Same-sex marriage in Australia

This article is about the legal recognition of same-sex unions in Australia. For details on the ongoing survey on same-sex marriage in Australia, see Australian Marriage Law Postal Survey.

Same-sex unions are treated as de facto unions under Australian federal law, though each Australian state and territory is entitled to create their own laws with respect to same-sex relationship registers and same-sex partnership schemes. Civil unions and domestic partnerships are available to same-sex couples in most states and territories. Same-sex couples were prevented from marrying by Section 46(1) of the Marriage Act 1961, and also by 2004 amendments to the federal by the Howard Government that copied the same wording into the Interpretations Section. Additionally, same-sex couples who get married in countries where same-sex marriage is legal cannot divorce within Australia when they come back due to the same-sex marriage ban.

As of September 2017, 22 same-sex marriage related bills have been introduced in the Parliament of Australia, none of which have passed into law. In December 2013, the Australian Capital Territory (ACT) passed legislation which briefly legalised same-sex marriage within the territory, prompting the federal government to launch a constitutional challenge in the High Court. The High Court struck down the ACT legislation on the basis that the law was inconsistent with federal legislation, which defines marriage as between a man and a woman. The current Coalition Government proposed to hold a plebiscite on same-sex marriage in 2017, though this was rejected twice by the Australian Senate, in November 2016 and August 2017. A nationwide voluntary survey by postal mail on same-sex marriage is being held between 12 September and 7 November 2017.

The opposition Labor Party supports same-sex marriage in its national platform, though allows its parliamentary members a conscience vote on same-sex marriage legislation until 2019.

De facto unions

De facto unions, defined in the federal Family Law Act 1975, are available to both same-sex and opposite-sex couples. De facto relationships provide couples who are living together on a genuine domestic basis with many of the same rights and benefits as married couples. Two people can become a de facto couple by entering into a registered relationship (i.e.: civil union or domestic partnership) or by being assessed as such by the Family Court or Federal Circuit Court. Couples who are living together are generally recognised as a de facto union and thus able to claim many of the rights and benefits of a married couple, even if they have not registered or officially documented their relationship.

Rudd Government 2008/09 reforms

Following the Australian Human Rights Commission's 2007 report Same-Sex: Same Entitlements and an audit of Commonwealth (i.e.: federal) legislation, in 2009 the Rudd Government introduced several reforms designed to equalise treatment for same-sex couples and same-sex couple families. The reforms amended 85 Commonwealth laws to eliminate discrimination against same-sex couples and their children in a wide range of areas. The reforms came in the form of two pieces of legislation, the Same-Sex Relationships (Equal Treatment in Commonwealth Laws—General Law Reform) Act 2008 and the Same-Sex Relationships (Equal Treatment in Commonwealth Laws—Superannuation) Act 2008. These laws, which passed the Parliament in November 2008, amended 70 other existing Commonwealth acts to equalise treatment for same-sex couples and any children that such couples may be raising. As a result of these reforms same-sex couples are treated equally with mixed gender couples under federal law.

For instance, with relation to social security and general family law, same-sex couples were previously not recognised as a couple for social security or family assistance purposes. A person who had a same-sex de facto partner was treated as a single person. The reforms ensured that same-sex couples were (for the first time under Australian law) recognised as a couple akin to opposite-sex partners. Consequently, a same-sex couple receives the same rate of social security and family assistance payments as an opposite-sex couple. Such reforms, however, do not completely equalise treatment for same-sex couples; for instance, they do not have the same rights and entitlements as married heterosexual couples with respect to workers' compensation death benefits, pensions for the partners of Defence Force veterans and access to carer's leave. Despite large equality of rights, Australia cannot not have a national registered partnership, civil union or same-sex relationship scheme as a result of Constitutional limitations. Under the Australian Constitution the Federal Government only has certain, enumerated, powers, which under Section 51(xxi) merely relate to 'marriage'. States would have to refer their residual powers to the Commonwealth to allow a national registered partnership, civil union or same-sex relationship scheme.

Legislative history prior to de facto unions

In 2004, amendments to the Superannuation Industry (Supervision) Act to allow tax free payment of superannuation benefits to be made to the surviving partner on an interdependent relationships, included same-sex couples, or a relationship where one person was financially dependent on another person. Prior to 2008, same-sex couples were only recognised by the Federal Government in very limited circumstances. For example, since the 1990s, same-sex foreign partners of Australian citizens have been able to receive residency permits in Australia known as "interdependency visas". Following a national inquiry into financial and work-related discrimination against same-sex relationships, on 21 June 2007, the Human Rights and Equal Opportunity Commission (HREOC) released its Same-Sex: Same Entitlements report. The Commission identified 58 Commonwealth law statutes and provisions that explicitly discriminate against same-gender couples by using the term 'member of the opposite sex'.

