It’s time to allow gay marriage in Australia

Sarah K says:

12:35pm | 16/07/09

Spot on Millsy. And don’t forget “gay” = lesbian too.

Dave says:

12:52pm | 16/07/09

It’s just the church making a final stand.  The fact is the church invented the notion of marriage and set down some pretty strict rules regarding it - such as the participants to a marriage must be virgins, till death do us part wasn’t optional and divorce was impossible, oh and that the participant needed to be of different sexes.  The fact is that most churches have relaxed some of these requirements and certainly civil celebrants have no issues with multiple marriages.  The biggest threats to the institution of marriage and indeed our society as a whole comes not from homosexuals wishing to make a commitment but from single heterosexuals seeking to avoid them.

pat says:

01:08pm | 16/07/09

Terry and Mark H - Gay Marriage is going to happen. In the next 5 to 10 years it will be a certainty throughout the western world. Its just a question of old folks being replaced by young folks Your on the wrong side of history. You mightnt like it, but guess what, no one will care.

Mark says:

01:19pm | 16/07/09

TERRY judging by your nasty comments God definately made you!
I’m glad he never made me!

SS says:

01:22pm | 16/07/09

given the main opposition to gay marriage come from religions , society should be establishing the legitimacy of such religions.
The problem with Dave’s thought process is none religious people also get married so marriage is not limited to religions and therefore gay people should have such rights too. It is with some irony that religious folk have such a fascination with the actions of gays or other none religious folk. Surely they should look at their own flawed belief structure before insisting on imposing it on others.
As Australians we should have the right to live as we choose , to do what we wish in our own homes without fear of the state or any other group interfering, so long as our actions harm no one.The whole concept of the state telling us what we can and cant do is in direct opposition to our supposed state as a free country.
Mind you i am a father of 6 hetro male, whom doesn’t believe in marriage full stop.It amazes me why anyone would wish to marry.

andyroosh says:

01:27pm | 16/07/09

It’s not only about religion etc, Millsey. Strong families, and embracing traditional family values is fundemental to society. Our society and the values which make up our laws are to some extent built around judeochristian values. I’m personally not particularly religious, but you don’t have to be religious to believe these values help stabilise society.

Not supporting gay marriage doesn’t equate to not supporting gay people. Gay people in a domestic partnership are still entitled to most of the rights of a married couple, so this isn’t about equality.

Australian pollies shouldn’t succumb to the far-left liberal/secular lean that many of the other nations in our western world is taking. They should stand up to the kumbaya brigade, including the likes of Mr. Mills, wanting to make themselves feel good at the expense of society.

MarkH says:

01:29pm | 16/07/09

Pat, a wonderful insight into arrogance - you just don’t care nor respect the opinions of others. Maybe one day (when you grow older) you will realise what you have lost. “Those who believe in nothing will fall for anything.”

MF says:

01:30pm | 16/07/09

MarkH - historically marriage was all about inheritance rights.  That’s changed over time.  It used to be that whites couldn’t marry blacks.  That’s changed.  Why shouldn’t other archaic parts of it be rescinded as well?

I doubt I’ll ever get married, it’s not something that I feel the need to do.  But I will fight all the way for the right of others to do so.  My best friend is a lesbian who’s been in a relationship for almost 10 years.  And she’s apparently an inferior human.  The government is happy to take her taxes, but not give her the same rights as everyone else.  It’s a total crock.

hannah says:

01:31pm | 16/07/09

It disgusts me that people could state that marriage is about love and commitment in one breath, and in the next state that gay people should not be allowed to get married. How absolutely absurd that two people can not celebrate their love in front of friends and family because of others homophobia.

CH says:

01:42pm | 16/07/09

Wow, such insight and fresh revelation. This piece has really helped the debate to progress into unchartered territory.

Come on Punch, lift your game. This is a worthwhile topic to explore and what you’ve given us is the intellectual equivalent to a high school assignment.

Chad says:

01:55pm | 16/07/09

Great article Rob, hats off to you. I am a human being, i have the right to marry. My sexual orientation is not important. Full Stop.

MarkH says:

01:59pm | 16/07/09

MF
Why shouldn’t other archaic parts of it be rescinded as well?
Quite simply, archaic = historic. Marriage as already mentioned has the explicit religious meaning of the union of a man and a woman (under God or “a God” and generally seeking the blessing of that deity). Change that and it is no longer marriage.  This is not to deny the official union of GLBTs (Gay/Lesbian/Bisexual/Trans-sexual) but simply recognises that other unions are not Marriage.
A question for those not interested in adhering to a religious belief system…
Why are you even interested in highjacking a religious term for secular use?
If you reject the religion(s) - why use their vocabulary?
Ignore it!
Walk away.
Create your own term and walk boldly into a new future unconstrained by old world values and terms.

jason says:

02:02pm | 16/07/09

Marriage is the union of 2 people.  religion may or may not play a part depending on personal beliefs. To suggest everyone has to live by your own individual beliefs is preposterous and somewhat hypocritical. By denying gays the rights to live as they choose religion are merely turning the focus to their own legitimacy.

MF says:

02:13pm | 16/07/09

MarkH - the “church” appropriated the term for their own ends.  Marriage, originally, had nothing to do with religion.  It had to do with succession and inheritance rights.

MarkH says:

02:22pm | 16/07/09

Pardon me Jason?
No-one is denying gays the right to live as they choose (except Tasmania until recently…). The debate is simply what Term is or is not appropriate for the OFFICIAL union of “various” couples.

Dean says:

02:26pm | 16/07/09

Same sex marriage has been around throughout history… It’s only this day and age the brainwashed sheep of religion that think it un-natural.

Joel says:

02:30pm | 16/07/09

There should be more heterosexual guys like you speaking up like this, mate. Seriously, it’s absolutely fantastic.
To all the haters writing in this forum- grow up. You are as outdated and wrong as the laws preventing gay marriage.
The most simple but most important thing you people don’t seem to understand is that, wait for it, one doesn’t choose to be gay. Get it? It just happens. It’s the way we are and there’s nothing wrong with that.
Yet year after year, time after time, people continue to fight nature. Its completely absurd and, as a gay guy, actually makes me laugh now because I know I’m smarter and better than everyone who has ever called me a fag.
I hope everyone can one day look back at this -after the laws are changed and its acceptable for two guys to walk down a busy street hand-in-hand - and laugh too, but judging by the pain it has caused so many throughout history, I doubt that will ever happen

Adam says:

02:30pm | 16/07/09

I completely agree that gays should be allowed to be married

But then I dont agree they can have children

JG says:

02:30pm | 16/07/09

The homophobic religions are testament to just how irrelevant religion truly is. How religion has permeated our entire society as it has is beyond logical thinking, to base our entire system on a mythical creatures is reflective of just how dumb our species is.

Chirvy says:

02:31pm | 16/07/09

Just because the term ‘marriage’ may have religious historical origins, it doesn’t mean it can’t be appropriated by others and perhaps change in meaning over time. Certain values/beliefs which have been associated with religion (but don’t necessarily come form religion) have been adopted by the broader society for the benefit of everyone. Claiming explicit ownership of the term marriage just makes you seem backwards and desperate in an attempt to differentiate yourself from others, and those sort of views only creates divisions within society. I don’t care what the term is, but I’d just like to see everyone have the same rights as their fellow human being.

Jack says:

02:45pm | 16/07/09

Anyone considered the alternative? That the government stays out of marriage? You can have the civil union, which is a legal agreement for the sake of tax/children and then anything religious ie. ceremony - is a seperate social thing that has nothing to do with legality.

Chris says:

02:49pm | 16/07/09

Spot on. Gay people have the right to be as miserable as every other married couple.

jason says:

02:51pm | 16/07/09

MarkH thats your interpretation of it , however the reality is quite different.

BrianN says:

02:51pm | 16/07/09

andyroosh says: “It’s not only about religion etc, Millsey. Strong families, and embracing traditional family values is fundemental to society.”

Can you explain to me then andyroosh, why this isn’t the exact argument that conservative forces should be embracing or even demanding same-sex marriage?

If gays have all the rights of defacto married opposite sex partners and can create family units either through adoption, children from previous marriages, surrogacy or artificial reproductive technology - then wouldn’t this be the reason people should be encouraging them to be in a marriage?

So their children are no longer “bastards”. So that their love and commitment can flourish under the mystical banner of marriage? So they can be assured of their societal acceptance and celebration of their union for life…

Im sorry but your argument doesnt wash for me. Your arguments appear to be bigotry wrapped up in a thin veil of humanity - Family Values are not exclusive of same-sex families in a tolerant and equal Australia!

Alf says:

03:04pm | 16/07/09

Hmm…

Definition of marriage is (and has been for ages) “a union of man and woman”. Same-sex marriage is an oximoron!

Why are cars called cars and planes called planes? We didn’t change the definition of a car, just because humans created a flying vehicle! Why try and change the definition of marriage?

Call it whatever you like - same-sex contract, same-sex commitment… but leave marriage for what it was intended for!

Tim says:

03:06pm | 16/07/09

Brian N,
thanks for giving the reasons why Gays should not be allowed to have children as well. good work.

