[cato_the_elder]

> Ok, so what gives you reason to think subsidisation (or even just recognition) of non-traditional marriages is going to damage your culture at all?

Traditional nuclear family is a tenant of many cultures, including the one I have a feeling of belonging to. Also, the amount of propaganda and censorship which is needed to push these things is quite worrying.

> I actually thought marriage itself was likely to die as an institution

That's unlikely, at the very least because of Lindy effect [1]. In the traditional sense, it is under attack though.

> something close to 70% support now

First, these things are measured by polls, and the outcome of course depends on how do you ask the question. Do you think you'd get the same outcome if it was phrased as "subsidising" instead of "the right to marry"? Plus, how much propaganda and censorship did that take? Are people free to make fun of these things or harshly criticise them without fear of "consequences"?

[1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lindy_effect

[wizofaus]

"Should the law be changed to allow same-sex couples to marry?"

Official nation-wide referendum, in 2017, with 61% responding yes. 80% participation.

No censorship that I was aware of, and I would very much have been concerned if there were. Lots of propaganda, arguably more on the "no" side, but accepted, that's not an entirely objective view.