Australian Same Sex Marriage

Our debate started in WhatsApp which is not a good platform for lengthy texts. Therefore, I invited my friends to come over here to exchange our views.
Moreover, I want to know more about the situation in Australia because many Hong Kong ordinances have been inspired by similar laws in UK and Australia. When I teach my students sexual ethics and when I deal with similar issues in the future in the capacity of a permanent deacon, I need to have a broader perspective.

The debate started when a lady friend urged us to vote against Australia passing same-sex marriage in an online poll by 9news.com.au. I oppose same-sex marriage, but I do not like meddling with the affairs of other countries. The lady, perhaps shocked like me about the outcome of the recent Irish referendum on same-sex marriage, a defeat of the Irish Catholic Church, thought we should fight the battle on all fronts.
Then, my sister-in-law in Australia told us about the tolerant atmosphere in Australia where same-sex civil unions have been endorsed. She said not many same-sex couples raise kids and she has homosexual friends and colleagues. A few of them have kids who are good classmates of her son. "Their families are full of love", she said in WhatsApp. The lady friend in WhatsApp thought that it was too dangerous.

Out of curiosity, I asked my sister-in-law.
"Same-sex couples cannot give birth to children which must be adopted." (I was proven wrong later.)
"Australian government respects the adoption right of homosexuals, but children must have been born of heterosexuals. Does the Australian government respect the right of children to be raised by heterosexual parents?"
Here is the reply of my sister-in-law.
"The children of homosexuals I know of were born of their mothers. (i.e. lesbian couples) Their children study in the Catholic boy school in which my son studies and they are good friends. Thanks the school for offering Study of Religions as a compulsory subject. The kids know different religions and learn of love and tolerance. I myself have taught me son love, respect and compassion. If I cannot do this to the family members of his friends, how can I set up a model for my son, to make my son trust his mother, to keep always love and compassion?"
Though I claim to be an opponent of same-sex marriage, I have less objection against lesbian couples because men and women are different in many ways. To be more exact, I oppose gay marriage more than lesbian marriage. As for the part on love and compassion, it is commendable. However, one crucial point is missing. Truth. There is no doubt about love and compassion. However, when we love in the wrong ways, tragedy arises. Love must be practised within truth. And what is the truth? This is a big question. To be tolerant means I should not impose my understanding of the truth on you. But I still have the duty to tell you the truth as I understand it.

My sister-in-law continued.
"Most of the children of same-sex couples came from IVF. Mothers gave birth to their own children while men sought surrogate mothers who are friends or voluntary surrogates. In order to protect children and surrogate mothers, NSW forbids commercial dealings, only altruistic. Exploitation of women and children through adoption and surrogacy should be condoned and penalised. However, not just same sex couples will adopt children or use commercial surrogate service. Heterosexual couples exploit too."
With the advance of technology, we are able to do a lot of things. However, should we do what we can do? This is another big question. Ethics. Human beings are more than animals because we are rational. We are able to tell the difference between good and bad. We are able to foresee the consequences of actions. Are they contradictory? Are they virtuous? Human beings uphold values. Technology extents our ability. But technology can be very selfish and unethical. For example, we enjoy comfort and convenience at the expense of our future generations. It is blatant injustice. Therefore, we have environmental ethics.
All ethical schools of thought condemn IVF. It is unethical because we treat other human persons as an object to satisfy our need. I dare anyone to tell her IVF son the truth, "Son, we made you in a tube to satisfy our needs! You are not the fruit of our love."
Surrogacy is even worse. It is a power relationship in which the rich male exploit the reproductive capacity of the poor female. Michael Sandel's "What money cannot buy" and "Outsourcing Pregnancy to India" speak loudly against such unethical dealings. The path to hell is littered with good intentions. Good intentions cannot turn what is unethical ethical.
Lastly, unethical is unethical no matter who does it, be it heterosexual or homosexual. The wrongs done by heterosexuals cannot right the wrongs done by homosexuals. Exploitation is exploitation. Exploitation done by heterosexual couples cannot justify the exploitation done by homosexual couples.

"I myself as a believer and a mother, if one day my son tells me, ' I have found someone whom we love each other. We intend to get married to spend the rest of our life. But it is a he. Will you come to our marriage to give us your blessing?' I will say yes. This is the love of a mother towards her son. Among faith, hope and love, love is the greatest.  When you learn that sexual orientation is inborn, you will understand the wishes of homosexuals are based on love. The world is changing everyday because human beings are changing. There were matriarchal societies, polygamy (nowadays, some religions and local customs still allow polygamy). Now, same sex marriage is part of human history."
The above section is full of fallacies and I hope I can talk more about it tomorrow. Sorry for my bluntness because I am an Ethics and Religious Studies teacher.