Now, dear Reader, as I live and breathe, may I be struck down by a bolt of lightning, but these conversations DO actually occur!  With Me. To me. Why? I have no idea – but I have people – friends, acquaintances and strangers – approach me in the street, in pubs, on the golf course and engage me in conversation about subjects that appear close to their hearts and minds.

So it was that I found myself with a very close mate in a bar in Brisbane not too long ago.  We had met – together with a couple of mutual mates – in the Qld Capital for a few rounds of golf, catching up on the news of our families and generally shooting the breeze. So (and I’ll call him Rob) Rob and I found ourselves at a high-set table in a lovely bar in the centre of Brisbane one cold, wet Sunday night.  The other two mates (I’ll call them Kym and Scott) had repaired to bed early, after a particularly heavy night Saturday and a pretty ordinary round of golf Sunday afternoon.

Rob asks me, quite matter-of-factly (and surprisingly, because he has never, in our 16 years of very close friendship appeared to care about such things) “What do you think about the GM matter?”

Blew me away with this question. But, being as up-to-date as it’s possible for the average layman to be on such matters, I took what I regard as a decent mouthful of my favourite brew, and started in on my knowledge of ‘Genetic Modification’, thus:

“Well, you know, mate, the considered science if that, if the world’s population keeps growing at the current rate – or even accelerating – there won’t be sufficient farming land on the planet to adequately provide food for the world, especially the world’s poorer nations, including, and especially, those in the sub-Saharan African nations. Genetic Modification generally leads to greater amounts of food being able to be grown on a given acreage of land than those which are natural. So, unless the Pope suddenly and clearly declares that ‘genetic’ birth control is allowed in the Catholic world, then I think there’s a case for Genetic Modification.” Taking another decent sip and passing my now-empty glass across to him, in the tried and true gesture that means (in Australian parlance at least) “It’s your shout”, I continued, still looking at the table top for inspiration, “All that said, there are certain hurdles that need to be overcome - including the ‘polluting’ of naturally grown crops by those which are GM’d” (I used the last because I REALLY get off on abbreviating things once I use the full term in conversation!) – but once that’s been achieved, we’re ready to roll on GM foods.”

I looked up from the table top, just in time to see Rob, shaking his head, walking to the bar, and ordering more drinks.  He came back to the table seeming somewhat exasperated.

“What’s that about?” I asked him, sort of ‘quizzically’ though I often wonder how one can ask a question without asking it ‘quizzically’. “What’s that look for?”

My good mate Rob looks around the now almost-full bar, leans in and whispers, “No, knucklehead – the REAL GM issue; Gay Marriage.”

I leaned in to him, and, equally in sotto voce whispered “Why are you whispering?”

“I don’t want anyone thinking I’m gay,” he said.

I rocked back in my chair, laughing and said, “So what if anyone thinks you’re gay?  Are you gay? Does it matter?” It was then that we both realised we were being watched/listened to by a large portion of our nearby fellow-drinkers. I dropped my voice and continued my chat with Rob.

“Mate, we both have experience in the Police Service.  The Police is essentially a conservative organisation.  You know though, as well as I do, that gays and lesbians are members of the Police services in Australia.  You know, like I do, that gays and lesbians have been reluctant to come out in the Police; gladly, there is now a representative group of gays and lesbians across all industries in Australia.  Equally, any number of gay and lesbian Police Officers openly take part in Gay parades like the Mardi Gras in Sydney.”

“Yeah, but...” started Rob, but I cut him off quickly.

“There’s no ‘yeah buts’ in this debate, mate.  What it’s all about is people who identify as gay and lesbian wanting to marry their partners, people that they love, or, at the very least, the freedom to make that decision in the same way that you and I have.”

“Where did this all start? Why do they want to marry? Why can’t they just live together?” Rob asked.

“Well, that’s a very good question,” I offered, before heading to the bar for a fresh drink.  On my return, I continued “years ago I recall reading that, after his partner had died, a gay man had been unable to be paid out his partner’s life insurance and superannuation account. The gay man took the matter to court, where he was denied access to the funds. Why? Because Life Insurance was only able to be paid out to a ‘relative or spouse’; gay partnerships did not comply with this requirement.  So, gays became active in demanding changes to the laws.  It’s not something that I’m completely sure of, but it’s my understanding that the gay community’s attitude to marriage altered at that point.”

“So, they can just call it a Civil Union. What’s with the ‘marriage’ thing?”

“Yeah, but that’s discriminatory. You and I both were married in private premises, not churches, and were joined in marriage with our wives by Civil Celebrants.  But we call it marriage.  Why should a gay or lesbian be discriminated against under the same circumstances?”

“Yeah, I suppose.  But they’re still different” was all Rob could counter with.

“Well, gays and lesbians might say the same about us.  What’s to say that heteros like you and I are ‘different’?” I challenged.

“The bloody Bible” says Rob – who’s never mentioned religion in 16 years.

“Well, marriage is not about religion – it’s about love and love only.  You want to know what I really think? I think big business and government don’t want gay marriage because gays traditionally – though they can and do adopt or procreate through a third party – don’t have ‘normal size’ families; therefore they’ll buy less of the rubbish that the general population buys.  They’ll invest more in the top end of town – houses, furniture, cars, holidays, etc. I’m all for it.”

“You’re not gay yourself, are you mate?” was all Rob could come back with.

“Don’t come that stunt. We’re mates. Have been for 16 years. You know my wife and family and I know yours.  It’s all about fairness.  What has ANYONE got to lose by allowing gays and lesbians to marry?  What does it matter to you or me whether two people of the same sex marry?

“You know, I have a very good mate who I trained with in the Police Service in 1999-2000. I’ll call him Ben.  Ben and I got along just fine; he had the voice of a radio man which was handy because he’d been in the employ of radio stations before joining the Police.  Had a great sense of humour; liked a beer and the company of his friends.  On the day of our Graduation, he resigned from the Police and I barely heard from him again.

“Then, on the old, familiar FaceBook are pics and stories of Ben always in the company of a guy named Jonathon.  It took me a while but I eventually assumed they were gay partners.  I was left in no doubt when I saw a video on FB made by a middle-aged lady (Maree) questioning why it was that she had been allowed to marry but that her son wasn’t allowed the same right with his partner. The video included what you and I’d call a ‘family photo’ of Maree, her husband, Ben and Jonathon.  That video and photo cemented my view that ‘marriage is for anyone who wants to marry’.”

“Yeah, but” – there he goes again! – started Rob, “doesn’t the Federal Govt promise a plebiscite on the GM Debate so that the people can decide?”

“Well, your Freudian slip is showing Robert – you know more about the debate than your questions let on.  Yes, Mr Turnbull has promised a plebiscite if re-elected; the problem with a plebiscite is that – unlike an election or a referendum – the Govt is not bound to take any notice of its result.  So, Australia could vote overwhelmingly for Gay Marriage, but the Govt of the day could disagree with the will of the people and deny it. That’s just not right and it shows a real lack of leadership.”

“Well, I think marriage is for straight people” was about all my mate could counter with.

“That’s your view, you’re entitled to it and I respect it and will defend your right to voice it.  Just make sure you’re both in receipt of all the facts and can make your argument based on real facts and objective commentary. It’s not about you and me – it’d about inclusiveness for everybody. If it doesn’t negatively affect you, why would you oppose it?

“I think it’s my shout and time for a double for you – if you’ll pardon the pun.”