The previous conservative Howard Government banned its departments from making submissions to the HREOC inquiry regarding financial discrimination experienced by same-sex couples.

The report found that 100 statutes and provisions under federal law discriminated against same-sex couples by using the term "member of the opposite sex", from aged care, superannuation, childcare, Medicare (including the Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme) through to pensions. "All the basics that opposite-gender couples are legally entitled to and take for granted" were things same-sex couples were effectively barred from utilising under the former system.

Differences between de facto relationships and marriages

Since 1 March 2009, some legal differences remain with respect to treatment of couples in a de facto relationship and heterosexual couples in a marriage. Differences exist between the rights of a de facto couple and a married couple in relation to family law matters, including property settlements and entitlements to spousal maintenance. A de facto relationship must have ended for the court to make an order for property settlement or spousal maintenance, though this requirement does not exist for married couples. For a de facto partner to seek an order for property settlement, the Court must be satisfied of at least one of the following:

• The period of the de facto relationship was for at least two years; or
• There is a child in the de facto relationship; or
• The relationship is or was registered under a prescribed law of a State or Territory; or
• That failure to make an order would result in serious injustice due to the significant contributions made by one party.

By way of comparison, for a married couple, it is enough merely to have been married to attract the jurisdiction of the Court for property and spousal maintenance.

Furthermore, it is possible that individuals in a de facto relationship can be treated substantively different to a person in a marriage. In the event of an unexpected end to a de facto relationship (such as death of a partner), the surviving partner must often prove the existence of a relationship in order to be registered as the next of kin on a death certificate and receive government bereavement payments and access to a partner's superannuation. These requirements vary on a state by state basis. Given that same-sex couples do not have the option to marry, as heterosexual couples do, these discrepancies can have a particularly discriminatory impact on same-sex couples. The rights of a de facto partner may be poorly understood by government departments, resulting in occasions where said couples have not had their rights upheld.

In April 2014, a federal court judge ruled that a heterosexual couple who had a child and lived together for 13 years were not in a de facto relationship and thus the court had no jurisdiction to divide up their property under family law following a request for separation. In his ruling, the judge stated "de facto relationship(s) may be described as ‘marriage like’ but it is not a marriage and has significant differences socially, financially and emotionally."

State and territory recognition schemes

Same-sex couples have access to different relationship recognition schemes in Australia's eight states and territories. Under federal law, these relationships are treated as de facto unions. Unless the states and territories legislated otherwise, these schemes would remain in place as an option for same-sex couples in the event Australia passed a federal same-sex marriage law.

Civil unions

See also: Same-sex marriage in the Australian Capital Territory

The Australian Capital Territory provides same-sex couples with the right to access a civil union. Under the federal laws, these unions are treated as de facto unions. In August 2012, the ACT's Civil Union Bill passed after legal advice demonstrated that the federal government had removed its ability to legislate for territorial and state same-sex marriage after it defined marriage as only between man and woman in the Marriage Amendment Act 2004. The Civil Union Act 2012 grants many of the same rights to same-sex couples as people married under the Marriage Act. The act was not challenged by the Gillard Federal Government. The act was to be repealed and civil unions were to be no longer accessible to same-sex couples upon commencement of the Marriage Equality (Same Sex) Act 2013, which (if not struck down by the High Court) would have permanently legalised same-sex marriage in the territory. Due to the High Court's ruling striking down the ACT's same-sex marriage law as invalid, the repeal of the Civil Unions Act 2012 is of no effect and civil unions continue to take place in the ACT.

Civil partnerships

See also: LGBT rights in Queensland § Recognition of same-sex relationships

Civil partnerships, commonly referred to as civil unions, have been legal in Queensland since April 2016. In December 2002, the states' Discrimination Law Amendment Act 2002 created a new and non-discriminatory definition of "de facto partner", affecting 42 pieces of legislation. This gave same-sex couples the same rights as de facto couples in most instances. Queensland law since November 2016 includes access to adoption for same-sex couples.

Brisbane protest rally, 2009

On 25 October 2011, Queensland Deputy Premier, Andrew Fraser, introduced the Civil Partnerships Bill 2011 into the Queensland Legislative Assembly. The bill passed the Legislative Assembly on 30 November by a vote of 47 to 40, with those against including four votes from the Australian Labor Party. The Civil Partnerships Act 2011 allowed for same-sex couples who are Queensland residents to enter into a civil partnership. Shortly after the change of government in the 2012 state elections, the centre-right LNP government passed the Civil Partnerships and Other Legislation Amendment Bill 2012. The new law changed the name from "civil partnership" to "registered relationship" and prohibited the state from offering ceremonies for those who do register their relationship in this manner. Following the 2015 state election, which saw Labor form minority government, the Parliament passed (in December 2015) the Relationships (Civil Partnerships) and Other Acts Amendment Bill 2015, which restored state-sanctioned ceremonies for same-sex and opposite-sex couples and once more changed regulations referring to "registered relationships" with "civil partnerships". The law came into effect following a number of administrative matters occurring, with civil partnerships resuming in the state on 2 April 2016.

