For many years the voices for same-sex marriage were in a minority in Australia, and only growing slowly. Then Ireland held a referendum in May 2015 after an ugly and hurtful public debate, and the Irish voted "yes"; Ireland being the most Catholic country in the English-speaking world.

Here, the pendulum swung and within two years the majority of Australians now support same-sex marriage.

I hear the Liberals saying that prime minister Gillard and opposition leader Shorten did not support change, and are hypocrites, but this was before the Irish vote and the consequent rise in support in Australia.

Our prime minister-in-exile, Tony Abbott was our leader then but, as we all are aware, progress is not in his DNA.

As for Prime Minister Turnbull, his lack of leadership has been pitiful.

It is nonsense to talk of a mandate when you just scrape into power. A postal plebiscite will be ugly and divisive, will have logistical problems, and is not binding on the Parliament.

I wish the Labor Party were more savvy and would refute the constant calls of hypocrisy and blaming from the Liberals without reference to the context of events when Labor was in power.

As for the media, the lack of knowledge and depth in their reporting of politics is creating an ignorant public.

Lucille Rogers, Kingston

Michael Kellahan ("Why marriage should be between a man and a woman", canberratimes.com.au) writes: "... all sides should be able to make their case in a way that lets us disagree, without being disagreeable."

Fine, Mr Kellahan, can you please let me know when I get the opportunity to vote on whether heterosexual marriages are legitimate or not, and if not, why not? I'll explain why not. Because it is not for me, nor anyone else, to judge whether a relationship between consenting adults should be defined as a marriage.

The only people who should concern themselves with this are a couple wanting to marry, their celebrant and a couple of witnesses (if there are no dependants).

Marriage has nothing to do with democracy, it's a private matter – like faith should be.

Travis Gilbert, Oaks Estate

Quite apart from the many procedural problems with a postal vote on same-sex marriage that contributors to The Canberra Times have already identified, it also needs to be observed that a postal vote may not even measure the views of Australians on the actual issue being put to them.

This may happen simply because many may see this process as an opportunity to make it a protest vote, such as was the case with Brexit.

Given that both Malcolm and Bill support a "yes" vote, and given that many voters are less than impressed by either of them, then may not many voters (particularly those that don't feel that strongly about or invested in this issue) simply vote "no" as a protest.

Moreover, many may simply vote "no" because they resent the fact that they are being straddled with the time and expense of deciding this issue because of the failure of the mainstream political parties to deal with it. For these reasons alone, I believe there is a real danger that the outcome of the postal vote is unlikely to give a true measure of the real views of Australians on the issue of same-sex marriage.

Philip White, Crace

As the Australian Christian Lobby and its acolytes preach the bigotry of intolerance towards marriage equality, they might recall that it was similarly bigoted religious beliefs that were used in the USA to defend laws against interracial marriage. As some who choose a "Christian lifestyle" – for religion is a matter of choice – to suggest that same-sex attraction is also a lifestyle, they might reflect that Leviticus is not a valid modern life manual and that innate sexuality is now known to be as much a matter of choice as skin, hair or eye colour.

As some who consider themselves conservative believe they are defending the social institution of marriage, they might reflect on their undermining of the more important and stabilising social institution – the modern family – while at the same time also undermining the established role of representative democracy with this ill-thought-out experiment in direct democracy. But those who would boycott a plebiscite, if one eventuates, might reflect that they are playing into the hands of the bigots, credulist Christians, and misguided conservatives who will use any negative outcome as their validation while being prepared to deny the same status to a positive outcome.

Mike Hutchinson, Reid

May I suggest the following question be used for the marriage equality survey.

Knowing full well that: (a) if a majority of voters vote yes to this question it in no way compels or binds the government to legislate marriage equality or even for its members to vote in favour of it unless they wish to; and that (b) if the majority of voters vote no then exactly the same will apply; do you then support the costs of this postal survey beingpaid for from the salaries of all Coalition MPs?

Phil Crawford, Hackett

Come on, Zed Seselja ("Same-sex marriage could see Christians persecuted", canberratimes.com.au, August 10) were you persecuted before 2004 when John Howard managed to change the Marriage Act to specifically state that marriage should be between a man and woman? I don't think so. Why would anyone persecute Christians for what they have, that is. a marriage, when they are fighting for the same thing? As you state, somewhere between 60 and 70 per cent of the voting public believe that marriage equality should be legislated.

All members of Parliament are there to represent the views of the people, so why not simply have the vote in Parliament and save $122 million, which should easily be passed by at least 60 per cent of members if not as much as 70 per cent. You could still vote no (whether in fact that represents the opinion of those in your electorate or not) and your conscience would be satisfied and you wouldn't be persecuted.

Mila Yates, Valentine, NSW

US President Donald Trump's threat to unleash "fire and fury like the world has never seen" against the impoverished and oppressed North Korea has sent shockwaves of dread and anxiety around the world.

The very week that survivors in Hiroshima and Nagasaki were marking the 72nd anniversary of the US atomic bombings that killed nearly a quarter of a million Japanese men, women and children, the American President interrupted his golf holiday to threaten a nuclear war in Asia with incalculable consequences for all of humanity. Yes, this is the beginning of the end of the US reign of what is now, terror.

Rhys Stanley, Hall, NSW

Why would Kim Jong-un be the slightest bit worried about bellicose threats of "fire & fury" from Donald Trump, launched from the safety of a bunker of a local golf course, when the keeper of the fearsome "death stare" and Minister for Armani, Julie Bishop, is in his face ("Politics live: Parliament deals with fallout from marriage postal plebiscite and North Korea threat", canberratimes.com.au, August 10)?

Of course, while Australia has worked assiduously to construct its international reputation as Washington's loyal and ferocious "lap dog", no-one expected that we would wind-up as a yapping Miniature Pinscher.

