Reasons To Vote NO!

If you feel threatened by left wing extremists you're not alone.

"Love is love; this is a basic human right; equality for all; you have no compassion; you're oppressing people; you're discriminating; this is just like the black civil rights movement and womens right to vote; the majority of the world has already accepted this; none of the other countries that accepted SSM have had any issues; the sky won't fall and 'why should you care - it won't affect you personally'."   

These words usually come with an eye roll and a deep sigh indicating you should have done at least SOME homework to know this for yourself.

And if you're still unsure after all that's been thrown at you, there's clearly nothing left for them to do but start school yard bullying by ridiculing, mocking and name calling.  You'll be branded a homophobe, a bigot or just plain stupid.  And woe to you if you're a Christian, because YOU will be branded the worst of the worst.  How can you call yourself a Christian and not love these people.  Jesus would have said yes.  He loved people (unlike what you seem to be doing).  Why is your make-believe God or your fairies in the backyard more important than the pain of real people?

Of course the deep irony is that these people who demand free speech and call for tolerance and love, abuse everyone who disagrees with them. 

And unfortunately it's not just the extremists  we hear this from. Many kind hearted, well meaning people believe what they hear from the media as well and feel compelled to help protect these weaker minority groups too.


Like most Australians, I have no problems defending the rights of same sex attracted people - who should of course be allowed to love whom they please, with all the legal protections and responsibilities given to everyone else.

However, changing the Marriage Act will only remove more human rights than protect those we think we're helping (evidence below).

Many legitimate case studies, research papers and high court battles have been documented since the introduction of SSM in other countries. These documented examples are not only frightening, but positive proof that this one 'small' change which supposedly 'won't affect you', has a crippling 'ripple effect' that removes freedoms, removes rights and damages many lives immediately after the law is changed.

Share this article.  People need to see they are being lied to by political bullies.

Same Sex Marriage is Not a Human Right

Photo: AAP: Aaron Bunch

The words 'equality' and 'human rights' have a beautiful emotive overtone and it's a great soundbite for media and banners, but this idea has been argued and firmly cast out in international courts. Both the United Nations Human Rights Committee and the European Court of Human Rights have held there is no inequality where a state retains the traditional definition of marriage. In so ruling, these bodies have actually affirmed the inherent equality of all persons

The European Court of Human Rights identified the criteria for determining the claims of equality as being the extent to which same-sex couples are "in a relevantly similar situation to a different-sex couple as regards their need for legal recognition and protection of their relationship".

The court held that the important claims of equality are met through civil partnership regimes and through equality in access to entitlements such as inheritance rights and material support.

These are measures Australia has already enacted.

External Link: ABC News

80% of Gay people chose NOT to Marry

It's also important to get a handle on the number of people this affects.  The Media would have us believe that 'everyone wants this', however, large scale studies (rather than media hype or small group polls) prove this to be untrue.

In a recent study conducted in the Netherlands where gay marriage has been legal since 2001 over 80% of gay people ultimately chose NOT to get married.

Chose NOT To Marry

To put that in perspective, in the Netherlands (which has a similar population to Australia) they have around 100 same sex and 70,000 hetrosexual marriages conducted each year.

External Link: Reflecting on 12 years of marriage in the Netherlands

External Link: Canada 10 years on

Change Will Not Reduce Suicide

One of the many emotive claims by LGBTI extremists is that changing the law will reduce the number of suicides by gay people.

Unfortunately there are many large scale studies that prove this is untrue.

If we look at the Netherlands, where gay marriage has been legal since 2001, gay men remain three times more likely to suffer from a mood disorder than straight men, and 10 times more likely to engage in “suicidal self-harm.”

Even in comparatively tolerant country like Sweden, which has had civil unions since 1995 and full marriage since 2009, men married to men have triple the suicide rate of men married to women.

Suicide is a horrific problem no matter which way you look at it and people helping those suffering from depression need continued support, funding and help, but SSM has not proven to be an answer for this.

External Link: Dutch paradox: an ethnographic investigation of gay men's mental health 

External Link: Suicide in married couples in Sweden

SSM Will Not Change Equality

Australians are well known for helping the underdog.  And this is how the debate has been couched - that you're helping a vulnerable minority gain equality.  This is NOT true.  A lot of the discriminatory problems you hear originate out of America. The laws are very different in Australia.

