One question keeps interrupting the campaign, despite both major parties being against it and most being ambivalent about the whole thing. Marriage equality came up last month, when Penny Wong was asked why she didn't support it.

It came up last week, when Julia Gillard was asked by a lesbian why she couldn't marry the one she loved.

And this week on Q&A, Vietnam veteran Geoff Thomas asked why Tony Abbott couldn't overcome his prejudices and allow gays to marry - just as he had overcome his prejudices and accepted his gay son. Ignore it, refuse it, roll your eyes at it, but same-sex marriage is the issue that won't go away, one that comes not from the parties, but from the people.

When the Marriage Act was passed in 1961, legislators didn't bother to define marriage as being between a man and a woman. That didn't happen until 2004, when the Howard government with Labor support inserted this definition: "marriage means the union of a man and a woman to the exclusion of all others, voluntarily entered into for life".

At last count, 44 jurisdictions – including deeply religious Portugal, Spain and Mexico City – disagree. They think secular marriage is wider than that, it's the union of two people.

The first was the Netherlands in 2001, followed by Belgium. Argentina is the most recent, where marriage equality was allowed by the legislature, not by courtroom victories more common in the United States.

More at the source: http://www.smh.com.au