John Richardson, Wallagoot, NSW

Marx Brothers fans would be able see the similarity between Groucho Marx "the big bully and the little bully " skit in one of their movies " and the hairy chested posturing of Trump and his North Korean opposite. However unlike the Marx Bothers skit these "grown" ups posturing is one of them could go one step further than posturing by pressing the button setting loose a nuclear exchange. Both of these "men" are acting more like children than leaders of countries. Grow up, boys, and put away your big-boys toys before one of you sets one them off.

D.J. Fraser, Currumbin, Qld

If I am deluded (Peter Stanley, Letters, August 9) about the achievements of Monash on August 8, 1918, then I am in good company. At the time, Ludendorff, King George V, Liddell Hart and Lloyd George all thought he'd had a good day. His troops held him in high regard and, years later, hundreds of thousands of people turned out for his funeral. He is still held in the highest esteem by senior military men (a number of whom support my initiative) and by many ordinary citizens. I have been surprised how many ordinary peaceable Canberra folk not only know about Monash but have gone out of their way to tell me how heartily they support my proposal.

Is Monash over-commemorated? Stanley says he has a university named after him (in Melbourne), a suburb (in Canberra, where he is remembered as an engineer, among streets there named for engineers), and the odd street. Hardly over-commemoration. His troops, the ANZACs, are commemorated in Anzac Parade. What is missing there is their commander at its head. Instead we have Limestone and Fairbairn Avenues, names that do not do justice to this sacred precinct.

Dr Wareham's letter (August 9) reminds us of the grim folly of war. War memorials and museums also remind us of that folly, they do not celebrate war. With the two world wars a fading memory, education of our young becomes ever more vital. Monash would have supported these efforts, as will the new commemoration centre at Villers-Bretonneaux, named after him. Thousands of young Australians now visit the Western Front battlefields. Monash wrote 'I hate the business of war — the horror of it, the waste, the destruction, the inefficiency. My only consolation is the sense of doing my duty to my country'. Surely a man we should commemorate.

Trevor Lipscombe, Campbell

I strongly support the idea of a Monash Square as suggested by Trevor Lipscombe.

Adequate recognition of General Sir John Monash's life and legacy as Australia's greatest general, some say our greatest citizen, has been sadly lacking in our nation's capital.

The proposed Monash Square will improve awareness of the great man and it is appropriate it be located near the Australian War Museum. Sir John's contribution to nation building extended over many endeavours such as engineering, the law, education and community affairs but it is his achievements in WWI that most affected world history.

His genius as a leader of men, creative thinker with a unique ability to see solutions to the most complex challenges, combined with a respect of all men is an example to all Australians. It is a travesty that for many he is a forgotten man. I suggest that 2018, the centenary of the outstanding achievements of the Australian Army Corps under the command of General Monash, is an appropriate time to revisit honouring him.

The AWM has commissioned a bronze statue of Monash for completion in 2018. If not already decided on, I suggest Monash Square would be an ideal location.

Michael Headberry, Director - Saluting Monash Council (Victoria)

Fruit growers don't pick produce before it's ripe to "maximise sales and profits", Cora Gilbert (Letters, August 7), they pick it when our duopoly supermarkets tell them to, to maximise their sales and profits. Ripe fruit cannot be transported or stored easily and cheaply, and prematurely picked fruit is the lessor of two evils. A lot of produce used to be grown close to markets, but that land has been put to greater use, more people. Grow your own, or pay extra.

Christopher Smith, Braddon

I have no problem with acknowledging that prior to 1788 this continent was inhabited, but before I am asked to vote on whether the descendants of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander lineage should occupy a privileged role in Parliamentary procedures will someone please define how such lineage or recognition will be defined.

Will there be DNA testing to show a minimum level of "originality" to qualify for this special status? This will be of critical importance as it seems that being a member of any self-defined disadvantaged group inevitably opens up claims for financial compensation from the rest of us.

Roger Dace, Reid

DEBATE'S QUICK FIX

The impasse over same-sex marriage would be fixed in a flash if the Liberal members' proposed Bill was moved by Labor in the Reps and those Liberal members voted with their hearts, rather than with an eye to misplaced Party solidarity and pre-selection. Would save a lot of time, money and destructive divisiveness.

David Weeden, Evatt

I think it would be a be a lot less divisive if the Government held a plebiscite on some sex marriage.

D. Macgill, Griffith

I'll spell it out as simply as I can, Bob Salmand. Marriage has a range of legal protections regarding the rights of, for example, a surviving spouse in the event of the other's death. These protections do not exist elsewhere.

I don't like the government's position on some other matters. Can I propose a postal plebiscite on those as well so I can have a say?

David Brown, Canberra City

BARNABY BADGED

I just looked up Barnaby Joyce's Wikipedia entry after a suspicious sighting in a photo ("APVMA Armidale move doesn't add up", August 9, page 17). It makes no mention of military or overseas service (normally obligatory for a politician to brag about), but he's wearing a returned serviceman's badge. Why?

Bob Gardiner, Isabella Plains

DOG GONE

Leo Dobes' article "APVMA Armidale move doesn't add up" addresses the needs of agency employees who own a dog with a natural wanderlust, suggesting that Gulargambone would be an equally attractive option to Armidale. Surely dogs with wanderlust would prefer Come By Chance?

Peter Baskett, Murrumbateman, NSW

Email: letters.editor@canberratimes.com.au. Send from the message field, not as an attached file. Fax: 6280 2282. Mail: Letters to the Editor, The Canberra Times, PO Box 7155, Canberra Mail Centre, ACT 2610.

Keep your letter to 250 words or less. References to Canberra Times reports should include date and page number. Letters may be edited. Provide phone number and full home address (suburb only published).