Domestic partnerships

See also: LGBT rights in New South Wales § Recognition of same-sex relationships, LGBT rights in Victoria § Recognition of same-sex relationships, LGBT rights in South Australia § Recognition of same-sex relationships, and LGBT rights in Tasmania § Recognition of same-sex relationships

Same-sex couples have access to domestic partnership registries (otherwise known as registered relationships) in Queensland, Australian Capital Territory, New South Wales, Tasmania, Victoria and South Australia.

New South Wales, Australia's most populous state, has recognised domestic partnerships since July 2010. The Relationships Register Act 2010 was introduced to the NSW Legislative Assembly on 23 April 2010, to provide conclusive proof of the existence of the relationship, thereby gaining all of the rights afforded to de facto couples under state and federal law. The bill was approved by the NSW Legislative Assembly on a 62–9 vote on 11 May 2010, and then by the NSW Legislative Council (upper house) on a 32–5 vote on 12 May. It was signed into law by Governor Marie Bashir and entered into force on 1 July 2010. Earlier, in June 2008, the Legislative Assembly passed the Miscellaneous Acts Amendment (Same Sex Relationships) Bill 2008, which recognises co-mothers as legal parents of children born through donor insemination, provides birth certificates allowing two mothers to be recognised, creates amendments to 57 pieces of state legislation to ensure de facto couples, including same-sex couples, are treated equally with married couples, and creates amendments to the New South Wales Anti-Discrimination Act to ensure same-sex couples are protected from discrimination on the basis of their "marital or domestic status" in employment, accommodation and access to other goods and services. In November 2013, a bill was introduced into the NSW Upper House to legalise same-sex marriage. The bill was defeated. The external territory of Norfolk Island has, since 1 July 2016, been incorporated into New South Wales legislation.

Victoria has recognised domestic partnerships since December 2008, when the state's Domestic Partnerships Register came into effect. This allowed same-sex couples to register their relationships with the state Registry of Births, Deaths and Marriages and provide conclusive proof of a de facto relationship, allowing them to receive all the benefits and rights of such a couple under state and federal law. In 2016, the Victorian Parliament passed reforms to the state's domestic partnerships legislation, allowing for the recognition of overseas same-sex marriages on official documents and also allowing couples the option of having an official ceremony when registering for a domestic partnership. The earliest legislative reform in the state designed to provide equal treatment of same-sex couples came in August 2001, in the form of the Statute Law Amendment (Relationships) Act 2001 and the Statute Law Further Amendment (Relationships) Act 2001. The acts amended 60 laws in Victoria to give same-sex couples, called "domestic partners", many rights equal to those enjoyed by de facto couples, including hospital access, medical decision making, superannuation, inheritance rights, property tax, landlord/tenancy rights, mental health treatment and victims of crime procedures.

All levels of Australian governments under nearly all Australian statutes recognise same-sex couples as de facto couples since 2009. From 1 July 2009, Centrelink recognises same-sex couples equally regarding social security – under common-law marriage, de facto relationship or unregistered cohabitation.

Registered partnership recognition in state governments

States	Official relationship status	Year of enactment
ACT	Civil union	2012
New South Wales	Registered relationship	2010
Queensland	Civil partnership	2012
Tasmania	Significant relationship	2004
Victoria	Domestic relationship	2008
South Australia	Registered relationship	2017

Registered partnership recognition in 7 local government areas within Australia:

• City of Sydney, New South Wales - Registered partnerships since 2004
• City of Melbourne, Victoria – Registered partnerships since 2007
• City of Yarra, Victoria – Registered partnerships since 2007
• Municipality of Woollahra, New South Wales - Registered partnerships since 2008
• City of Blue Mountains, New South Wales - Registered partnerships since 2010
• City of Vincent, Western Australia - Registered partnerships since 2012
• Town of Port Hedland, Western Australia - Registered partnerships since 2015

In South Australia, the Statutes Amendment (Domestic Partners) Act 2006 (Number 43), which took effect 1 June 2007, amended 97 acts, dispensing with the term "de facto" and categorising couples as "domestic partners". This meant same-sex couples and any two people who live together are covered by the same laws. In December 2016, the South Australian Parliament passed a law which creates a relationship register for same-sex couples and recognises the relationships of same-sex couples who had married or entered into an official union in other states and nations. This law went into effect on 1 August 2017. Prior to that reform, same-sex couples could make a written agreement called a "domestic partnership agreement" about their living arrangements. This may be prepared at any time and is legal from the time it is made, but must meet other requirements, such as joint commitments, before being recognised as domestic partners.