Our Federal Parliament already amended 84 pieces of legislation in 2008 to place homosexual rights and entitlements on the same basis as others. The Marriage Equality website itself admits that after these amendments the Marriage Act is the only legislation requiring change - this is not an issue of substantive discrimination.

Along with that, homosexual couples in NSW, Victoria, Tasmania and the ACT are able to register their same-sex partnerships on a relationships register that provides public recognition and affirmation of their relationships.

The push for same-sex marriage is therefore largely ideological, because there is clearly no intention in any jurisdiction that same sex attracted people be subjected to any substantial discrimination on entitlement.

In a liberal democracy, others can form other types of relationships; but 'marriage' is a term reserved for a particular kind of relationship that brings with it obligations to others beyond the two parties. Marriage is shared obligation for children.

As to legal protections - under Australian law if a same sex couple signed a contract as part of a civil union, they would be equally protected in the same way as a couple signs a traditional marriage contract.  These genuinely heart wrenching stories of gay couples being separated in hospitals or the legal issues presented after one spouse passes may happen in America, or may happen when there is no contract (civil or otherwise), but with a signed contract and will this would never be a legal problem in Australia - and if it's not then this needs to be changed to accomodate them.

External Link: ABC News

In fact it's important to also consider that a large number of homosexual activists actually oppose same sex marriage for different reasons. Of course the media scarcely reports it.

External Link: Gay People Oppose Gay Marriage

So the whole thing is about that one extra step of changing the wording of the marriage act.  However by doing THAT - by changing the wording - it will cause a ripple effect across many laws that cause irreparable and significant harm to others.  

You really need to be asking yourself ‘what damage will this cause'?

What are you being asked to agree to?

The question being asked is “Should the law be changed to allow same-sex couples to marry?” You would think this means that marriage would include the union of 2 men or of 2 women.  However, the amendment to the Marriage Act proposed by the Exposure Draft Marriage Amendment (Same sex Marriage) Bill, to be put to the parliament if the plebiscite (now postal vote) returned a “yes” vote, was that marriage be “the union of any 2 people.” 

The Attorney-General’s Department’s Submission (Submission 78) to the Inquiry into the Exposure Draft Bill said: “Under this definition, … couples … who are intersex or of a non-binary gender, would be able to marry.” So persons of any fluid gender could marry.

This is not simply same sex marriage – this is transgender (or gender fluid) marriage.

Gender fluid (transgender) refers to a person who does not identity with their sex a birth. They don’t identity as male or female, but with another fluid genders.

The federal government allows you to identity as Male Female X (Indeterminate, Unspecified, Intersex). Indeterminate can mean any gender identity on a scale of male to female, as advocated by the Safe Schools Coalition (p 34), or any gender identity from the list on Facebook or Tumblr (e.g. non-binary, gender diverse,  gender queer, pan-gendered, androgynous and inter-gender), or genderless. 24 million Australians can have 24 million gender identities

Accepting and including all people is an expected human right, however imposing this onto law onto everyone means all gender types MUST be taught to all kids as the new norm through programs such as unsafe schools which also means that kids are taught that you might not have a gender and you can be whatever you 'feel' like.  

The danger of this is that children are easily led and manipulated and have no concept of what they are choosing, so if a girl feels like a tomboy, she could be convinced that she really is a boy in a girls body.  

And if you as their parent don't agree to follow state mandated teaching and be supportive of your girl transitioning to a boy, your child might be legally taken away from you because you are deemed to be a 'child abuser'. (examples of this new law noted further below).

There is no way to 'opt out' of this when it becomes law because now it is the new norm.  Under the Sex Discrimination Act 1984 (Section 21), teachers will risk prosecution through complaints of discrimination if they refrain from teaching state sanctioned materials which will include the unsafe schools program.

The inclusion of transgender opens a pandoras box of problems.  

External Link: Transgender Marriage Vote (good read)

Yes, this change will impact you

Changing one law means other laws must also change to integrate the change.  As a non threatening example; if we add allowance for same sex marriage we also need to change the divorce laws to add allowance for same sex divorce.  This is called a ripple effect.  

Its important to note that this is not the same as some would call a slippery slope.  We'll get to those later. What I'm expressing here is a ripple effect (or if you prefer, a domino effect) that naturally happens as a result of another law changing.

