Comments on: MP Tim Wilson says marriage equality debate has descended into ‘national silliness’ /news/national-news/tim-wilson-silliness/158737 Setting Australia’s LGBTI agenda since 1979 Thu, 01 Jun 2017 23:30:10 +0000 hourly 1 https://wordpress.org/?v=6.5.5 By: Dave /news/national-news/tim-wilson-silliness/158737#comment-596738 Thu, 01 Jun 2017 23:30:10 +0000 https://starobserver.com.au/?p=158737#comment-596738 ““My only concern really all along has been that any such change does not weaken what I think is a very important tradition that keeps parents of children together.”” says Andrew Bolt in the article.

What does this mean in practical terms? Surely the only interpretation is that Bolt wants to reverse no-fault divorce laws for married parents, be they gay or straight. Is there any other interpretation? Please tell me if I’ve got it wrong because I just can’t see how it means anything else.

Andrew Bolt claims to be open to the idea of same sex marriage as long as folks like Christine Foster go back and resume their marriage to the father of their kids. Am I reading this wrong?

]]>