What are your views on Abortion and gay marriage, not a political thread

[margomeoz]

but something to think about when casting your vote.

My personal view is that each person should be able to decide their own future in both these cases.

But in case you don't wish to share your own views I have added a poll.

If Tony gets in your choice will be very limited.

[azureline**]

While the original Act did not define marriage, section 46 of the Act incorporated the substance of the 19th century English case law definition of marriage found in Hyde v Hyde & Woodmansee[17]. Section 46 says that celebrants should explain the nature of the marriage relationship with words that include:

... Marriage, according to law in Australia, is the union of a man and a woman to the exclusion of all others, voluntarily entered into for life ...

However these words were seen as a description or exhortation rather than a definition.[18]

The definition of marriage now in the Marriage Act was inserted in 2004[19], its stated purpose being to reflect ‘the understanding of marriage held by the vast majority of Australians’.[20] The Government stated that:

It is time that those words form the formal definition of marriage in the Marriage Act.

[*crikey*mate*]

From the Oxford Dictionary published in 1992 first printed in 1987(so well before 2004)

(It's my earliest dictionary in print, but it clearly shows that the word was NOT defined in 2004 to stipulate that marriage was between a man and a woman.)

Marriage:

1) The state or relationship of being husband and wife.

2) The legal union or contract made by a man and woman to live as husband and wife.

In 2004, the definition of the word was inserted into the Marriage Act, however the definition was NOT changed.

[**meep**]

If you read the second reading speech, the Bill was not to change the definition of marriage, but to insert the definition of marriage into the Act for the purposes of clarification for Civil Celebrants.

The definition that was inserted was of the word as it has been defined since at least the 12th Century.

I've never really looked into it closely and TBH still am unsure but is the following what you mean?

to incorporate the common law definition of marriage into the Marriage Act 1961 and the Family Law Act.

[*crikey*mate*]

The Government stated that:

It is time that those words form the formal definition of marriage in the Marriage Act.

You are not interpreting the Act correctly. The Act was merely to insert the already established definition - its purpose was not to change the meaning.

The words that were there previously were seen to descriptive - so they inserted the established definition.

The definition of Marriage WAS NOT CHANGED BY THE ACT IN 2004.

[*crikey*mate*]

The case of Hyde v Hyde & Woodmansee drew on the definition of marriage in 1866! The definition of the word WAS NOT coined in 2004!

[freakiness]

The meaning/definition of gay has changed.

[*crikey*mate*]

I said that I did not agree with the definition of words being changed. I was told that the word marriage was changed to suit a particular political environment in 2004. This implied that my reasoning for being against gay marriage was flawed. I have shown that it is not by establishing that the definition of the word was neither coined nor changed in 2004.

Now Freaky, now that I have cleared that up, I asked you a question in another thread about me being politically biased about the menu. I was wondering if you would mind addressing that?

[azureline**]

no, it had nothing to do with what you said about definitions of words changing.

[*crikey*mate*]

do you agree that the definition of the word marriage was NOT changed in 2004, especially by the amendment to the Marriage Act of 1961?

[freakiness]

Now Freaky, now that I have cleared that up, I asked you a question in another thread about me being politically biased about the menu. I was wondering if you would mind addressing that?

Which thread was that?