The ripple effect from changing the marriage act spreads across many laws - it's impossible to see where it will end, but the good thing is we have the benefit of hindsight by looking at those countries which have already implented the change, (and yes, there are many serious consequences happening in those countries already as well).

Marriage laws are tightly interwoven with family law and the raising of children.  Some would like you to believe that love is love and we're only talking about 2 people getting married - what does this have to do with kids?

Marriage has a place in the law because a relationship between a man and a woman is the kind of relationship that may produce children. Marriage is linked to children, for the sake of children, protecting their identity and their nurture by a mother and a father. The State would have no interest in the permanence and exclusivity of marriage if it were not the fact that marriage may produce children.

By introducing a legal equivalence between same-sex relationships and marriage, you would further bury the rights of children, because they would cease to be the focus of marriage. Marriage would be about adults only and, in that sense, self-serving for them.

It's one thing to say that the law has nothing to do with what two men or two women do in their private life, it's quite another to change the law to promote those relationships. If marriage is redefined, then that is what we are going to have to teach and affirm to our children and in our schools. Why should a minority lifestyle so influence curriculum? Why should teachers be prevented from teaching that marriage is primarily about children?

Statistics and research the world over have repeatedly confirmed that the "ideal" family environment is one where there is a biological mother and a biological father.

Of course I need to be quick to say there are always exceptions - and I'm not saying gay parents or single parents or mixed families are bad, in fact some would rightfully argue that some of these non traditional parents are even better - but we're not talking about exceptions, we're talking about a law which has to be based on an ideal.  And the ideal according to global research is that a family unit is one where the children are raised by one of each biological parent.

External Link: Study: Children do best with two biological parents

Once you change that ideal, you start to enter murky waters. 

The change isn't about allowing same sex marriage into an institution - it's about redefining it. When you redefine it, it is no longer the thing that it was - meaning even if same sex attracted people get it, they will not get what they are asking for. But if it is redefined, it then becomes a new beast which has immense tentacles that permeate throughout many other sections of the law.

Examples of Change

If same sex marriage is legalized in Australia, parenting will need to be redefined to include the provision to erase the term natural parents and replace it across the board with a gender neutral legal parent under the law. This will result in all children only having "legal parents" as defined by the government.

By legally erasing biological parenthood in this way, the government ignores children’s foremost right which is their natural desire to know and be raised by their own biological parents.

Under this kind of law change it not only deprives children of their own rights to natural parentage, it gives the state the power to override the autonomy of biological parents which means parental rights will be taken away by the government adding to the elite school of the destruction of the family unit.

So what will this mean for normal everyday people who just want to raise their children in a normal natural environment? Firstly it might be considered discrimination to say that marriage is between man and a woman or that every child should know and be raised by his own biological married parents and you can be prosecuted under new laws with tens of thousands of dollars in legal fees. New hate speech laws will be introduced. The political leftists and social justice warriors will call you racist, a bigot and a homophobe and because your beliefs, values and political opinions are different from theirs, you risk losing your professional license, job or business and even your children.

Examples of these problems happening in countries that have accepted SSM are below.

I'm not saying its wrong for gay people to have all the same legal protections as everyone else and I'm not saying they should not be with whoever they please for the rest of their life and I am not saying they should not raise kids. Some gay people are better parents than heterosexual couples - I'm saying when you change the law you're not just 'making an allowance' for a new group to enter the marriage institution, you're forcing a change that has ripple effects and issues that will hurt and remove rights from a lot of people in many, many areas.

Parents can expect state interference when it comes to moral values. Parenting and education and not just in schools. The government might have access to your home to supervise you as the parent to judge your suitability and if the government doesn’t like what you are teaching your children, they will attempt to remove them from your home. Even if school teachers were to debate this, they might lose their jobs for thinking politically incorrect thoughts.

Evidence of Change

Canada has just passed a law that allows the government to take away children from parents who don’t accept the kids chosen identity. The Minister of Children and Youth Services, Michael Coteau, said that a parent’s failure to recognize and support a child’s gender self-identification is a form of child abuse, and a child in these circumstances should be removed from the situation and placed into protection.

External Link: Disapproval of kid's gender is "child abuse", leading to state removal from parents.

