Is he a maverick...I don't think so...
Just seems to me he is promoting the legitimate liberal (small 'l') social agenda.
By and large I concur
and I make the following points in a little note to the good Mr Bandt
"I am in the middle of blogging about your activities in the Parliament and thought I would contact you to say thanks.
Today is the day the discussion about MPs findings about same-sex marriage in their electorates has begun.
Not surprisingly many seem to be finding what they wanted to find.
I happen to be a Christian and a priest of the Anglican Church; there are many of us who are supportive of same-sex marriage and deeply distraught by our rather conservative institution's inability to be able to discuss this properly (or at all).
What the Church might choose to do is one thing, but I see no reason why our country should feel it has to concur with the Churches (and clearly the community already recognises this); it is also not true that all Christians are opposed to gay marriage. There is no doubt that conservative evangelicals are opposed, but the majority of Christians are not conservative evangelicals.
The Anglican Church is very diverse but has a strong tradition (despite the irony of some who think otherwise) of tolerating difference. I think the Uniting Church, Catholic Church and Lutheran Churches are not too dissimilar.
In the end all I want to say is that same-sex marriage promotes stability and commitment, which is a strong social virtue. The Churches will have to fight their own internal battles...and we will lag behind popular opinion I suggest.
Thank you for encouraging this community debate"
I do not think we need to be frightened of this debate. Why, indeed, should we fear legitimate discussion about anything