In Tasmania, beginning 1 January 2004, the states' Relationships Act 2003 allows same-sex couples to register their union as a type of domestic partnership in two distinct categories, "significant relationships" and "caring relationships", with the state's Registry of Births, Death and Marriages. The new definition of partner or spouse, "two people in a relationship whether or not it's sexual", was embedded into 80 pieces of legislation, giving same-sex couples rights in making decisions about a partner's health, provides for guardianship when a partner is incapacitated, and gives same-sex couples equal access to a partner's public sector pensions. It also allows one member of a same-sex couple to adopt the biological child of their partner. In September 2010, the Tasmanian Parliament unanimously passed legislation to recognise same-sex marriages performed in other jurisdictions as registered partnerships under the Relationships Act 2003, making it the first Australian state or territory to do so.

In August 2012, a bill was introduced into the Tasmanian Parliament to legalise same-sex marriage. The bill was defeated. In October 2013, a bill was re-introduced into the Tasmanian Upper House to legalise same-sex marriage. The bill was defeated.

No relationship registration scheme

See also: LGBT rights in Western Australia § Recognition of same-sex relationships, and LGBT rights in the Northern Territory § Recognition of same-sex relationships

Same-sex de facto couples in all states and territories have much the same rights as opposite-sex de facto couples. However, the inability of same-sex couples to have conclusive evidence of their relationships in Western Australia and the Northern Territory can make it difficult for them to access rights accorded to them under the law. The following list discusses states and territories without registered partnerships for same-sex couples: However, section 118 of The Australian Constitution (The Full Faith and Credit Section) would, in fact, mean that persons registered under the laws of states and territories with civil partnership or civil union laws would be able to enforce their rights in jurisdictions without specific enactments.

In the Northern Territory, in March 2004, the territory Government enacted the Law Reform (Gender, Sexuality and De Facto Relationships) Act 2003 to remove legislative discrimination against same-sex couples in most areas of territory law (except the Adoption Act) and recognise same-sex unions as de facto unions. The act removed distinctions based on a person's gender, sexuality or de facto relationship in approximately 50 acts and regulations. As in NSW and the ACT, reform has also included enabling the lesbian partner of a woman to be recognised as the parent of her partner's child across state law.

In Western Australia, the Acts Amendment (Lesbian and Gay Law Reform) Act 2002 removed all remaining legislative discrimination toward sexual orientation by adding the new definition of "de facto partner" into 62 acts, provisions and statutes and created new family law designed to recognise same-sex unions as de facto unions.

Same-sex marriage

Federal law

The federal Marriage Act Sect 46(1) always required celebrants to provide a definition of marriage as part of the ceremony. The wording required is "Marriage, according to law in Australia, is the union of a man and a woman to the exclusion of all others, voluntarily entered into for life", or "words to that effect". The Act was amended in 2004 to include the same words in the Interpretation section [Section 5 (1)], and to stipulate that any foreign marriages of same-sex couples "must not be recognised as a marriage in Australia".

Sect 46(1) comprised the only prohibition on same-sex marriage until 2004, when public debate increased following the legalisation of same-sex marriage in Massachusetts and Canada. In an attempt to prevent a similar outcome in Australia, the Howard Government introduced the Marriage Amendment Act in the Parliament on 27 May 2004. The amendment copied the wording from Sect 46(1) into the Interpretations section and declared that foreign same-sex marriages would not be recognised as such in Australia. Additional reforms to the Family Law Act prevented same-sex couples from being eligible adoptive parents for children in inter-country adoption arrangements, though these restrictions were eventually relaxed in 2014. The amendment passed the Parliament on 13 August 2004 and went into effect on the day it received royal assent, on 16 August 2004.

There have subsequently been several attempts to legalise same-sex marriage nationwide via approval from both houses of the Federal Parliament. A number of bills legalising same-sex marriage were introduced between 2004 and 2016, but each of these has failed.

The current Prime Minister, Malcolm Turnbull, supports same-sex marriage.

Recent history

Australian Marriage Law Postal Survey form

Main article: History of same-sex marriage in Australia

See also: Australian Marriage Law Postal Survey

In September 2012, the House of Representatives rejected a bill introduced by Labor MP Stephen Jones aimed at legalising same-sex marriage by 98 votes to 42. The Senate subsequently voted against a bill to legalise same-sex marriage by 41 votes to 26. In both instances the Gillard Labor Government allowed MPs a conscience vote whilst the opposition Liberal/National Coalition voted as a bloc against the legislation.

The issue caused significant tension within centre-right Abbott Government, which resolved in August 2015 to move for a national vote on same-sex marriage to be held sometime after the 2016 federal election, either in the form of a plebiscite or constitutional referendum. This policy was maintained by the Turnbull Government after Malcolm Turnbull (a supporter of same-sex marriage) replaced Abbott as Prime Minister following a leadership challenge.