Recent events in Norway depict the horrors of such policies in practice. The Bodnariu family was torn apart by social workers who forcibly took their children after reports of parental abuse – claims which were later dropped due to lack of evidence. All five children, including one three-month-old baby, were removed and placed in separate homes. Not one judge was involved in the process, just “well-meaning” social workers.
External Link: Norway stealing children

A Christian couple in Canada who have been fostering kids for years are now prevented from being foster parents because their "Christian views" don't fit with the public interest. The change is horrid. Even if you don't agree with Christian principals, you have to agree that this kind of thing where the tables are turning so quickly is frightening to say the least.

In Canada you must now call someone by their preferred pronoun.  If you don't, you could be charged and re-educated or jailed. What's a pronoun?  Some people like being called he, she, they, ze, zer, pixie, other worldly and over 200+ possible options (growing daily).  I can't imagine calling someone a pixie and not laughing or crying at the sadness of this whole scenario.  

"Few Canadians realise how seriously these statutes infringe upon freedom of speech. The Ontario Human Rights Commission has stated that “refusing to refer to a trans person by their chosen name and a personal pronoun that matches their gender identity … will likely be discrimination when it takes place in a social area covered by the Code, including employment, housing and services like education.”

External Link: National Post

How bad is it that we are being conformed to speak as per the government instructs us or we will be jailed?

And how confusing is it to kids who don't understand?  Kids who are told in school (a place of trust) that they are not male or female. Doctors being cautioned about identifying a newborns gender because he or she may not agree with that gender when it grows up.  Kids getting their sexual parts removed at 16 months old. Teachers taking kids away from parents if the parents refuse to conform to this new way of thinking.

External Link: Parents sue Carolina  for surgically making child female.

External Link: Dear Doctor: Did you just identify the gender of that baby? You're a bigot.

External Link: Schools accused of sowing confusion over promoting transgender issues.

External Link: Teachers ordered to teach kindergarten children to “eliminate gender".

"The treatment of Gender Dysphoria in childhood with hormones effectively amounts to mass experimentation on, and sterilization of, youth who are cognitively incapable of providing informed consent. There is a serious ethical problem with allowing irreversible, life-changing procedures to be performed on minors who are too young to give valid consent themselves; adolescents cannot understand the magnitude of such decisions."

External Link: American College of Pediatricians

The Jewish Vishnitz school for girls in the UK is under threat of losing its accreditation because they refuse to teach gender fluid (transgender) issues to children.

External Link: Threat of losing accreditation

Ontario also just passed the All Families Are Equal Act, which removes mothers and fathers from the law, and allows up to four ‘parents’ on a child’s birth certificate. Canada also refuses to allow law graduates from a Christian university to practise law because of the Christian teaching on marriage.

External Link: Law society targets Christians

External Link: Allowing 4 parents on a birth certificate

Canada’s reality is a warning: wherever marriage is redefined, parents have their rights trampled, and their children’s upbringing controlled by the state. As the marriage war rages on, we must ask ourselves: are we prepared to face the consequences? Or will we refuse to hand our beloved country and children to radical, ideological tyrants?

All these problems start as direct result of changing the definition of Marriage.

Australia already laying Foundations

We have unsafe schools in Australia taking us on a journey there right now with under age sex training, teaching kids age 10 how to masterbate; links to sexual driven websites; teaching of radical gender theories including dangerous tactics of how to penis tuck and chest bind; how to perform anal sex (without being taught the dangers) and more.  If you object to this in Australia before the laws change you're simply called names like a homophobic or stupid, but once laws are passed, it will be illegal to comment on this because any negative comment could be considered hate speech or against legally mandated curriculum (see USA and CANADA articles on this page).  Any other time and place and this kind of grooming and sexualisation of young children would be considered peadophelia and people would be jailed. 

External Link: Video - Political Posting Mumma - Facebook (4.5 million views)

External Link: Video - Masterbation taught in class

Taking gender OUT of the marriage act is the catalyst to all this change.

The problem with the term “Love Is Love” is that it's loaded with a false assumption. It assumes that love is only valid between monogamous relationships, but as we'll soon see, there are other competing relationship configurations that are just as genuine in their love and commitment.  If the slogan is correct, then these other relationships have a case.
Changing marriage from between a man and a women to '2 people' will open up opportunities to expand later to 3 people or 5 people.  And why stop at people or age or existing family?  The complexity this brings to law is phenomenal.