David JC says:

03:07pm | 16/07/09

Well said Millsy! As for R.E.L and his/her “marriage is a sacred union between a man, a woman and G-d. The intent is for man and woman to unify as creators of life and thereby emulate G-d in His Divine Image as The Creator of all life” what a load of religious mumbo jumbo bollocks. Honestly, its sanctimonious, holier than thou, preechy bible bashers like this that has consigned organised religion into the dustbin of irrelevance where it rightly belongs. We’re witnessing the last, dying gasps of an institution so completely out of touch with modern reality its struggling to recruit molesters… sorry, ministers. How about couples who decide not to have children, R.E.L? Or those that physically can not? Does your all-knowing, all-powerful man in the sky damn their relationship as well? Or does he “bless” it in the same way he would the 16 year old Mt Druitt schoolgirl who roots her way around the train station and has now created an offspring in “His Divine Image” to someone only He could know? And is your cloud wizard the same as the one down Auburn way who allows his followers to torture female family members if they transgress some subjective, medieval code of desert morality? R.E.L, most normal people stop believing in tooth fairies, ghosts and Santa Claus at about 10 years of age. Its time to grow up, ditch the delusion and start taking responsibility for your own life. And that includes keeping your self righteous nose out of other people’s bedrooms.

kate says:

03:11pm | 16/07/09

Marriage was originally a religious concept.  With the variety of religions and non-religious people now living in Australia, it is time the courts legally recognise the change to the modern state of matrimony - from religious, to a legal show of commitment between 2 people.  This being the case, this commitment should include gay couples. 

Frankly, I am in a defacto relationship and see no reason to bother getting married anyway.  I am not religious and I am committed to my partner, there are no legal benefits to marriage anymore with the new defacto laws, and I see no reason why I should sign a bit of paper to prove to others that I love my partner.  But for those traditional types who would like to sign on the dotted line….that option should be open to everyone.

RJB says:

03:22pm | 16/07/09

Lots of computers kept in closets

Ben from Perth says:

03:25pm | 16/07/09

What’s with the repetition on The Punch lately? 

We had this debate two days ago, along with the three articles on Triple J’s Hottest 100 Of All Time and a couple of articles thrown in on MasterChef and the cricket.

AndrewD says:

03:31pm | 16/07/09

Margaret Gray - I couldn’t agree with you more. I don’t know why people need labels to define everything. While I’m not against the idea of ‘gay marriage’ I don’t see it as an important step in moving forward. There are far more important issues out there.

Marriage is such a sham, it’s lost all value and no longer stands for “love & commitment” when so many couples end in divorce, adultery and unhappiness.

I am happily partnered and been so for many years. Who cares what the government, religions or society think about my relationship? I know, in myself, in my head and in my heart, that I love my partner dearly. Why should I get a piece of paper just to prove it to society? I believe it, so that’s all that matters.

Dan says:

03:50pm | 16/07/09

The thing that gets me with folks against gay marriage is that they always create a slippery slope where people will eventually be able to commit polygamy, marry children or marry Fido.  Seriously folks who think this, what are you smoking?  ‘Cos it sounds like some pretty good stuff.

Cynic says:

03:52pm | 16/07/09

what kind of person calls a child a bastard ??

another revolting discriminatory myth created by the revolting values of religion…
before religion can be used to impose moralistic standards on society religion should be scrutinized for any sign of legitimacy.

Adrian says:

04:12pm | 16/07/09

Margaret - “Just explain why gay people keep insisting they want to be “married”?” - If “married” is just a word, then why are people opposed to gay marriage so worried?

But seriously, if people are really that worried allowing gay people to get married will “devalue the institiution of marriage” (an argument I can’t follow to be honest) maybe they should consider where they stand on divorce. Allowing divorces fundamentally changed marriage, more than any other thing could. Marriages were once for life, no matter what happened during the course of the relationship. Once people were allowed to end those relationships (divorce) then marriage was fundamentally changed FOREVER.

Two people in love who want to get married doesn’t devalue marriage - it strengthens marriage.

Old Clive says:

04:26pm | 16/07/09

You showed your colours when you said we a little behind,  no we are way in front and we are not interested in little behinds or big ones for that matter, a decent society where we can raise our children and grand children is what we are interested in. Some homosexuals are born that way but the majority are made that way. Forthermore there is no such a person as a homophobic but there are a lot of normal well adjusted people.

andrew peter collins says:

04:29pm | 16/07/09

While i would never want to marry a partner (too much hassle if you divorce) it doesn’t mean that others can’t. Look at the recent tragedies with straight couples killing their kids then themselves. We’ve got more important things to worry about than gay marriage so just legislate to bring us in line with straight people…........next!

George says:

05:26pm | 16/07/09

Same sex marriages are a nonsense, and unjust. 

First on the grounds that it’s a debasement of language. Let them call it “gayrrige”, or “dykerigge”, or whatever, but it’s not marriage.  It’s like everything is called a holocaust now. The hijacking of words in this way has become endemic. Every tyrannical state is now “democratic” and has a “market economy”—see China and Russia.  It’s the perverse stealing from our culture of meaning built up over thousands of years.  Orwell foresaw it best.

Secondly, I did have some sympathy for equality of some legal and financial conditions for same sex couples, but after further thought I’m much less sure of that.  Why just homosexual couples?  Why not any kind of couple? Say two maiden sisters who live as a family unit? They’re equally deserving of state recognition and help.  And why just couples?  Why not threesomes, foursomes, eightsomes?  And what possible reason could be made to not fully equate polygamy?  The legal and bureaucratic monstrosity has no boundaries.  Like everything else in our degenerating culture.

The right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness of all individuals should be the measure of a civil, liberal society.  But that doesn’t mean that each individual’s personal idea of happiness includes the impossible expectation of the universal adoption of their values as social norms.  It’s a logical fallacy in that the only norm would be infinite proliferation of norms, which are no norms, and no society.  We need to re-establish some sense of privacy and shame and autonomy.

R.E.L. says:

05:57pm | 16/07/09

David JC:
You obviously didn’t read my original comment where I clearly stated that “what happens in their bedroom is nobody’s business”.
The facts remain. Marriage is a holy union between 3 entities and is only a true marriage when G-d is brought into it by the 2 human partners. Any other contract between the two humans - be they of opposite gender or the same - is not a marriage.
By the way, there is no “man in the sky” or “cloud wizard”. There is only G-d. The Omnipotent, Omnipresent. Analogous (but so much infinitely more than) The Force in Star Wars: G-d is everywhere and has no gender or physical form, but sustains our existence constantly.
Most people like you don’t believe in G-d because of your misunderstanding of what G-d is. To know G-d is to love G-d and by extension, all human beings.

Now go and read (not the bible you did or did not grow up with)!

zardo says:

06:43pm | 16/07/09

Your comment: R.E.L– I’m glad we’re on the same page. I completely agree with you that what goes on in other people’s bedroom’s is nobodys business, just like in their religous life. Good for you on your religion, I really respect you for your faith, and if you want to view relationships as not marriages because of your religion, then that’s perfectly fine. Our government, on the other hand, is defined as secular in our constitution, so in their view of marriage, God shouldn’t come in as a factor. In our society, everyone has the right to not to have other people’s religous ethics thrust upon them by law, just as I’m sure we’d both be appalled by compulsory burqas in Australia (that’s much more severe, of course, but you get my comparison)

Adrian says:

07:42pm | 16/07/09

So R.E.L. - “2 human partners. Any other contract between the two humans - be they of opposite gender or the same - is not a marriage.”

So you’re saying that my (heterosexual) marriage isn’t really a marriage at all, because my wife and I are atheists? What a wonderful person you are.

JG says:

09:14pm | 16/07/09

R.E.L

“The facts remain. Marriage is a holy union between 3 entities…”

That is the meaning to a religious person, the meaning to a none religious person is a bond between two people. no need for fictitious gods.
You have to stop expecting everyone to live according to your religious views, because in all reality they are merely your opinion.  Just as you say “god is everywhere”, i say “god does not exist” . neither of us will ever be proved correct but we can live in harmony if only you will stop expecting me to live under your delusion.
Citing the bible as proof of a god is as ludicrous as a fraudster citing his fixed books. I have no problem with you wanting to believe , i have an issue with you promoting it as fact when it clearly is not.

Luke says:

10:05pm | 16/07/09

THANKYOU MILLSY…... It’s about time that some celebrities got behind this movement in Australia. You are right when u say that gay marriage would bring no harm to anyone. I have written a letter to my MP on this issue in the hope she can express my view to the government. Maybe you should look at joining with some others in order to push this issue and get people aware of it then something might happen… Once again thank you

Steve B says:

10:39pm | 16/07/09

andyroosh says:
Not supporting gay marriage doesn’t equate to not supporting gay people. Gay people in a domestic partnership are still entitled to most of the rights of a married couple, so this isn’t about equality.

You’re absolutely right of course, in the same way that Australian women should be happy that they get paid ‘most’ of what men get paid, the same way that Palestinians enjoy ‘most’ of the same rights as other Israelis or the Christians have ‘most’ of the same rights as Muslims in Saudi Arabia, or theTibetans, Uighurs, Kurds, Romany or any other ethnic group around the world who enjoys ‘most’ of the same rights as everyone else in their country.
You’re right they should just shut up and be happy.
You wouldn’t complain if you were being discriminated against now would you? You’d just roll over and wait for a belly scratch and be glad that your government feels that you’re ‘mostly’ as important as your next door neighbour.

Good luck with that.