Turnbull introduced the Plebiscite (Same-Sex Marriage) Bill 2016 into the House of Representatives in September 2016. The plebiscite was to have been held on 11 February 2017. The Labor Opposition, minor party the Greens and several Senate crossbenchers later announced they would oppose the legislation. Following several weeks of debate, the bill passed the House by 76 votes to 67 on 20 October 2016. The bill moved to the Senate, though was defeated in the Senate by 33 votes to 29 on 7 November 2016.

Following the result in the Senate, Turnbull that the Government had "no plans to take any other measures on this issue", however a parliamentary committee examined the issue and several Liberal Party MPs subsequently stated they intended to move for a free vote to be held on same-sex marriage legislation in the current term of Parliament. On 7 August 2017, a bill allowing same-sex marriage was released by Senator Dean Smith, a prominent same-sex marriage supporter in the Liberal Party.

A Liberal party room meeting was held later that day, which resolved to re-submit the plebiscite legislation to the Senate once more that same week. In the event the Senate again rejects the legislation, the government has committed to conducting a voluntary postal survey via Australia Post postal mail, which it says would not require legislative approval and has the power to organise under the provisions of existing Commonwealth legislation governing the Australian Bureau of Statistics. Ballots would be mailed out to Australian voters from 12 September and would be required to be mailed back by 7 November, with a result expected no later than 15 November 2017. If the postal vote returned a majority 'yes' verdict, the government has announced it would facilitate a private member's bill in the final sitting fortnight of the parliamentary year which would legalise same-sex marriage. Several marriage equality groups have said they intend to challenge the proposal in the High Court and some legal experts have said it is likely the court would invalidate any postal vote if it is not legislated by the Parliament.

On 9 August 2017, the Senate rejected a government-initiated motion to debate the Plebiscite (Same-Sex Marriage) Bill 2016, the vote on the motion tied at 31-31, clearing the way for the voluntary postal survey. That same day, shortly after the failed motion in the Senate, same-sex marriage advocates Shelley Argent (national spokeswoman of Parents and Friends of Lesbians and Gays) and Felicity Marlowe (head of Rainbow Families), along with independent MP Andrew Wilkie, announced they would challenge the legality of the postal survey in the High Court. They were joined by advocates at the Human Rights Law Centre, who announced a challenge the following day. On 7 September 2017, the High Court found against both sets of challengers and ruled in favour of the Government, allowing the survey to proceed as scheduled.

Federal parliamentarians who publicly support same-sex marriage

Both the current Prime Minister and Opposition Leader (Malcolm Turnbull and Bill Shorten respectively), as well as their deputy party leaders (Julie Bishop and Tanya Plibersek) support same-sex marriage.

House of Representatives

The position on same-sex marriage of the 150 members of the House of Representatives, by electoral division.

  Representative supports same-sex marriage

  Representative opposes same-sex marriage

  Representative's position unknown

MPs who have publicly declared their support of same-sex marriage in the Australian House of Representatives:

93 / 150 (62%)

