I think Orwell was a brilliant writer, but not a good humanist! Although one cannot deny societies structure and how it’s designed to favour certain people, we as a church are not society.

We are called to be in the world not of it.

Yet as a church we get too hung up on the world, to the exclusion of God Children if they don’t fit the church ideal of a ‘good Christian’.

As a Christian for me marriage is about a commitment to God. Simple. If you are willing to make that commitment in the eyes of God good for you, no one should stand between you and God. In

Equality to for me means not having to worry about being discriminated against for ANY reason.

AS for if i were PM I would legalise gay marriage because if our government is secular, which theoretically they are, then they have absolutely no reason to deny gays the same right as everyone else. Sadly it’s not that simple.

As a Christian for me marriage is about a commitment to God. Simple. If you are willing to make that commitment in the eyes of God good for you, no one should stand between you and God.

AS for if i were PM I would legalise gay marriage because if our government is secular, which theoretically they are, then they have absolutely no reason to deny gays the same right as everyone else. Sadly it’s not that simple.

Hi holywoman,

Welcome to freedom2b[e]. Yep, it shouldn’t matter if you’re part of a gay couple. If you both want to get married then that should be available. Simple. Unfortunately as you say, politics is not that simple. Too many lobby groups and religious institutions against the idea. On a purely human rights ground, they haven’t a leg to stand on. But we can do our bit to eliminate the barriers of ignorance and fear that prevent gay marriage from becoming a reality.

Actually – Im probably a little out there on this issue….

BUT on this issue I would separate church and state…

I dont think the Church should have ANY say on who has legal recognition for their partnerships. By the same token. I dont think the State should say that the Church MUST marry this person or that person…

So – I would say – that a church wedding has NO legal recognition at all. (Rather like in Germany).

If you want Legal Recognition – YOU must go to the registry and sign ….

If you want Gods Blessing – then you can go to a church. neither have anything to do with each other… and in fact – If ONE minister wants to give you his blessing – it doesnt affect the fact that Jenson or Pell doesnt = because you are legally registered at the registry.

Thats the way I would set it up if I was PM

I cant speak the bit for common law – but I would point out – separating the religious issues and the legal issues on the matter resolves many of the problems (and this – as I said above – has been done in countries such as Germany that REQUIRE a separation of church and state)

I would note that there are legal rights given in the marriage act that are given no where else – so we are NOT equal in the law until we can marry. My understanding ( and IANAL – I am not a lawyer) is that these are mostly related to children so they dont relate to me personally BUT they do relate to many of my friends who either were married and had children heterosexually and are now in a lesbian or gay relationship OR who have children IN a gay relationship. THOSE children are denied legal rights that the children of MARRIED couples get.

So there is a definite discrimination there against a growing number of our community and I would say ¨think of the children¨. If the biological parent dies the children are in a legal limbo worse than I would be as an adopted kid even though I had no Biological ties to either parent – because they were married. That could be extremely distressing for the children (and the remaining partner).

In addition "Heterosexual people can’t marry someone of the same sex either, so GLBT people have the exact same rights as heterosexual people" ? IS a bit of a straw man. Hetero sexual people DONT WANT TO MARRY people of the same sex so its an irrelevant argument.

Logic is a powerful tool but it allows you to posit impossible or incorrect statements without warning you (the classic one is the paradox – what happens when an irresistible force meets an immovable force – – grammatical correct – but it cant exist)

The correct argument would be Hetero sexual people can marry the Consenting adult they want to – and so we should be able to.

As for sitting on the Fence – is that because it doesnt impact you ? what is the moral point here ? I have no great desire to get married. My partnership is legally recognised by the Aussie government and actually on record at the United nations (as I worked there for a little while)

however this is a MORAL question. others believe they need to be married to be equal. Others need to be married to protect their children and others need to be married because of their faith. Do you think they are wrong to believe that ? Many people Sacrificed a lot to win our legal freedoms and I think we should support others to complete the Job – if we think what they want is Ethical and moral even if it doesnt impact us personally.

We are family after all !

Thanks guys,

I think I will cut and paste & print your responses shadowboxer & ann-maree, just so I can show my friend, as you can imagine he has some strong views on this & of late he has been challenging especially, since I kind of "came out" to a few more people including him whilst arguing about homosexual rights & he was not impressed. But at least he is decent enough to remain friends even though he disagree with my "lifestyle" and my "immorality and sin" anyway ..

shadowboxer you said

I would note that there are legal rights given in the marriage act that are given no where else – so we are NOT equal in the law until we can marry

I'm not familiar with a lot of this, I was under the impression that civil rights gave GLBT people the same rights as heterosexuals who marry, is that right? anyone know? If so, would anyone object if States and Territories in Australia adopted civil unions allowing GLBT people from marrying? If laws were changed so civil unions have the same rights as heterosexual marriage would that be okay for those GLBT people who want to get married?

As for sitting on the Fence – is that because it doesnt impact you ? what is the moral point here ? I have no great desire to get married. My partnership is legally recognised by the Aussie government and actually on record at the United nations (as I worked there for a little while)

Sitting on the fence is because part of me still has the mindset & belief that marriage is between a man & a woman & I fin bit hard to get past that.

Ann Maree you said

The issue here is that heterosexual people can CHOOSE if they want to marry or not. They also receive the legal benefits that come with marriage. Civil union rights are NOT the same.

again, I just assumed without doing any research that civil unions gave GLBT people the exact same rights with the exception of being defined as married, if that makes sense. Just like de-facto relationships. Then again, I dont know much about de-facto relationships either, so I should just be quiet 😛

You also said

Your friend seems to be making light of a very painful issue for many. I know of a lesbian couple who had a daughter together. The biological mother and daughter were in an accident and critically ill. The daughter had to have emergency surgery and the other mother was not permitted to sign the consent form for her. It was life and death and fortunately the biological mother woke up and signed the form and they survived. Can you imagine the helplessness of the other partner though? And sadly this is not an isolated case. There are countless others who have been denied recognition as Next of Kin and if the family of origin are homophobic or don't like the partner, their wishes can override that of the partner's. This is an absolute travesty and can you imagine the stress and grief that places on the gay person/s involved, especially in an already stressful medical situation? Similarly when a partner dies, a civil union may not be recognised like a marriage and the surviving partner may find that the will can be contested more easily than if they were legally married. Your friend's comment that LGBTI people have the same rights as heterosexuals misses the point because straight people would have no desire to marry someone of the same sex. It's about being able to love someone of your choosing and to have the same rights around that and not be disadvantaged. How would your friend feel if he was denied the right to be with the one he loves?

Again, excuse my ignorance, but I thought the law was changed a few years ago or something changing that the whole not being able to sign consent form or having same rights as heterosexual partners when someone is ill, even if they are not in a civil union situation, but perhaps I am wrong again lol

It's a human rights issue that needs to be rectified.

Some disagree saying this has nothing to do with human rights, I think that in France the highest court there said that it was not a "universal human right" I'm not sure what they said it was, but then again, you can't trust the French. 😉

One thing is certain, it is a complicated issue that stirs up great emotion and mixed opinions. And (I think I said this before) I think GLBT will have to wait a little longer to get their call for justice because the Gillard government wont allow for a conscious vote I think and Julia Gillard has already gone of record saying that she opposes same-sex marriage & of course, when Abbott gets into power which is likely to be whenever the next election is held because I can't see Gillard getting another term in office. So there is hope in hell for an Abbott led government to ever pass any laws to allow for same-sex marriage or to change the marriage act 🙁