AlexJ says:

06:56am | 17/07/09

Reading these comments it is interesting to see that as a society believing all people are created equal, we still have a long way to go.

Marriage in a historical sense has always been the purview of Religions, it has only been in recent times that Marriage became a service performed by non-religious and governments.

As a gay man, I am opposed to Gay Marriage for all religions as it does impinge on the rights of those religions who are still practicing a form of societal segregation.

I am a supporter of those who are pushing for Marriage to be strictly recognised as a religious ceremony only with no standing in law.  All couples, straight and gay who wish to have their relationships recognised under law would have to commit or be unified in a licensed government service.

This enables marriage and those who believe in its strictly religious foundations of unified under god to keep it as it has been historically whilst making all people equal under law in terms of recognition and rights of their relationship.

Those who oppose this, I have found, are either people who are more about changing the religious organisations rather than seeking equality or people who really do have a prejudice towards gays and are using religion as a shield to hide behind.

Jeremy says:

08:12am | 17/07/09

It’s more than about time for full marriage equality. Let’s hope our major parties can see that. It is ludicrous that while about 60% of Australians support gays having the same rights as the rest of us, neither major party has reached that position yet. Only the Greens have put a bill that represents the majority.

There will be a national day of action on 1st August. Let the politicians know you stand for equality.

B says:

10:04am | 17/07/09

All these years we have been hearing that marriage is dead.  It’s only a piece of paper.  It is not relevent for our modern times.  Isn’t it interesting that it is the homosexual community that is now making such a big fuss about the sanctity of marriage?

The other B says:

01:50pm | 17/07/09

Tee-hee. MarkH said “bottom” in his first post *giggle*

Peta says:

02:02pm | 17/07/09

I love how a lot of the Christians harp on against gay marriage because it’s a sanctity and only for heterosexuals. It’s a hard argument to digest with a 40% divorce rate.

Why don’t we abolish divorce to protect a ‘holy union’? Because even though people jump up and down about Australia being a Christian nation - it isn’t.
We have a separation of Church and State for so many amazingly important reasons. People claiming they speak for God shouldn’t get a say in this debate, it’s illegal and so it should be.

If atheists can get married in a registry office, so should gay and lesbian couples. Even though you assume your religious arguments are important, they aren’t - and have no place in this debate.

Offer me an argument with no religious backing and I might consider you a worthwhile opponent.

Peta says:

02:07pm | 17/07/09

Also CH - I totally agree. Rob, it’s great you support gay marriage - but I would’ve loved to hear something new. This article could have used alot more research and insight.

V says:

02:16pm | 17/07/09

With all due respect to my fellow gay and lesbian brothers and sisters (and their supporters)... being gay is most certainly a choice.

Let me be clear. I was born the way I am.  But I can choose to be open and unashamed rather than closeted and fearful.  I can choose to be with the woman of my dreams instead of a sham relationship with a man.  Honestly, I really wish people would stop saying “we didn’t choose this” because it implies homosexuality is a terrible disorder, that we are somehow handicapped and society should pity us (or try to cure us). No, I’m not broken.  I’m happy, carefree, and gay..and I CHOOSE to be true to myself.

Being married is also a choice.  I would like to have that choice, too.  Many say that marriage is antiquated because defacto partners have most of the same rights…I can assure you this is not entirely true.  My partner is from another country.  To get her a visa, we had to physically live together for 12 months. Legally married couples do not have that requirement.  Legally married couples also do not have to prove the legitimacy of their relationship time and again when it comes to basic things like buying a home, drawing up a will, or putting both parents on a child’s birth certificate.

To the Bible-beating haters on here - don’t bother.  Neither of us are going to change our minds.  And that, too, is a choice.

pete says:

02:26pm | 17/07/09

I have a niece in a gay relationship, In all my life I have never been so privileged as to observe such a kind loving supportive interaction between two people. their love consideration and respect for each other knows no bounds and now they have a beautiful daughter.

Why are they discriminated against?  Who could possibly object to that kind of human interaction?

Jason says:

03:04pm | 17/07/09

The question is, Why did we let Howard ban gay marriage without a debate ?

gaymarried in british consulate says:

04:30pm | 17/07/09

Jason: I didn’t let him to anything - we fought as hard as we could, but unfortunately that often means nothing in this country.

Michael Whennen says:

05:20pm | 17/07/09

The Pro-Gay Marriage Movement correctly points out that the professing Church is hypocritical when it comes to marriage. They say, “The problems with both the Christian Right’s rhetoric and agenda on gay marriage can be revealed most readily by comparing gay marriage with divorce”

Please watch their satirical message and judge for yourself…

http://www.WiseReaction.org

Jason says:

09:30pm | 17/07/09

When Howard banned gay marriage he promised to change the federal superanuation laws so same—sex couples can list one another as a beneficiary. But did Howard keep true on his promise ? No he did not and he did not provide a reason, while hetrosexuals we able to share super and contribute to each others accounts gay couples were not aloud and superanuation providers refused to pay out and to this day its still happening. Thats how we treat gays in Australia because we are a democacy.

Unbeliever says:

10:35am | 18/07/09

If you don’t support same-sex couples getting married, then come up with a single verifiable piece of logic which supports your stance. Otherwise you’re just arguing without reason and logic.

Paul says:

11:16am | 18/07/09

I just think it’s hilarious that most of the hate comments here are full of misspellings and poor grammar.

Court says:

08:12am | 19/07/09

Millsy, congratulations on making a logical & concise & sensitive argument for something our country should absolutely be doing. Australia needs more people like you to state the obvious on this one & I hope you bring some more people around with your words.

All these people on here ranting about god need to really get their heads checked - nothing is more important than love & if this mythical ‘god’ doesn’t believe that, then he’s not a god I care to bother with. Nutters.

Brendon says:

01:20pm | 19/07/09

Imagine if ‘the gays’ could get married!

The amazing celebrations. Matching invitations and an Orson and Blake gift registry.

If only ‘the straights’ could be so lucky.

Geoff says:

01:27pm | 19/07/09

In times when anti-discrimination is such a hot topic, why is it that our Goverment is now the only organisation compelled to discriminate against our homosexual friends?  Laws don’t discriminate against marriage of persons of differing colours / religions / abilities…. why discriminate against sexuality; let it be a union of two persons in love.

Rhiannon says:

11:42am | 22/07/09

Wholeheartedly agree with you Rob. I’ll be wearing my white ribbon to support gay marriage in Australia on August 1.

Brendan of Wollongong NSW says:

02:59pm | 22/07/09

Nicely said, Millsy. It just makes plain sense.

Darryl says:

09:54pm | 28/07/09

Sorry but marriage is only available to heterosexual couples.
Maybe same sex couples should invent some other term for their no doubt loving unions but marriage is a word already taken and in use.
Remember the word gay when it could be used to describe a persons state of mind or demeanour rather than a their sexuality?
Old Slim Dusty songs use of the term “gay cowboys” is now a malapropism since the hijack of that word.
Same sex couples are recognised in many sections of the law already in this country.
Have ceremonies, and make commitments to each other, but find/invent another word and make it your own.
Who knows if this gets sorted and catches on in the future, for fun and novelty hetero couples may dress up as same sex couples for their nuptuals. I wonder will this behaviour be described as homophobic?

Kathryn says:

02:33pm | 29/07/09

The institution of marriage and parenting has ALREADY been devalued by bigots like you, Darryl.  You bring your nasty, antiquated ideologies to your marriage and raise prejudiced children who learn to disrespect minorities.  You just don’t get it- homophobia is clearly showing disrespect/fear, historically EVEN HATE and VIOLENCE for couples of the same sex.  THIS IS NO LIGHTHEARTED MATTER- gay people are owed our respect and NOTHING LESS.  They deserve our love and best wishes as they bravely forge their way to a lawful, loving future where they have EQUAL rights to LIVE and LOVE.

Darryl Price says:

02:56pm | 29/07/09

Kathryn@1:33. I’m CERTAIN that my post reflects your “EQUAL rights to LIVE and LOVE”. The next bit is interesting - “The institution of marriage and parenting has ALREADY been devalued by bigots like you, Darryl.” It’s already stuffed, let everyone have at it, is that what you mean? My bottom (snicker) line is, get another word for your happy union of two people. You forgot to accuse me of intolerance, but I see from your own splenetic diatribe you have claimed the franchise on that.

totally hetero says:

03:16pm | 29/07/09

If the Australian government can give a man and a woman who hooked up after a drunken night out, then moved in together a week later and have stayed together a matter of months, with no actual committment, the same tax & centrelink rights as a traditional married couple, I can see no reason why a loving gay couple can’t have the same rights (and thank god they finally do now) or be allowed to sign a piece of paper that will mean just as much to them as it does to the rest of the ‘sacred church ordained’ marriages (40+% which end in divorce) between the hetero folk. I don’t think anyone is pretending Australia’s a ‘Christian country’ are we? I love Australia for it’s willingness to accept races and creeds of all types. Why not sexuality?

a says:

03:39pm | 29/07/09

You know most religions have a kind of “marriage” institution and not all of them define it as strictly between a man and a woman. Along with denying gay people the right to marry, Australia is also ignoring the rights of non-christian religious groups to marry people as they see fit. My faith says I can marry same sex so why does the government deny me the same religious as well as civil rights as everyone else. The “one true right and only way” set at some point have to pull their head out of the sand and realise they are not the only game in town anymore.

