It is obvious the Fr Brennan realises that marriage is the unique union of two people from the two genders existing in our nature. Aurelius you protest all members of the human race want to be loved-however AURELIUS love is not ineluctably sexual in act thus homosexuals have a right to love and be loved but homosexual love must eclipse coitus or copula since homosexual love is impotent regarding procreation of life[homosexual love has all the variations of heterosexual love except sexual acts intended for generation of new life putting aside sexual reproduction Jesus was the greatest lover ever in laying down his life for salvation of others-need i mention the rich continuum of non genital love[eg between members of a family THUS to reduce love to a sexual act is the ultimate myopia] the church has the most serious obligation to support homosexuals with their heavy cross by prayer and sacrament and to publicly reject distortions of love by politicians and lawyers in institutionalising mortal sin Father John Michael George 12 December Michelle Goldsmith 20 December Thanks Fr Frank for being able to clearly state where the Australian Catholic Church needs to situate itself on this matter. To me, the winning argument is Civilization itself.
Conversely, allowing same-sex spousal unions makes no sense.
Topic tags: I have not said that the High Court would necessarily find a law with respect to same sex marriage invalid. Brennan argues powerfully and repeatedly that same-sex relationships are often worthy and honourable, and that same-sex couples should have complete equality in civil law. Thank you for this article.
Under the Constitution, the Parliament has power 'to make laws with respect to marriage'.