Member	Party	Electorate	State/Territory
Anthony Albanese	Labor	Grayndler	NSW
John Alexander*	Liberal	Bennelong	NSW
Anne Aly	Labor	Cowan	WA
Adam Bandt	Greens	Melbourne	VIC
Julia Banks	Liberal	Chisholm	VIC
Sharon Bird	Labor	Cunningham	NSW
Julie Bishop*	Liberal	Curtin	WA
Chris Bowen*	Labor	McMahon	NSW
Gai Brodtmann	Labor	Canberra	ACT
Tony Burke*	Labor	Watson	NSW
Linda Burney	Labor	Barton	NSW
Mark Butler	Labor	Port Adelaide	SA
Terri Butler	Labor	Griffith	QLD
Jim Chalmers	Labor	Rankin	QLD
Nick Champion	Labor	Wakefield	SA
Darren Chester*	National	Gippsland	VIC
Lisa Chesters	Labor	Bendigo	VIC
Jason Clare	Labor	Blaxland	NSW
Sharon Claydon	Labor	Newcastle	NSW
David Coleman	Liberal	Banks	NSW
Julie Collins	Labor	Franklin	TAS
Pat Conroy	Labor	Shortland	NSW
Chris Crewther	Liberal	Dunkley	VIC
Michael Danby*	Labor	Melbourne Ports	VIC
Milton Dick	Labor	Oxley	QLD
Mark Dreyfus	Labor	Isaacs	VIC
Damian Drum	National	Murray	VIC
Justine Elliot	Labor	Richmond	NSW
Kate Ellis	Labor	Adelaide	SA
Warren Entsch*	Liberal National	Leichardt	QLD
Trevor Evans	Liberal National	Brisbane	QLD
Jason Falinski	Liberal	Mackellar	NSW
David Feeney	Labor	Batman	VIC
Joel Fitzgibbon*	Labor	Hunter	NSW
Paul Fletcher*	Liberal	Bradfield	NSW
Mike Freelander	Labor	Macarthur	NSW
Josh Frydenberg*	Liberal	Kooyong	VIC
Steve Georganas	Labor	Hindmarsh	SA
Andrew Giles	Labor	Scullin	VIC
Luke Gosling	Labor	Solomon	NT
Tim Hammond	Labor	Perth	WA
Ross Hart	Labor	Bass	TAS
Sarah Henderson	Liberal	Corangamite	VIC
Julian Hill	Labor	Bruce	VIC
Kevin Hogan	National	Page	NSW
Emma Husar	Labor	Lindsay	NSW
Greg Hunt*	Liberal	Flinders	VIC
Ed Husic*	Labor	Chifley	NSW
Stephen Jones	Labor	Whitlam	NSW
Justine Keay	Labor	Braddon	TAS
Mike Kelly	Labor	Eden-Monaro	NSW
Matt Keogh	Labor	Burt	WA
Peter Khalil	Labor	Wills	VIC
Catherine King	Labor	Ballarat	VIC
Madeleine King	Labor	Brand	WA
Susan Lamb	Labor	Longman	QLD
Andrew Leigh*	Labor	Fenner	ACT
Jenny Macklin	Labor	Jagajaga	VIC
Richard Marles	Labor	Corio	VIC
Emma McBride	Labor	Dobell	NSW
Cathy McGowan	Independent	Indi	VIC
Brian Mitchell	Labor	Lyons	TAS
Rob Mitchell	Labor	McEwen	VIC
Shayne Neumann*	Labor	Blair	QLD
Brendan O'Connor	Labor	Gorton	VIC
Kelly O'Dwyer*	Liberal	Higgins	VIC
Clare O'Neil	Labor	Hotham	VIC
Cathy O'Toole	Labor	Herbert	QLD
Julie Owens*	Labor	Parramatta	NSW
Graham Perrett	Labor	Moreton	QLD
Tanya Plibersek	Labor	Sydney	NSW
Christian Porter	Liberal	Pearce	WA
Melissa Price	Liberal	Durack	WA
Christopher Pyne	Liberal	Sturt	SA
Amanda Rishworth	Labor	Kingston	SA
Michelle Rowland*	Labor	Greenway	NSW
Joanne Ryan	Labor	Lalor	VIC
Rebekha Sharkie	Nick Xenophon Team	Mayo	SA
Bill Shorten	Labor	Maribyrnong	VIC
Warren Snowdon	Labor	Lingiari	NT
Anne Stanley	Labor	Werriwa	NSW
Wayne Swan*	Labor	Lilley	QLD
Meryl Swanson	Labor	Paterson	NSW
Susan Templeman	Labor	Macquarie	NSW
Matt Thistlethwaite	Labor	Kingsford Smith	NSW
Malcolm Turnbull*	Liberal	Wentworth	NSW
Andrew Wallace	Liberal National	Fisher	QLD
Tim Watts	Labor	Gellibrand	VIC
Andrew Wilkie	Independent	Denison	TAS
Josh Wilson	Labor	Fremantle	WA
Tim Wilson	Liberal	Goldstein	VIC
Jason Wood	Liberal	La Trobe	VIC
Trent Zimmerman	Liberal	North Sydney	NSW

* Has voted against same-sex marriage

Senate

Senators who have publicly declared their support of same-sex marriage:

44 / 76 (58%)

Senator	Party	State/Territory
Catryna Bilyk*	Labor	TAS
Simon Birmingham*	Liberal	SA
George Brandis*	Liberal National	QLD
Carol Brown	Labor	TAS
Doug Cameron	Labor	NSW
Kim Carr	Labor	VIC
Anthony Chisholm	Labor	QLD
Sam Dastyari	Labor	NSW
Richard Di Natale	Greens	VIC
Patrick Dodson	Labor	WA
Katy Gallagher	Labor	ACT
Stirling Griff	Nick Xenophon Team	SA
Sarah Hanson-Young	Greens	SA
Derryn Hinch	Justice Party	VIC
Jane Hume	Liberal	VIC
Skye Kakoschke-Moore	Nick Xenophon Team	SA
Kimberley Kitching	Labor	VIC
David Leyonhjelm	Liberal Democratic	NSW
Sue Lines	Labor	WA
Scott Ludlam	Greens	WA
Gavin Marshall	Labor	VIC
Jenny McAllister	Labor	NSW
Malarndirri McCarthy	Labor	NT
Nick McKim	Greens	TAS
Claire Moore	Labor	QLD
James Paterson	Liberal	VIC
Marise Payne	Liberal	NSW
Louise Pratt	Labor	WA
Linda Reynolds	Liberal	WA
Lee Rhiannon	Greens	NSW
Janet Rice	Greens	VIC
Scott Ryan*	Liberal	VIC
Nigel Scullion*	Country Liberal	NT
Rachel Siewert	Greens	WA
Lisa Singh	Labor	TAS
Arthur Sinodinos	Liberal	NSW
Dean Smith*	Liberal	WA
Glenn Sterle*	Labor	WA
Anne Urquhart	Labor	TAS
Larissa Waters	Greens	QLD
Murray Watt	Labor	QLD
Peter Whish-Wilson	Greens	TAS
Penny Wong	Labor	SA
Nick Xenophon	Nick Xenophon Team	SA

* Has voted against same-sex marriage

State and territory law

Status of same-sex unions in Australia.