M says:

03:40pm | 29/07/09

I wish I knew how to explain what it feels like to be denied the right to marry my partner of 12 years.  A person who I have grown with and loved with.  I wish that there was something that I could leave behind that tells you of what it is to be denied something that has such fundamental meaning.

Marriage is not just for the wealthy.  Nor is it just for the healthy.  We don’t deny people the right to marry their partner based on their race (anymore - thank god) and we don’t deny people the right to marry despite having been married and divorced previously.  So why am I denied the right to marry my same-sex partner?  What are you so dammed afraid of???

I don’t want a civil union. I want the same right as everyone else.  But most of all I want to marry my partner because I love and adore her and because nothing else will do.  And one day I will marry her legally IN THIS COUNTRY, and even the bigots will be invited.

It'll Never Happen says:

03:57pm | 29/07/09

No Pat it wont be in this country im a gen y’er and i don’t support gay marriage now and wont be changing my mind ever. Everyone i know has the same opinion so there goes that idea out the window. There’s a difference between not caring if gays want to be together and actually supporting it. And to M you wont be marrying her in this country, your argument will always be a minority group ONLY, a civil union and a marriage come with the same rights you just want to claim marriage because “the bigots,” don’t want you to have it. Get over yourselves and call it something else, centrelink already recognises and gives you equal rights.

David says:

04:01pm | 29/07/09

Thank you Millsy, as a young gay male I very much appreciate your comment.  I don’t agree with other bloggers that what was needed was an article that sought a PhD to decipher.  Your support as a visible hetro male in this country long overdue.

I don’t understand the prejudices against gays, I dont understand why the church with its dwindling congregations has such importance in our society.  I don’t understand why people vocally support prejudice of any nature.  However I do understand what love is and I do understand when a role model liek Millsy is trying to make a change for the better.

Thank you.

Pete says:

04:18pm | 29/07/09

I am soon to be wed and as a Christian being married in my Anglican faith I have my religious marriage (the union between me, my fiance and God) as well as the civil marriage making our union legal in the eyes of the state. 
The importance for me is my commitment to my fiance and our Lord not the paper signed for the state.

Although I do not enthusiastically support gay marriages I do respect their right to a civil marriage however different our definations of marriage are.

Alison says:

04:36pm | 29/07/09

These are very interesting comments.

For all of those on the religous bandwagon however, may I suggest you actually research marriage and it’s historical context first.

Marriage has been around far longer than Christianity. For most of European history marriage was a business agreement between families, which was arranged by the parents. In Ancient Greece, a marriage could be created and dissolved by mutual agreement.

Taking the religious stand itself: the Bible, Koran and Torah, just to name a few, all state ‘God’ has made people in his image. If ‘God’ made us all exactly how we are supposed to be, why would he make people have a sexual orientation that is “wrong”? Why would he deny his children the right, privildege and honour to be married?

I have asked numerous clergymen and women this question. All have failed to give a convincing argument.

Micheal says:

09:41pm | 29/07/09

No Way ! It is a disgusting and distasteful proposition. It has no public support at all except among the politicians. Even in California the public thru referendum repealed that law. It is only the gay lobby groups and the lefties that keeps hounding this shamenful idea.

Kathryn says:

10:26pm | 29/07/09

Wrong Michael, I’m a suburban married mum of 4 & I know my gay friends certainly deserve the basic right to marry the love of their life just as you or I do.  I’m not a “leftie”, just not scared to embrace a more tolerant world.

Your Scapegoat says:

11:01pm | 29/07/09

...Love is love….Black,white,yellow,red or blue.. Male or female ..No different..We are starting to wake up..And certain people/Institutions know this and are starting to feel threatened ...Exciting times.. : )

Stuart says:

11:11pm | 29/07/09

No kathryn; you are at the wrong here. Vast majority of Australians do not support gay marriages at all. Your opinion is at the minute minority here. I wouldn’t be surprised if you were from the gay lobby pretending to be a suburban housewife.

vw says:

11:49pm | 29/07/09

Don’t quite get the argument that “religious” people should stay away from the same-sex marriage argument.  You’re really saying that as a marginalized group I shouldn’t have a voice….

And instead of all this ranting and raving against Christianity, we really should be saying thank you for a society where we have freedom of speech, a fair standard of living, a safe country, good health….look around you at nations that don’t have our christian heritage - I don’t think our lifestyle is an accident.

Kathryn says:

11:53am | 30/07/09

What’s Millsy then Stuart????  Believe it or not there are heterosexual people who don’t want to continue denying gay men & women basic rights in this country.  Millsy is right- we are way behind other countries in this area and it is about time….I reckon my gay friends will bring colour/diversity and above all love to the institution of marriage.  Why continue denying these people their basic rights.  Why are you guys so dreadfully threatened?  Get to know a gay person today- I challenge you to sit down and share a cuppa with one- they are just like you and me but happen to be gay.  You resist change because you are scared, but you fears are irrational.  These people do not harm you or your lifestyle, they just wish to be free to love in peace.  Historically, many marginalised groups have enhanced our society with their more tolerant and less narrow ideals.  If you look around you will see loving caring gay people who enhance our world with their empathy and caring.  Gay people/their heterosexual friends/family do have the right to be angry about narrowminded people denying them the basic right to marry the love of their life.  I bet those of you who are anti gay marriage have been too scared to make friends with someone who happens to be gay.  Take a chance- be brave, share a cuppa with a gay person today!!!

Pricey says:

12:17pm | 30/07/09

I’m not gay….... So i maybe called a bigot here but let me say a couple of things.
There appears to be 2 arguments here. I think that if the Gays and the Lesbians want to have the same rights legally as Male/Female couples married or De Facto. Let them have it, and as a straight male (married to an absolutely hot woman, who herself is proud of her hotness and straightness) i honestly support these groups in their fight for equality with regards to family law. It is descrimination and the family law should be more accommodating to todays society and our tolerance and acceptance that many people choose to live as an “unmarried” same sex couple.
Now for the next argument: I’m sorry but marriage is for us, the straights. It is the name of our “commitment ceremony”. I fully support commitment ceremonies for Gays and Lesbians, but you have to call it something else. Hey even my gay brother had a committment ceremony, and he and his partner are now committed together, but they will also say they are not “married” in the true sense of the word. They do say they are committed to each other. And i gotta say they are extremely happy.
The opponents to this will say i’m bigotted and whatever, but what i am saying is you need to get your name for your union. The name for a straight union is “marriage”. I guarantee if you called it another name you would have more success with changing perceptions and beliefs on the matter.
Maybe we could start an open thread on the possible names for a Gay or Lesbian committment ceremony.
Let’s start with my suggestion “Same Sex Union”. This could be used for Gays and Lesbians who have not had an official ceremony and those that but will have the same legal implications as the Straight version commonly called a “De Facto” relationship and our other one we call “marriage”.

(I only contribute to this site and others using the the name of “Pricey”)

Kathryn says:

02:18pm | 30/07/09

Your brother has made the most of what rights he has to begin a committed life with the love of his life.  Gay marriage should be legal in this country so that he had that choice-there are endlessly different types of gay people as there are heterosexual people.  They all deserve the right to be married if that’s their dearest wish.  Why do you need to state that you are married to an absolutely hot female- does speaking up for gay rights threaten your masculinity?  You are what you are and whatever gets you through the night, to quote John Lennon.  It’s wonderful that you support your brother, why not support the basic rights of all gays- please don’t deny them something you and I take for granted.  My friend’s 15 year old daughter recently “came out” and at such a tender age, I just wish she could look ahead to a life with the same rights to marry as you and I, free of discrimination.

sophie says:

05:17pm | 30/07/09

Well said, Millsy!

Gunnhild says:

05:41pm | 30/07/09

As a citizen of Australia who fulfills my civic duties and conducts myself in a manner beneficial to our society, I feel it’s only fair that there should be some form of give and take. Our Australian Government should feel obligated to give back to the hard-working gay, bisexual and lesbian citizens of this country that they’ve been taking from for so long. Their stance is discrimination against human beings - simple as that.

Pricey says:

05:46pm | 30/07/09

Kathryn, Why would i be afraid for my own masculinity. Maybe you have too much of a fascination with my hot and straight wife.

Steph says:

06:25pm | 30/07/09

If marriage is just a “word” then why cant gay people have the right to that “word” too? Why is it so bad that gay people want to be labelled “married” just as a man and a woman does?!
PRO - Good Job, Millsy!

scott says:

06:53pm | 30/07/09

U would think in this day and age we wouldnt have to push the government to alow us to marry. We are the same as every one else !!  so we should have the same rights as everyone else…........very rude!!

Royal says:

03:20am | 31/07/09

Seriously? Millsy? Who cares what Millsy thinks?

Man, you throw a bloke into one musical and turns pinko!

Kathryn says:

08:56am | 31/07/09

Mmmhmm, uhuh, yeah, right!  Those who believe in gay rights must surely be “pinko”/gay.  Those who believe in the rights of ethnic minorities must surely wish to change their skin/eye/hair colour too. 
Makes perfect sense!