It's also no secret that Islam is pushing for marriage laws to be relaxed in order to accommodate polygamy which is permitted within Sharia Law and modelled as an example by the Prophet Muhammad himself.  Only last month, Muslim leader Keysar Trad said that he wants Australian men to be allowed multiple wives.  Why not?  Love is love right?

External Link: - Polygamy is taking off.



Gay Couple Mark & Ben are voting NO. They've been together for 15yrs and will vote no in the upcoming postal plebiscite. They say they ALREADY HAVE .  Listen to what they have to say:

External Link: WAVE FM - Recording

LGTBI+ A More Sinister Force

There's a very sinister side to this whole Same Sex Marriage (SSM) debate.  The more I look into this, the more I can see a pattern of dominance, deception and intolerance that I can only call mind boggling.

The LBTGI+ extremists don’t want equality - they're not looking to be accepted, tolerated or loved.  What they want is to impose their ideology on you and receive full compliance to groom and sexualise young children, remove gender and remove any resemblance of a family unit as we know it today. 

SSM is just one of many changes that will help them achieve their goal.  

In fact they don't even want marriage.

Consider these candid remarks of the writer and gay rights activist Masha Gessen from 2012: 

Mascha Gessen

It’s a no-brainer that [same-sex couples] should have the right to marry, but I also think equally that it’s a no-brainer that the institution of marriage should not exist. . . . Fighting for gay marriage generally involves lying about what we are going to do with marriage when we get there—because we lie that the institution of marriage is not going to change, and that is a lie.  

The institution of marriage is going to change, and it should change. And again, I don’t think it should exist. And I don’t like taking part in creating fictions about my life. That’s sort of not what I had in mind when I came out thirty years ago.

I have three kids who have five parents, more or less, and I don’t see why they shouldn’t have five parents legally. . . . I met my new partner, and she had just had a baby, and that baby’s biological father is my brother, and my daughter’s biological father is a man who lives in Russia, and my adopted son also considers him his father. So the five parents break down into two groups of three. . . . And really, I would like to live in a legal system that is capable of reflecting that reality, and I don’t think that’s compatible with the institution of marriage.

Anderson, Ryan T.. Truth Overruled: The Future of Marriage and Religious Freedom (p. 38). Regnery Publishing.

It’s not just compliance they demand - they also want to force their LGTBI+ ideology onto your children and their children, confusing generations about who and what they are through gender dysphoria.

If you don’t like or approve their unrelenting desire to dominate, too bad.  Their agenda will go to any length to ridicule and mock you. And they will use new language to rephrase any alternative opinion you may have into "micro aggressions” or full blown "hate speech”.  

That new language gives them ‘permission' to immediately retaliate or seek retribution.

You’ll be ruined by their incessant mocking, you’ll be taken to court and told to not only pay penalties, but also pay to promote their ideology further, after which you’ll be made into a public example so others dare not challenge the new norm. 

And you can see this very clearly by the attitudes of the YES voters - even BEFORE we give them any right of LAW.  Supporters will go to any length to make you compliant.

In an effort to discredit people wanting to vote NO, Channel 10 incites public fear promoting this image of a bus stop intended to make people believe these were all over Melbourne.  The bus stop was a stock photo of a bus stop in Europe with a fake poster superimposed on it.  Fake news.

External Link: Media Watch 

This is NOT equality.  This is subjugation and a total hypocrisy of intolerance. 

So this whole thing is not about denying people love, It's not about equality, It's about the radical social engineering of society and the forceful imposition of new age sexual and gender Ideologies onto the public in a way that will alter our western way of life and affect not only each one of us, but also our kids and their kids in the future.

This is social engineering.  And to this I vote NO!


“Changing the definition of marriage…is not an exercise in human rights and equality, it is an exercise in de-authorising the Judaeo-Christian influence in our society.”

 The Honourable John Howard



worrying evidence AFTER SEEING TV AD

The bile and even (reported) death threats directed against the mums in the ad, the petition on Get Up (eventually pulled) to deregister the doctor on screen, and the ironic pillorying of the ad as ‘fanciful’ by a chorus of journalists and politicians all indicate that, indeed, it may one day become impossible for reasonable people—and not just the religious—to disagree with same sex marriage without consequences. A survey of British and Canadian events following their changes to marriage law provides further worrying evidence.