  Civil or Domestic Partnership

  Defined statewide as "de facto"

States and territories have long had the ability to create laws with respect to relationships, though Section 51 (xxi) of the Constitution of Australia prescribes that marriage is a legislative power of the Federal Parliament.

In December 2013, the High Court of Australia ruled, in relation to a territory-based same-sex marriage law of the Australian Capital Territory (ACT), that the federal Marriage Act, which defined marriage as the union of a man and woman, precluded states and territories from legislating for same-sex marriage. As a result, only the Federal Parliament can legislate for same-sex marriage, whilst states and territories almost certainly cannot.

Since the Commonwealth introduced the Marriage Act Cth. 1961, marriage laws in Australia have been regarded as an exclusive Commonwealth power. The precise rights of states and territories with respect to creating state-based same-sex marriage laws have been complicated since the Howard Government amendment to the Marriage Act in 2004 to define marriage as the exclusive union of one man and one woman, to the exclusion of all others. In their December 2013 ruling striking down the ACT's same-sex marriage law, the High Court effectively determined that all laws with respect to marriage were an exclusive power of the Commonwealth and that no state or territory law legalising same-sex marriage or creating any type of marriage could operate concurrently with the federal Marriage Act; "the kind of marriage provided for by the [Marriage] Act is the only kind of marriage that may be formed or recognised in Australia". As a result, the only possible method for same-sex marriage legalisation to occur in Australia is via legislation passed into law by the Federal Parliament only.

Prior to that ruling, reports released by the New South Wales Parliamentary Committee on Social Issues and the Tasmanian Law Reform Institute have found that a state parliament "has the power to legislate on the topic of marriage, including same-sex marriage. However, if New South Wales chooses to exercise that power and enact a law for same-sex marriage, the law could be subject to challenge in the High Court of Australia" and that no current arguments "present an absolute impediment to achieving state-based or Commonwealth marriage equality". With respect to territories, the ACT Government obtained legal advice that its bill seeking to legalise same-sex marriage could operate concurrently with the federal Government's statutory ban on recognising same-sex marriage. The Abbott Government's acting Solicitor-General advised the federal Attorney-General, George Brandis, that the ACT's same-sex marriage law was inconsistent with the federal Government's laws whilst other experts rated the ACT's law as 'doubtful' or impossible to pass judicial scrutiny. Those experts were proven correct, when on 12 December 2013, the High Court of Australia struck down the Australian Capital Territory's same-sex marriage law.

Aside from the Australian Capital Territory, Tasmania is the only other state or territory to have passed same-sex marriage legislation in a chamber of its Legislature. The state lower house passed same-sex marriage legislation by 13-11 votes in September 2012, though the state upper house subsequently voted against this legislation a few weeks later by a vote of 8-6. Both houses have since passed motions giving in-principle, symbolic support for same-sex marriage.

New South Wales amended its law in November 2014 to allow overseas same-sex marriages to be recognised on the state's relationship register. In December 2016, South Australia became the fifth state to provide recognition for same-sex marriages performed abroad.

As of December 2016, six Australian jurisdictions (Tasmania, the Australian Capital Territory, New South Wales, Queensland, Victoria and South Australia), comprising 90% of Australia's population, recognise same-sex marriages and civil partnerships performed overseas, providing automatic recognition of such unions in their respective state registers.

Constitutional and legal issues

Oceania

  Same-sex marriage

  Other type of partnership (or unregistered cohabitation)

  No recognition

  Same-sex sexual activity illegal

Referral of power and recognition of married and de facto relationships

There is an important difference in the source of power of the Commonwealth to legislate over married and de facto relationships. Marriage and "matrimonial causes" are supported by sections 51(xxi) and (xxii) of the Constitution. The legal status of marriage is also internationally recognised whereas the power to legislate for de facto relationships and their financial matters relies on referrals by states to the Commonwealth in accordance with Section 51(xxxvii) of the Australian Constitution, where it states the law shall extend only to states by whose Parliaments the matter is referred, or which afterward adopt the law.

Legal status consequences outside of Australia

Thus, same-sex or heterosexual, unmarried and also married couples living in the Netherlands, Germany, Belgium and France for example, have the right to choose their own legal status and respective rights and obligations easily, such as to have no community or to have community of property, as an active opt in system at time of first living together. This is in contrast to the Australian de facto and married regimes where all property is in the pool, unless a couple actively opt out with a binding financial contract drawn up by lawyers and they also have to be resident in Australia to do that.