Mark Nicholson says:

09:37am | 31/07/09

Marriage is specifically a term that means from the basic greek the coming together and long term commitment of two different sex’s for a long term pro-creation of the species. It can be equally used for Penguins mating for life.
It is not a term that can at it’s base level be used for same sex partnerships.
A joining of two, three or more under law is actually a civil union. That’s what this should be recognised as. In the end it is political issue and will passed by government because government will gain tax revenues and be able shift responsibility of care to the new legally recognised partner. Thereby avoiding there own fiscal responsibilities. Because a government can give a couple less social security, health and physical support than two seperate people. The government will eventually see the prospect of saving literally billions of dollars and pass an act in order to save them meeting there obligations. The grandstanding of the greens senator and other interested parties within and without government always forget to state what the true effect will be. What might be seen as a win on the outside is just going to be a way to shift the governmental responsibility for caring and funding for that person and their property and lift the levels of Tax that can be levied against the people new married or united. With gain rights come the government levies. Good luck but don’t say you weren’t warned.

Noishe says:

12:12pm | 31/07/09

Actually Mark, the English word marriage is derived from the Old French word mariage.  Which was derived from the Old French word marier.  Which was derived from the Latin word maritare (marry, give in marriage).  Which was derived from the Latin word maritus (husband, married man; lover; nuptial; of marriage; married).  Which was derived from the Latin word mas (male; male; masculine, of the male sex).

The earliest known usage of marriage in English dates from the 13th century.

Most dictionaries now do state that marriage is the state of being united to a person of the same sex in a relationship like that of a traditional marriage.

Throughout history there is more than enough evidence of same sex marriages, when did we become so unenlightened??!!

It doesn’t bother me if people of the same sex wish to be married - I would wish them nothing but happiness in their marriage to each other. 

Why must they continually have to ‘fight’ for what was once a normal union/ceremony/marriage [depending in the culture].  Doesn’t look like we’ve achieved much socially when people are denied basic rights of marriage.

Kellie p says:

06:19pm | 31/07/09

I wonder if Penny Wong is going to stand behind her leader, like a good little robot on this issue? Would be interesting to see her questioned about it.

J says:

10:22pm | 31/07/09

I just dont understand how people can be so cruel. Why does it matter to you if two gay people who love each other get married? If the church doesnt agree….fine… dont let the two people get married there. But dont stop two people who love each other not marry at all because theyre gay. Its selfish. There is no other way to put it. Its selfish. Im not gay but I hate watching other people miss out on something special just because their views dont match yours. I just dont understand how anyone can be so cruel. Who gives a **** if its a man and woman, 2 women, 2 men. Marriage is about love. Nothing else. And maybe not many people are for gay marriage, but maybe its because everyone is to stuck on what a Bible says, or because people are scared, for examples. Its just stupid. Stop thinking about how wrong it is and start thinking about whats fair.

Cly says:

01:34pm | 01/08/09

Equal rights for all. Present day laws should not be determined by bronze age gods.

cat says:

03:28pm | 01/08/09

Society is well on its way to Sodom and Gommorah (we’re probably already there and just to blinded by our own perversities to know it!). Maybe we should be like a lot of other countries… how about child prostitution, slave labour, etc EVERYBODY ELSE DOES IT! IT MUST BE OK! For the sake of civilisation, grow up! There are reasons for rules and they all relate to preventing humans destroying themselves, just because a minority choose not to have any moral fibre AND force the rest of us to accept their behaviour as being ‘normal’. The alternative is that THEY’D have to have another look at themselves. I’d say that most of us don’t agree with gay/lesbian marriage, unfortunately nobody is ever going to ask every Australian where they stand on the subject.

Jolanda Challita says:

04:05pm | 01/08/09

Marriage is between a man and a woman.  It is as easy as that.  Same sex partners want to live together and form a union then that is their choice, it is a free country, but it is not a MARRIAGE…

Lo says:

04:34pm | 01/08/09

i love the possibility of “registering” my relationship.

do i just rock up to the local council and do it at the same time as i register my dog?

thanks australia.

Conan says:

05:09pm | 01/08/09

So much talk of rules of marriages, acceptance of gay marriage and keeping up with the times. Well as far as I’m concerned, in our times, marriage doesn’t mean commitment and traditional marriage didn’t mean love. Marriage certainly isn’t about making everyone happy except only if you believe that’s how you’ll be happy.
No, what should be true marriage is when a couple is committed to breeding better human beings than themselves.
If you’re so concerned about gay marriage in this country, go lobby. Otherwise just let the times move as it should

Happy and Single says:

08:18pm | 01/08/09

Marriage is rediculas full stop! whether str8 or gay. Most humans find it almost impossible to commit themselves for life to another person! And if they do they’re usually unhappy for most of it.

MM says:

04:57pm | 03/08/09

Although heartily disagreeing with the out and out bigots in these comments, I’m finding it harder to understand the people commenting that things will never change because homosexuals are a minority, and the rest of us don’t care. If we never changed and evolved or looked after are neighbours, just because the majority of people disagreed with something, I wouldn’t be allowed to vote (coz I’m a woman), I wouldn’t be allowed to walk into a bar (same reason), I wouldn’t be allowed to sit next to my black friend on the bus, because she wouldn’t be allowed on there in the first place, people would still be hanging people because of the colour of their skin, people wouldn’t be held accountable for beating their children/spouses because ‘it’s none of our business’, lots of us would have to follow our religious persuasions in secret, rock music would have been a long forgotten event in history… I think I’m damn lucky to be a white, straight female from a middle class family. God only knows who would fight for my rights if I wasn’t… I was very happy to hear that Centrelink etc now recognise gay relationships. I hope this move indicates an explosion of gay rights in the right direction. Frankly, I don’t see who it’s going to hurt, but it’s very easy to see who it’s hurting now.

rubens camejo says:

07:07pm | 03/08/09

Vegetarians living in Perth and everywhere else, (I live in Sydney), offend me and they shall burn in hell. I mean, God gave us incisors for a reason. Motorists offend me for the same reasons. We have God-given legs. Motorists too will suffer the eternal fires. You shall live by my rules and tenets lest you be cast in the flames of damnation. - Makes as much sense as opposing gay marriages on the same basis. You have got to hand it to the religious lobby. They do have the power of brainwashing down to an art form. The majority of us could not be truly be described as religious, even if we, some of us are self described Christians, Muslims, etc. maybe we ought to stop recognising religion altogether. It’d save billions in tax breaks. You shall practice it but not claim recognition. How about we do that?

L.Andrews says:

11:18pm | 22/08/09

I think the issue goes much deeper. Like it or not there is a christian “jihad"going on and GLBT are the target. These groups are very organised and pump vast amounts of money into politics. Religion has somehow entered into politics and Advance Australia Fair is for the selected few. Gays must vote under Australian law, gays must pay tax under Australian law and gays are made to admit to centrelink they are in a same sex relationship solely for pension purposes yet gay’s cannot marry under Australian Law. Remember Howard’s government quickly dismantled (overnight) the ACT when it passed its laws on same sex marriage. In Dec 2008, Australia flatly refused (along with America) to sign the UN Gay Rights Declaration . The clearest message was sent shortly afterwards by Pope Benedict when he announced that saving the world from homosexuality is like saving rainforests - we are a threat to civilisation. The Vatican also openly condemened all those countries who signed the UN declaration. Another disturbing trend is the “nazi” style propoganda taken by certain groups that urge the UN to remove all protection for gay rights . Freedom is not any form of freedom when it oppresses the freedom of others. Australia has not signed any universal declaration regarding human rights. Religion has entered Australian politics and we need to clarify where Australia truly stands in regards to human rights . Migrants of differing religions all share equality in Australia and protection under Australian law. Australia (media and government) prides itself on multiculturalism. Equality is dictated by legislation and gay equality is ignored. Globally, homophbia is extreme as books are being published such as Redeeming the Rainbow, The Pink Swastika (which tries to discredit the formation of the United Nations) or “A Christian Response to the ‘Gay’ Agenda. Such radicals believe that by refusing gay equality will break this imagined “gay agenda. Take the organisation “Defend the Family” International.
If Australians do not act, Australian gays will also be targeted. Refusing gay marriage is just part of this religious vendetta that has the UN in a stranglehold. Gay Australians are facing an incredibly homophobic Government and Rudd is defending this agenda much like Howard did.

BoombeeShark says:

09:01pm | 24/08/09

Hmmm… I am a little surprised nobody has outlined some basics of why society had marriage between only men and women (even before Christianity). It is fundamentally about raising kids and protecting the future of societies. Even thousands of years ago societies realised that future generations are best served by children growing up with biological parents in a stable relationship. Even now, the scientific evidence is that children growing up with biological, and married, parents achieve highest on all measures of life, i.e. emotional, financial, health. I would suggest this is still a desirable outcome.

As such, the idea is to provide privilege to marriage because of the importance of raising children. Such an arangement is no different from providing a privilege, e.g. a tax break, to any other activity that is considered “good” for the society (maybe power generation without pollution). Such privileges are argued against (in the economic world) on the basis of “a level playing field”. However, most people have no problem encouraging good outcomes via privileged treatment, it just depends on how much privilege

Furthermore, it appears we have no problem with the Aborigines in Australia receiving privileges because of desired outcomes, even though this is blatant descrimination. I don’t hear many complaints on this issue. Is the future generations of Australians not worthy of consideration at least equal to that of Aborigines?

As such, I would suggest that providing some privilege for parents to ensure better outcomes for children as a desirable thing. I would suggest the debate should be about how much privilege.