John Dixon

John Dixon

UK" age of consent DOWN TO 10 and Incest abolished

A National Council for Civil Liberties (NCCL) press release quoted in The Sun issued in Miss Hewitt’s sole name in Mach 1976 read: “NCCL proposes that the age of consent should be lowered to 14, with special provision for situations where the partners are close in age or where the consent of a child over ten can be proved.”

External Link: UK The Telegraph​​​

Former Labour cabinet minister Patricia Hewitt

UK: Churches NOT SAFE from litigation

The ink isn't even dry on the UK same sex bill and churches are already facing litigation. No amount of 'allowances' for religious organisations will protect the church from this - someone will continue to push and push and push.

External Link: UK Daily Mail

Barrie Drewitt-Barlow and Tony want to marry in Church


As a knock on effect of changing the same sex law in New Zealand the charities board is trying to deregister Family First because their views of traditional marriage are "not for the public benefit".  When the state determines what you can and can't believe, we're in big trouble.

External Link: Facebook Family Voice

Bob McCoskrie Director Family First, New Zealand

CAN'T SAY 'Husband' and 'wife' - offensive LANGUAGE

Saying ‘husband' and ‘wife' will be a thing of the past.  Already before any laws even change, the Victorian government already put out a new ‘language guide' discouraging people from using heteronormative terms such as husband and wife in the hope of addressing and eradicating homophobia, biphobia and transphobia.

External Link: The Australian

Victoria’s Equality Minister Martin Foley

you're teaching our kids what?

This is a great video of a Melbourne mum who made a video sharing her shock and outrage when she finally discovered what they are trying to teach her impressionable kids through the "safe schools" rubbish.  Ironically this kind of thing will end up being labelled hate speech if law changes are passed.

External Link: Video Facebook (4.5 million views)

Political Posting Mumma

USA: FATHER of 6yr old Arrested - opting out his son

An American dad was arrested because he wanted to be told when his 6 year old was being taught this kind of sexual diversity education and refused to leave until someone told him so he could opt out his child from that class. "Because of the same-sex marriage law people are treating this as a mandate to teach the youngest of children." 

External Link: MassResistance

uk: parents pull second child from school

A British couple took their son out of school after he faced disciplinary action for accidentally referring to his 6-year-old classmate as a boy, when this classmate had asked to be called a girl. The parents, Nigel and Sally Rowe, said their son was confused as to why one of his male peers was dressing as a girl, and had gotten in trouble for asking questions to try and understand. 

External Link: Daily Caller

CAN: Disapproval of kids gender is child abuse

Canada has just passed a law that allows the government to take away children from parents who don’t accept the kids chosen identity. The Minister of Children and Youth Services, Michael Coteau, said that a parent’s failure to recognize and support a child’s gender self-identification is a form of child abuse, and a child in these circumstances should be removed from the situation and placed into protection.

External Link: Disapproval of kid's gender is child abuse

Ontario Takes Over Parental Decisions

USA: 29 same sex marriage violations of faith

Here’s a list of 29 cases in which Christians have been accused of violating non-discrimination laws in USA for following the dictates of their faith. LGBTI have retaliated for a business owner’s Christian stance, or an official’s religious rights have been brushed aside:

External Link: List of USA SSM lawsuits

LABOR will spend $1.4 million to appoint a watchdog for gay and lesbian rights.

A labor government will set up a financial slush pot to fund an organisation that will inevitably be suing people for standing firm to their traditional family values.

External Link: Labor to appoint watchdog

Bill Shorten

Yes "Campaign violence" gets applauded.  Is this bullying Really acceptable?

the gay marriage yes campaign is a disgrace and frightening. We’ve already seen the pickets, the yelling, the abuse, the physical attacks on opponents and even the sacking of an 18 year old for putting the slogan of the No campaign on her Facebook page.  Just in the past week alone, we’ve seen churches vandalised by yes campaigners,  we’ve had protestors storm the stage of a coalition for marriage in Melbourne with banners saying ‘burn churches, not queers’ and other signs saying crucify christians. Honestly some yes campaigners have become the bigots they say they hate.  It’s bizarre.

External Link: Bolt Report

Andrew Bolt

NEWS POLL: "Yes" Voters Falling

There is hope as people are realising the ripple effect damage being caused by changing the law, voters are changing their mind from yes to no.  Please help by sharing this article!

External Link: Sydney Morning Herald - Support for SSM Falling

Share this article.  People need to see they are being lied to by political bullies.