Is Marriage a basic human right?

...

Also, why or why not?

no
you do not need to be married to stay alive

Human rights don't exist. Certainly not under the constitution, or most federal law as I understand it. Merely calling something a right doesn't make it so.
Afaik any rights, obligations or privileges under Australian law are granted by the grace of her majesty the Queen, so faggots can fxuk off and take it up with her.

It's literally just the ability to file taxes jointly, niggas acting like it's vital

>Human rights don't exist
wrong, they do
human lefts as well

the only basic human right is to die
everything else can be taken away
doesn't make it fair, or right
just the way it is

But isn't the queen a jew? Is there a probability for her to grant it after the plebiscite in case her kikeness fires up?

touche

No. it's jealousy. They want what breeders want. Just wait till fag divorce, cohabitation splitting of assets after a breakup, custody issues come into play. Changing that one line in the Marriage Act will turn around and bite them all on the ass. Screen cap this.

no, it's a religious rite
if you want marriage then make a marriage system that does not infringe on a religion that is against gay marriage
it's a dumb sandnigger kike religion anyways

Her Royal Highness is of the Tudor house, and married a Greek prince if I'm not mistaken. Keep on larping muh joo shit moran

Well played Indonesia. Well played

There is no such thing as a (((basic human right)))

It's not. It's a contract between a man and a woman, whereas man gives woman his surpluss of work & resources and the woman gives the man complete access to vagina and the products of her vagina as well (i.e children). Of course this doesn't mean anything anymore, due to bastardization, degeneracy, feminism, divorces etc. There's literally no point in faggots getting married other than to deal the killing blow to the remains of what the sacred contract of marriage was.

I just re read your post. A plebiscite is a non binding straw poll of the citizenry. But you knew that. The government has said that if the plebiscite comes back yes, they will Change the law.

This can only happen if both houses pass the bill, and gain royal assent, which Is just rubber stamped by the GG.

>woman gives the man complete access to vagina and the products of her vagina as well

Do you mean back then man can't have sexy time with a woman without prior marriage?

So you voted no?

What do you think user

>Needing legislation to tell you what rights you have

If so, why muslims are having more human rights than a white boi?

> being this oblivious to the changes to the UK marriage acts from the 18th century onwards

I'd say it is, poopdick isn't however, and is in fact a vile crime against both nature and civilization, and thus deserves a harsh punishment.

Even if it is a human right, gay men still have that right. They just choose not to marry women

Whores have always existed, but I mean what the initial point of marriage was. A steady supply of pussy.

Bcoz white bois colinized and oppressed them natives n shit. Karma to you whities.

For those who don't know he's an Australian Rugby player (and devout Christian), and the Australian Rugby Union came out and said they support gay marriage. He had to actively state it because the ARU felt it was entitled to speak for him.

Ninja rare

If marriage is a right, why isn't Bernie Sanders paying for my mail-order brides?

>Not needing legislation to tell you what rights you have

So in case the government infringes your right, you can't assert any law. Just muh basic hueman ryts.

Because no refunds

fingers crossed