LAURA says:

01:03pm | 27/08/09

Recently i’ve being doing a school assignment on same-sex marriage and the justice of the world, particularly Australia. It’s not until now that i realise how split cutural values are and why things like same-sex marriage is such as issue.
Marriage has evolved through time allowing mixed-race marriage, and in some countries (something i’ve just learnt) bigomy. The marriage of more than two people.
If people can be married to more than one person in some countries, why can’t Australia even put in the slightest thought for gay and lesbian marriage.
Homosexuals are still human, and I’m sure if all those people against homosexuality and same-sex marriage were gay, their views would be very different. Take a walk in their shoes.

Lala says:

05:06pm | 27/08/09

You people all forget that marriage isn’t a strictly Christan pursuit. The way some of you religious nuts talk, no-one from a faith other than Christianity should be allowed to be married either, whether opposite or same sex pairings. Marriage was simply invented as a way of propagating the species, simplfying property rights and protecting bloodlines. It’s not some huge religious deal about love and religion and god.

dawg says:

08:13pm | 16/09/09

LOL

Wilonia says:

11:41pm | 20/09/09

Marriage is a sacred union between two people in love… two PEOPLE
Man and Woman,
Man and Man,
Woman and Women,
When you discriminate you only generate hate…

Jessica says:

07:06pm | 21/09/09

“Just because it is, doesnt mean that it should be.”
How can anyone say that marriage SHOULD be between a man and a woman only. marriage is love. love can come in many forms.
People who love eachother may choose NOT to marry at all - its still love.
People who love eachother may choose to marry - its love
How is it anyones choice to deny two people in love the right to marry.
It DOES NOT affect you in any way
You wont even know them
You will just carry on your normal life, with ur wife or husband and buy a house and a car together like YOU can.
They cant. Its illegal.
God said “blah blah blah” who cares? that was like 2000 years ago or something
There is a law against racism
There is a law against discrimination
THIS IS DISCRIMINATION
i do not know anyone who is gay, but you know what it does not affect me one bit so i dont see how its my decision or anyone elses for that matter to say to someone you dont know.. YOU CAN NOT GET MARRIED!
Its not fair and its not right and when people say it is it makes me so angry.
one day im going to change that law no matter how long it takes.
It needs to be done!

Reg says:

09:02pm | 21/09/09

Why don’t we just abolish Marriage from legislation altogether? People could still get Civilly Espoused if they wish, which would convey all the same legal rights as Marriage currently does, but without the oh-so-sacred ‘M’ word actually being involved.

Thus, Marriage would become an wholly religious arrangement, and Espousement remains wholly civil.

People would be able to get Married without becoming Espoused.
People would be able to get Espoused without getting Married.

No reason whatsoever to prevent homosexuals from Espousing each other.

Better yet, dump the whole concept altogether and stop discriminating against us non-Married/Espoused folks!

Tom says:

08:00pm | 01/10/09

Of course gay marriage should be allowed in Australia. That God discussion should be out of it, becasue no one has even proved the existance of a god. I was made by my parents and not by a god. God is a fary tale and that should be known in the year 2009

Steve says:

11:35pm | 01/10/09

Marriage is between a man and a woman, not 2 people of the same gender.

But if you oppose gay marriage, then you are homophobic, and that is not the case, we are not a backward country for not allowing this, we have beliefs, we are a christrian country, and christantity does not allow this.

So if you want gay marriage, then you must say yes to any other suggestion set forward which is against christanty, you cannot just pick the eyes out of what you want, its all or nothing, and for those who want gay marriage, you will certainly not want everything approved, as many will be against what you believe.

Jason says:

08:48pm | 02/10/09

Here, here! I cant believe we are behind spain and south africa on this! And as u say its about civil marriage.. it has nothing to do with religion.. keep it up and lets get out there and fight for equal marriage, gay or straight.

Lachy says:

10:46pm | 07/10/09

Well Steve, I am not Christian. I am not even religious. Does that make me a stateless person now? What you mean to say is that Christian principles have helped shape our society in a very big way, the same way that our links to the civilisations of Rome and Greece have helped shape Western society as a whole. Does that mean we MUST stay the same as Ancient Rome? Course not. We progress. Just because we started somewhere, doesn’t mean we have to stay there; how else do we ever get anything done in this world otherwise? Not even those labelled as “conservative” are THAT conservative.

If you still insist that Australia is a Christian country then keep living your lovely pipe-dream. It may give you a warm fuzzy feeling, but that is all it’ll ever be.

Chuck says:

01:08am | 08/10/09

I think it’s interesting people use the bible to support such hateful views.

One guy here said…  God created Adam and Eve… end of story.   

I’d have to ask… do you really believe that?  Do you really believe that Adam and Eve were the first humans on the planet?  Even though we have evidence that humans were walking the planet thousands upon thousands of years prior?  It really is all about education.

And if you were to believe the story of Adam and Eve, are you also suggesting we should support incest?  Do you seriously think a God so powerful and mighty would have to result to incest in order to populate the planet?  Really now. 

This Christian rhetoric reminds me of when the Christians in Germany once said, “It’s okay because they’re JEWS”  As the Christians supported Hitler.  Or when the Christians in America said… “It’s okay because they’re BLACK”  Even used their bibles to support SLAVERY!  Today, the Christians are at it again… today they say ” It’s okay because they’re GAY”

Well, I’m here to tell you…  It was NOT okay in Nazi Germany and it surely is not okay on our planet in the year 2009.  Shame on anyone that finds such acceptable.

Now let’s really take a look at the bible and what it says.    And it’s clear…  JESUS NOR GOD EVER SPOKE AGAINST GAY MARRIAGE OR HOMOSEXUALITY in the bible and that is a FACT!

Another Fact, the Christians didn’t come up with the concept of marriage.  As some of the uneducated would like you to believe.

The Romans were marrying same-sex couples long before the Christians ever got involved.    The Romans were also marrying same sex couples when Jesus walked this earth… Jesus would have been well aware of this fact and it’s clear…  Jesus said NOTHING.    Jesus was quite vocal on the issues of the day and the fact remains…  Jesus said nothing.  Had same sex marriage been a issue…  JESUS WOULD HAVE MENTIONED IT.

I think many people are confused about the bible.    There are actually people in this world whom believe the bible is actually God’s word.  How remarkable is that?  Let’s be clear…  the bible was written by MAN in order to control man.  I find it remarkable in all the years, it still controls people.

Then we talk about saving marriage?  Well saving it from who?  The divorce rate is over 50%.  If we are truly serious about saving marriage…. what do you suggest we do with all the heterosexuals divorcing and ruining a institution we supposedly hold so dear?    Should we jail them?  I mean are we trying to save marriage or not?

A recent poll was done and it said of the divorce cases, almost 93% of them were from people whom proclaimed to be CHRISTIANS.    I know… how about that.  These people professed they undying love in front of their God, Clergy and family and then have the nerve to divorce?  And then it’s the very same people whom want to prevent others from marrying.  Truly shameful and I truly will believe it’s this type of hypocrisy that will do damage to Christianity.    People are no longer stupid.  We are more and more educated and as we continue in the path of education, the ideology of these Christians is doomed to fail.

We are talking about loving couples here…  nothing more.

Then we have those that talk about marriage being for procreation ... as if the world is not over populated enough, but with that logic, should we ban heterosexual couples whom can not procreate?  There are many heterosexual couples whom are unable to have children.  What about latter marriages…  should we ban anyone over the age of 55 marriage rights?  I mean where does it stop?  And why would anyone think it was acceptable for the Christians to set laws?  Especially in a free society.    What about the many mainline churches who would be more the happy to marry same sex couples?  Isn’t shocking when the Government starts telling our churches who they can or can not marry.  You would think people would be outraged.    What’s next?  Who’s next?  And when will you care?  See to me this is not a “Gay” issue, but a issue on one’s basic human rights.  Hopefully one day soon all the citizens of the world will have a similar understanding.

Eleanor says:

03:09pm | 08/10/09

Keep fighting the good fight, Millsy.

And for those of you who keep throwing about the terms “traditional family values” - spare a thought for the divorcees, the widows, the single parents and the adoptive parents, please. Stating that a child requires a man and a woman to have a balanced upbringing is the most absurd argument I’ve ever heard. I’ve met my fair share of unstable, emotionally crippled people and they were raised with these “traditional family values” you so desperately try to protect.

Greg says:

05:57pm | 08/10/09

I tend to agree that we should allow gay unions. Gay unions should have the same rights as hetrosexual couple. But the term marriage has always been in realm of hetrosexuality and the church. Which is make me wonder why do gays want also to call it the same name or under the church. Weahter people agree or not the Bible is fairly clear on the topic and to call gay unions, marriage is an insult to those who believe it is wrong. Call it anything else but from the reading the most of the comments from church goers they woudl rather not be assoicated with a homosexual marriages.

I also believe that union shouldnt be determined a sexual relationship, why not a couple of friends all open f+f or f+m or m+m, allow them the same rights as gay unions or hetrosexual marriages. If we allow homosexual people to adopt, be in legal union, superannuation rigths etc etc why not let these non sexual unions to also have the same rights.

P.S.  Justifing gay unions by saying that hetrosexual marriage are some time abusive hardly justifies the need for gay unions and is a weak argument. Let union happen because they deserve the same rights as everybody else.  and any other relationship

Jason says:

10:54pm | 08/10/09

As a gay person I cant see gay marriage in Australia any time soon as most aussies are prejudiced towards gays and lesbians, thats why Howard was able to amend the marriage act and there was virtually no fuss or concern.

