Josephus,

You may not hate gay people - there may even be some whom you love - but your desire to deny them equal treatment contradicts this. The best you’ve done to justify this apparent contraction is to present an argument which mistakes marriage for a biological institute, when it is purely a social construct for which we as a society have the power to alter as we please.

There is evidently no god who invented marriage or told us how marriage must remain. You, however, believe there is, and I would respect you more if you could just say that instead of trying to rationalise an irrational position with a patently ignorant understanding of what marriage is. In a more difficult position is someone like ALTRAV, who doesn’t have a religious belief, yet utterly despises gay people anyway.

You at least have a god to blame on any homophobic sentiment in your position on; for all we know, your hands are tied. You should take advantage of that. I could understand if you want your god to have rational reasons for his rules, but I see no reason why you can't just throw this one in the 'Mysterious Ways' basket. It seems to be bottomless.

"Paul, you are brain washed into believing persons that voted NO hate homosexuals" No Fr Joe, every No vote like you love homosexual, and with a well developed paternalistic attitude you simply wanted to protect gay people from themselves. As for all that family gay friendliness of you and your, highly commendable.

Issy, who ever said a pedophile could not be homosexual. Although among the most notorious Catholic pedophile clergy there is no evidence that any were in consenting adult homosexual relationships, they were simply child molesters. Homosexual or heterosexual they deserve the same punishment, in my book, or is there some mitigation for the male preditor molesting a female child?

The design of the male and female human body itself gives evidence as to the intended biological relationship. If marriage is just a social contract then sex, procreation or gender is not part of that contract. But that is not the case put forward by the LGBTQQS campaign, as sex is part of their envisaged marriage contract and adultery is part of its violation and children with IVF or surrogacy is also part of their plan for equality. That marriage is just a social contract is a lie propagated by deceivers of our moral culture. Propagated by Marxist University lecturers seeking to undermine our Culture and values. "We learnt it at University!" Example: https://www.vice.com/en_ca/article/mgyax8/what-its-like-to-be-a-genderfluid-sex-worker?utm_campaign=Global&utm_source=vicefbca

AJ, Tell me please how you change the gender constructs you were born with by changing laws? No you cannot! so we have this gender fluidly rubbish floating around in the minds of university graduates trying to change gender by surgery and hormones. Marriage is not just a State contract, it is a sexual relationship, and to prove it we have sex now identified as LGBTQQS; and it is they who want equality with a normal gender of male and female identity. It is a sexual contract to dismiss this is clear deception of the fact. Marriage is clearly an exclusive sexual contract!

Is Mise,

You still don't get it.

What I have been saying all along is that
the figures of 61.6% YES and 38.4% NO are
representative of those eligible voters
who chose to vote rather than being
representative of ALL eligible Australians.
I have made this quite clear.

I have explained this from the very beginning
on page 8 of this discussion and subsequently
in posts ever since where I have gone on to give
the exact statistics of how many of the population
voted YES and how many voted NO. I made it quite
clear that 7,817,247 (61.6%) responded YES and
4,873,967 (38.4%) responded NO.

If you still chose to misinterpret what I have
tried to explain to you over and over again -
Then there's no further point in my arguing with
you. We are not exchanging knowledge here - but
ignorance and that is a waste of both our times.

Cheers.

Foxy,

Just shew me where anyone, other than yourself, asserted that,
"61.6% 0f the Australian population votes YES"

That statement is wrong and you know it, it's not wasting time to correct erroneous statements because if not challenged they become believable.