SSM Plebiscite

[mateinone]

No, well not from what i head, but as you pointed out it could have been possible.

I was only half listening, but i believe the debate centered around the rights of marriage have always been the same and should never change.
IIRC, it used to be ok to marry a 16yo. Obviously now, that is no longer the case.
I think there was a couple other variations along the same lines.

Essentially the debate of 'You can't change what a marriage represents as its always been the same' was debunked because it was an ever shifting landscape that has indeed been changed previously.

Changing it to include same sex is the next incarnation of it, just like the change to remove 'kids' from it was previously.

I don't think people would be arguing that a marriage law can't change parameters, that would be very easy to shoot down as society changes.
No I think more, there will be people who believe that marriage has and should represent a union of man and women. That traditionally it has (throughout most/all societies historically) and that biologically man and women are meant to be together, whether determined by God or just through evolution.

But an argument to the strict interpretation of marriage within Australia wouldn't make any sense, for the reasons already pointed out.