Nathan says:

12:30pm | 18/10/09

Guys and Gals,
I am gay. I hope that if i do meet the right guy in the next few years I will be able to marry him.
To me, Marriage is showing the love and commitment for your partner through legal bonding. Yet I know now that through laws eyes I am a second grade citizen. Well thats how i feel anyway.
As for the whole “God created Adam and Eve, Not Adam and Steve” quote, I was born this way. Looking back through my life I have seen it.
Its not just something that switches on and off.
And it could have easily been you.
Would you want limited rights if you were me?

C says:

11:11am | 20/10/09

Well said Nathan   I have walked the anx that comes with realising I was born gay.  You are pushed to marry so the family can see grandkids.  You are too young to stand up and say no usually and then the situation becomes intolerable. Other peoples lives are damaged too as a result. Show your love but be proud of the good things that can come out of being gay such as sensitivity, caring for others and just good old gentleness.  Being gay is fine but we should not cram it down others peoples throats as this only does damage to how we really are and you cannot expect others to respect and tolerate us if we behave inappropriately.  We are still men so why behave differently?  Too much damage is done to this cause by a lot of gay people which is very sad.  Good luck and I hope you find sincerity in your life when you find that partner

Cookie says:

12:43pm | 20/10/09

I have only this to say: let’s reflect for a moment on how awesome it is that we’re arguing about gay marriage rather than gay survival. These issues are worth fighting for, but they’re really just the victory lap to a war we already won.

Static says:

05:55pm | 20/10/09

Unfortunately marriage was invented by god and the church adopted it first. So until the prejudice god changes its view and communicates this to its followers. You got no chance. After all God is always right…eh…..

Joe says:

01:02pm | 21/10/09

Marriage is the commitment you make from one human to another. Gender should play no hinderance towards it. In society today, persistance for gay rights has triumphed over so many adverisities and has led to this major point now, to give the right to unify two people who in everyway are as human as everyone else. There should be no hesitation, no walls and no more challenges to prevent this. To bring religion in to this is utterly ridculous, considering what religion beliefs and values have caused to alot of societys and to this world. This decision should not be based on religion, but commonsense. This is reality. This is now. Society has changed. And will continue always to. Id love to see this happen pretty soon. And ill support it 100%. And yes ill find pleasure in making this a victory slap in the small minded people against this. And, im sorry but to all those in the religion VS gay marriage, religion lacks credibility in everything, so i dont think anyone should be using that as a basis for their arguement, if it was science, then its facts, and it would have some backing. but its not. in the end, nearly everyone knows someone who knows someone whose gay, and how does it affect your life, and your values and how you live, if this was to happen.

James says:

04:54pm | 21/10/09

OK it’s time to sort this shit out once and for all. Keep marriage for the religious and have Civil Unions for the rest of us.

The sooner Australia does this the sooner the FOR THE CHILDREN tards stop dictating what the rest of us can and cannot do and therefore stop being a Nanny State.!

Luna says:

11:22pm | 27/10/09

I’ve been reading all the comments on this article up to certain point and as interested as i am in this topic and the general public’s opinions, all i can think of while reading the majority of the comments is “Why is everyone yelling at each other?” I understand that this is an emotional topic for people but snapping at each other isn’t going to help resolve it. My opinion on this topic is rather non existent at the moment and my knowledge in the area is extremely limited. I think the first step is to get information out on the streets in such a manner that it is unobtrusive to the general public yet informative at the same time. I would love if my homosexual friends could be legally labeled a ‘couple’. It would make me beyond happy because they are the most beautiful people i have ever met, but i’m just wondering, with my limited knowledge, if it would not be easier to just make a new law for all unions to made under and then if the couple wishes to do a religious one as well, then so be it?

Jadan says:

10:17am | 28/10/09

I find the argument that Marriage (with a capital M) is a historically defined institution completely valid, but history is also about conflicts and the change they bring. Reasoning that marriage should go unchanged because of its historical contexts isn’t a sound argument. Social institutions are historically dynamic,  marriage is no exception.

I think that people who use those arguments need some self examination for the real reasons they have a particular view or discourse on gay marriage.  Sometimes this argument is used for easy allocation of one’s views in a catagory, what I want from everyone is the REAL reasons they dont like gay marriage. Be honest, its forum, nobody is going to punch you in the face.

Phil says:

08:21am | 30/10/09

This all depends if the greens ever get a majority.

Really havent the gays got more to worry about like the colour of their frock for next years mardi gras.

Anon says:

11:02am | 30/10/09

As long as they don’t use the term ‘marriage’ for it, I’ll be happy. What they do otherwise is none of my business.

Kate says:

01:51pm | 30/10/09

Oh my…........ Im a lesbian, was born that way, dont give a rats what anybody thinks of it…...........but I am also a member of the human race…........need I say more?

Jason says:

10:09pm | 30/10/09

Gay people already have the same rights - they too can marry someone of the opposite sex.  I agree there should be a middle ground where legal rights etc are the same, but also respect those who believe marriage is man/woman and call it something else.  You could go and get “garried”.  No pun intended sorry

Maxine says:

04:59pm | 01/11/09

can we just have the same life as every body do ... i’m a 16 year old .. i’m gay ... and am wants to get marry ... if that allow me.. that is the best part of my life. all the thing the i try to be a good person .. all i can do it just wrich to god ... to marry ..with someone as the same colour as i am .

Cody says:

04:42pm | 17/11/09

Hey i am a male 16 year old student.
I am also the older brother of a gay brother, Why dose he have to live in a world that is so un-accepting of his sexuality He is a kind loving Person who would NEVER hurt a fly, yet every day he is called names like faggot.
My question to all the Anti gay people is why is my Loving little brother differn’t from all ur Little Nephews, Cousins, Uncles or Kids because he likes the same sex?

Tommy says:

11:48pm | 31/12/09

I really support same-sex marriage every one should have a shot at life fair and square, think about the future generations man like its already hard telling people your gay in the first place.Its like your saying its perfectly right to get rid of the aborigines. Same with us. I really agree on gays adopting children like seriously people are usually born gay not taught to be gay. So if you dont want too support gays . GO GET THE HELL OUT OF THIS COUNTRY. we need to act together as one.
Copy and past this if you agree

                    ####GAY PRIDE ####

ACarr says:

11:01am | 15/01/10

So let me get this straight. A male rapist and a female murderer (both convicted of their crimes) have the right to get married, but two law abiding women in love cannot? Gee, what a balanced society!

Tri says:

02:56pm | 25/01/10

sara says:10:03am | 15/01/10
“Marriage should be between a man and a woman.  I also do not think gay people should be allowed to adopt children. Egg + Egg does not equal a baby, neither does Sperm + Sperm.  You need Egg + Sperm to have a baby.  Woman + Man.  It’s nothing to do with God, it’s nature and the way the world is.  I do not like gay people meddling with science and using artificial things to create babies - that is wrong.”

Geez Sara how smart are you? It’s all about creating babies with you isn’t it? Guess what? We don’t need “marriage” to make babies (gasp!). If you stay really quiet, you can possibly hear a 17 year old goofhead screwing a 15 year old blond cheerleader right now. Additionally my uncle got married to his wife for 20 years and they were never able to conceive a child due to some medical condition he has. Does that mean his marriage license mean any less? He’s recently turned to a number of invitro labs in the hopes of being a father. I guess in your eyes he’s doing a digusting revolting thing against God’s will too.

I have looked into homosexuality in nature. Approximately for every 10 pairs of swans, one wil be homosexual. The homosexual pairs are formed monogamously for life (awww…how cute) and are often seen in assisting single swan mothers in looking after the chicks. It has even been observed that these male swans mate with females and then drive them away and raise the chicks on their own. An article on the CBC has also written a story about two gay male penguins looking after an abandoned chick removed by (wait) her own heterosexual parents.

Giving birth to a child is a much less complicated intricate procedure than to provide him/her with a loving home, to take care, and be there for them for the rest of their lives (Remembering the names of their girlfriends or ballet’s schedule is no less difficult!). Of course uneducated idiots everywhere are too brain dead to see the logic behind it.

I am from Canada and of Vietnamese descent. Same sex marriage has been legal here for 5 years. NOTHING has changed from then ( except the lives of the gays for the better) and Canada remains one of the best most sustainable respected countries on earth.

Steven Thompson says:

12:45am | 29/01/10

I am in a commited gay relationship, I have also had a strict christian upbringing. I think I can safely say that I see both points of view in this regard. The fact is the gay marriage, in my view can’t take place in a church as it is a conflict of interest for the pastor etc. However a civil union (which gives the person the same rights at a married couple), I can not understand what is so wrong with that? If you want a fancy wedding, then have one, just don’t have it in a church. The two just don’t blend together.

