Folklore is that marriage is an agreement between a couple witnessed by the community. This is only half true. There is another important agreement, and that is between the couple and the community. The couple promise to look after each other, and perhaps more importantly, their children, and the community promises to help them in these endeavors. Australia is a secular country. That means we need to be ever vigilant that we do not make laws for the sake of promoting various religious views.
That does not mean, however, that state has no business in social values and social institutions. But, again, it must again be ever vigilant that it does so only for the public good rather than public sensibilities, and achieves the right balance between public good and individual freedoms.
So the real question is: are gay marriages (and Big Love) harmful to the individuals or their children? The little research I've found is neutral. The real issue Parliament should be concerned about is why so many straight marriages are breaking down (and causing hurt to both the couple and their children). What seems clear to me is that society is not keeping up its end of the bargain.
wtf?
Evasion
Paul Walter, I asked, What is marriage?
You seemingly purport to respond by saying, "Marriage is an institution" and then blathering on about institutions. Bizarre!
Let me ask again, What is marriage? Is there a definition? Is there any such thing? If so, what is it?
Is it perhaps, or was it when it existed, an institution for human procreation, for protecting the procreating woman and protecting and bringing up the products of that procreation?
Why is the word "marriage" being used in this thread? What does it mean? Why is there no answer?
God's police
Michael Talbot, it is said marriage is an institution, and institutions, as we know, are places unhappy folk end up being locked up in, in straightjackets.
We need for the human propensity to control-freak, meddle and interfere with others to be stopped at the front door and if not that, surely the bedroom door.
Paul Keating suggested that, "two blokes and a cocker spaniel " wasn't his idea of marriage, but then, no one was asking him to adopt that lifestyle. It wasn't him in the position of "two blokes and a cocker spaniel"; were people to look after their own business instead of peering after others they might not lose their own marriages, eg, as Keating did.
Ffs, what's wrong with "live and let live", for the more sanctimonious?
?
What is marriage?
QED
So many taboos around this topic, and silly ones. The old "It's Adam and Eve, not Adam and Steve" mentality is still prevalent. I don't think it'll get passed this time. Next time it will.
But yes, Jay, the other end of te stick often tells the tale!