug head butts Tony Abbott.>>

In Brisbane, NO thug bashes Kevin Rudd’s gay Godson.

I’m sure we can all find examples of undesirable behaviour to commit the Association fallacy with.

http://www.logicallyfallacious.com/tools/lp/Bo/LogicalFallacies/10/Ad-Hominem-Guilt-by-Association

Those of us who have logic and reason on their side, however, will not need to.