Daddio D says:

10:06am | 29/01/10

Tri (25/01/10) wrongly and falsely answers sara (15/01/10). It’s been said before but I offer it again: Marriage is solely basically between a man and a woman and is all about propagation of the human species by them, rewarded in the main by familial descendants and inheritances. LGBT people can never offer the human race these basic elements of marriage naturally. Marriage existed long before religion. In Christian religions, it is acknowledged as a Sacrament, blessed by Jesus at a wedding between a man and a woman at Capernaum when he reluctantly performed His first miracle, using water. He didn’t ever bless a union between man & man or woman & woman with any of His other miracles. Our long-held understanding of marriage is being eroded by false messages put out by LGBT people, influenced by satanic forces, forces that can never win. I do agree that LGBT people should have civil rights between them, as between any partnership. But real Marriage between Gays or Lesbians is a no-no and always will be however else it is dressed up prettily with smiles, laughter, cakes, garish clothes and tarnished gold.

James says:

11:19am | 29/01/10

There is no reason why we shouldn’t allow gay couples the same rights as straight couples, if you object on religious grounds your objection is noted, but this is a secular country and your relious objection carries no real weight.  Leave your personal sprituality out of the public domain, it has no place there.

In this country we do not base adult decisions on discussions with your imaginary friend.

cats says:

01:36pm | 29/01/10

Why are people so against changing the traditional meaning of marriage, to “a union of 2 people” instead of “union of man and woman”? If it doesn’t affect you, then why not? You people claim not to be homophobes, but you’ll need to provide a good non-discriminatory reason to keep the traditional meaning otherwise you’re just a homophobe.

Tri says:

01:46am | 01/02/10

“Daddio D says:10:06am | 29/01/10

Tri (25/01/10) wrongly and falsely answers sara (15/01/10). It’s been said before but I offer it again: Marriage is solely basically between a man and a woman and is all about propagation of the human species by them, rewarded in the main by familial descendants and inheritances. LGBT people can never offer the human race these basic elements of marriage naturally. Marriage existed long before religion. In Christian religions, it is acknowledged as a Sacrament, blessed by Jesus at a wedding between a man and a woman at Capernaum when he reluctantly performed His first miracle, using water. He didn’t ever bless a union between man & man or woman & woman with any of His other miracles. Our long-held understanding of marriage is being eroded by false messages put out by LGBT people, influenced by satanic forces, forces that can never win. I do agree that LGBT people should have civil rights between them, as between any partnership. But real Marriage between Gays or Lesbians is a no-no and always will be however else it is dressed up prettily with smiles, laughter, cakes, garish clothes and tarnished gold.”

Blah blah blah God God God. PLEASE STOP! Just because 10% of the population of Canada is gay doesn’t mean that Canadians stop giving birth to wonderful beautiful babies (and less prone to obesity compared to our Southern neighbors). On the contrary, we have babies that are being dumped in trash bins in some lesser known provinces around this country by their OWN HETEROSEXUAL parents. If I am not mistaken I read an article on CBC last year about a man (a father I think) throwing his daughter over the bridge in the down under.

Have you ever traveled to Vietnam? You’d see children barely getting by in orphans and begging for food in the streets. Oh Vietnam doesn’t have same sex marriage on top of it and forbids same sex adoption. I am sure it’s your perfect little reality of heterosexual parenting.

If you are somehow trying to conjure up some ungrounded theories on child abuse by same sex parents, try to swallow the fact that’s already legal in Canada for 5 years now. A sexual scandal by a same sex parent (a very sensitive topic) will make headlines in this country. So far all of the headlines I’ve seen have been from sexual abuse by uncles, stepfathers, headmasters, and (cough) parish priests. Besides if two gay fathers start sexually molesting their daughters, they won’t be gay anymore.

Are you really that warped in your ridiculous religious mindset that you fail to even see logic and common sense? You frighteningly remind me of the religious people who killed the first person who suggested the earth is round and revolves the sun, of the witch hunts by the insane Christians, of the neverending bloodbaths between the hard core Christians and right wing Islamists.

Let’s bring what the bible writes below back into, shall we? Since we’re talking about marriage being “blessed by God”:

“If a man discovers on his wedding night that his bride is not a virgin, he must stone her to death on her father’s doorstep (Deuteronomy 22:13-21).”

Signed,

A moderate fellow Christian

Daddio D says:

08:20am | 03/02/10

Tri’s response is notable for the fact that it doesn’t once challenge or address any of the truths that I posted. Instead, Tri skews off on tangents, none of which I am prepared to waste time on – they’re just not worth it and make no response to my points in this debate that the reality is that marriage between people of the same sex can never exist, however it is presented. One can pass laws allowing ‘marriage’ in any country but it never makes it a true marriage – it’s just another a sham exercise to keep people happy. On that point, one might note that some States (mainly USA) that did pass such laws are now repealing them. I did not make the ‘natural’ or ‘religious’ laws; even a moderate Christian would know that – so Tri’s derogatory smirk ‘ridiculous religious mindset’ doesn’t bother me – what Tri or anyone else thinks of me is none of my business. This debate, generated by Rob Mills, is about gay marriage for Australia. My point is irrefutable – true marriage cannot ever be executed naturally between human beings of the same sex. That’s just the way it is, has always been and ever will be. There is therefore no point in Rob Mills suggesting that Australia allows something that can never exist, anywhere in the world. Civil unions or legal partnerships between gays etc do not and will never amount to true marriage. Don’t bother responding Tri – an angry mind is an empty mind.

yeah boy says:

10:11am | 04/02/10

What the hell? It disgusts me to know that we as a country cannot accept other peoples differences. If its what makes them happy, than why should they be denied this right, your not in the relationship with them so back off.
Leave them to make their own decisions and give them a chance to find joy.
How would you like it if people looked at you differently and judged everything that you did? What kind of life is that? it doesnt affect you in anyway so just get over it.

NONYA says:

09:50am | 05/03/10

That is the definition of marriage. That is the reason why gays are not allowed to marry

n. the joining of a male and female in matrimony by a person qualified by law to perform the ceremony (a minister, priest, judge, justice of the peace or some similar official), after having obtained a valid marriage license (which requires a blood test for venereal disease in about a third of the states and a waiting period from one to five days in several). The standard age for marriage without parental consent is 18 except for Georgia and Wyoming where it is 16, Rhode Island where women can marry at 16, and Mississippi in which it is 17 for boys and 15 for girls. More than half the states allow marriages at lesser ages with parental consent, going as low as 14 for both sexes in Alabama, Texas and Utah. Marriages in which the age requirements are not met can be annulled. Fourteen states recognize so-called “common law marriages” which establish a legal marriage for people who have lived together by agreement as husband and wife for a lengthy period of time without legal formalities.

Penny says:

10:59am | 05/03/10

How can you deny love? War, yes…love, no.

Tom says:

08:33pm | 09/03/10

Holy crap, i am so sick of people writing the bloody definition of marriage (one that specifically includes male and female) and hoping it to mean something.  Go on google and type in “define: marriage” none of those definitions say marriage can only be between a man and a woman.  And before in finish my rant…there are still a few things i wish to say.  1) Believe it or not, some people in this world are not religious, so why should we have to care about other people’s beliefs.  2) When people say that a child is more successful when it has both a female and male influence…I’m sure that there are a few single parents out there.  3) If marriage is all about reproduction, why are heterosexual old and infertile people allowed to get married?  4)  Straight marriage will not become less meaningful if gays get married.  Because I’m pretty sure “normal” marriage is meaningless after Brittany Spears’ 55 hour marriage.  So you religious people…BUT OUT…Nobody really cares about your strange views.  “YEAH YEAH…OUR LORD WALKED ON WATER ONE TIME LOL”

chris says:

12:11am | 10/03/10

“Can you believe that in 2009 we don’t allow same-sex couples to get married?” Well strangely enough Rob, I can, because in all of human history to this moment we haven’t allowed it. “The law says gays are suddenly so different they’re not allowed to have one” Well, if you are talking about marriage, that’s right.

“Suddenly”? That’s a bit disingenuous isn’t it? At the risk of sounding like a parrot it has never been allowed previously (as you well know) so why the sudden change insinuation?

Rob, it must be hard for you and your mates. There is an almost imperceptible shift going on in the Australian mindset, and it doesn’t hark well for the homosexual lobby.

After all those years of spin, convincing people that they are a group of truly disadvantaged individuals (while at the same time cramming their pockets full of pink dollars) the public are just not quite buying that activism agenda lately are they?

I would love to see the details of the poll you quote from (and all gay lobbyists do don’t they, and from a surprisingly similar hymn sheet) but, nevertheless, morality has never been about majority opinion, in the same way that marriage has always been about a man and a woman.

Humans instinctively know what is right and wrong, although many are equally knowledgeable about self-denial techniques.

Is homosexuality sinful?” Well yes, by definition, the Bible is the only source that can describe what constitutes a sin, and yes it is listed in there, or are your friends planning to re-write that too? (right after the Marriage Act)

Tony Abbott used the word “disordered” about homosexuality the other day.
Well I’m afraid from a purely human species point of view that’s true also. You see, what Patagonian warbling jellyfish and semi-rotating transitional microbes do in their private lives doesn’t fit the context of the human same-sex discussion. Despite the homosexual lobby’s “10% of population” codswallop, the wholly discredited gay gene and the movement’s cynical cloning of its agenda onto the lives of the truly disadvantaged like the poor and Aboriginal people, there seems to be a spoke or two in their wheel lately.

You see Rob, we still have free speech in this country, and I’m glad you have
the space to (perhaps unknowingly) continue the spin for a group of social agenda lobbyists. But there are also many who take my view, and try as you might you will never make me, or Tony Abbott, believe what you want us to. Better get used to each other I guess.