Australian marriage legislation

Marriage Amendment Act 2004

On 27 May 2004, the then federal Attorney-General, Philip Ruddock, introduced the Marriage Amendment Bill 2004, intending to incorporate the common law definition of marriage into the Marriage Act 1961.. It reflected the definition of marriage already enshrined in the and the Family Law Act 1975 as introduced by the then Whitlam Government. In June 2004, the bill passed the House of Representatives and the Senate passed the amendment by 38 votes to 6 on 13 August 2004. The bill subsequently received royal assent, becoming the Marriage Amendment Act 2004.

The amendment specifies the following:

Marriage means the union of a man and a woman to the exclusion of all others, voluntarily entered into for life.

Certain unions are not marriages. A union solemnised in a foreign country between: (a) a man and another man; or (b) a woman and another woman; must not be recognised as a marriage in Australia.

Under section 46 of the Marriage Act, a celebrant or minister is required to say these words, or words to this effect, in every marriage ceremony.

Attorney-General Ruddock and other Liberals argued that the bill was necessary to protect the institution of marriage, by ensuring that the common law definition was put beyond legal challenge.

The Labor shadow Attorney-General Nicola Roxon on the same day the amendment was proposed said that the Labor Opposition would not oppose the amendment, arguing that it did not affect the legal situation of same-sex relationships, merely putting into statute law what was already common law. The Family First senator supported the bill. The bill was also supported by the Nationals.

Despite having support of the major parties the bill was contested by sections of the community, human rights groups and some minor political parties. The Australian Greens opposed the bill, calling it the "Marriage Discrimination Act". The Australian Democrats also opposed the bill. Democrat Senator Andrew Bartlett stated that the legislation devalues his marriage, and Greens Senator Bob Brown referred to John Howard and the legislation as "hateful". Brown was asked to retract his statements, but refused. Bob Brown also quoted as Australia having a "straight Australia policy".

Not all of Labor was in support of the bill. During the bill's second reading, Anthony Albanese, Labor MP for Grayndler said, "what has caused offence is why the government has rushed in this legislation in what is possibly the last fortnight of parliamentary sittings. This bill is a result of 30 bigoted backbenchers who want to press buttons out there in the community."

Marriage Equality (Same Sex) Act 2013

Main article: Marriage Equality (Same Sex) Act 2013

See also: Same-sex marriage in the Australian Capital Territory

On 13 September 2013, the Australian Capital Territory (ACT) government announced that it would introduce a bill to legalise same-sex marriage, following a decade-long attempt to legislate in the area. "We've been pretty clear on this issue for some time now and there's overwhelming community support for this", Chief Minister Katy Gallagher said. "We would prefer to see the federal parliament legislate for a nationally consistent scheme, but in the absence of this we will act for the people of the ACT. The Marriage Equality Bill 2013 will enable couples who are not able to marry under the Commonwealth Marriage Act 1961 to enter into marriage in the ACT. It will provide for solemnisation, eligibility, dissolution and annulment, regulatory requirements and notice of intention in relation to same-sex marriages." On 10 October 2013, federal Attorney-General George Brandis confirmed that the Commonwealth Government would challenge the proposed ACT bill, stating that the Coalition Government has significant constitutional concerns with respect to the bill. The bill was debated in the ACT Legislative Assembly on 22 October 2013, and passed by 9 votes to 8.

Under the legislation, same-sex marriages were legally permitted from 7 December 2013.

As soon as the ACT act had been passed, the Commonwealth launched a challenge to it in the High Court, which delivered judgment on 12 December 2013. As to the relation between the ACT act and federal legislation, the Court found that the ACT act was invalid and of "no effect", because it was "inconsistent", in terms of the Australian Capital Territory Self-Government Act 1988 (Cth), with the federal Marriage Act 1961 (Cth). It was inconsistent both because its definition of marriage conflicted with that in the federal act and because the federal act was exclusive, leaving no room for any other definition in legislation of a state or a territory. However, the Court went on to determine that the word "marriage" in Constitution s51(xxi) includes same-sex marriage, thus clarifying that there is no constitutional impediment to the Commonwealth legislating for same-sex marriage in the future. It can do so by amending the definition of "marriage" in the Marriage Act.

Public opinion

Main article: Public opinion of same-sex marriage in Australia

The table below shows the results of opinion polls conducted to ascertain the level of support for the introduction of same-sex marriage in Australia.

Date	Firm	Support	Oppose	Undecided
28 August - 6 September 2017	Newgate Research	58.4%	31.4%	10.2%
17-20 August 2017	Newspoll	63%	30%	7%
July 2017	Essential	63%	25%	12%
July 2017	YouGov	60%	28%	12%
February 2017	Galaxy	66%	–	–
September 2016	Newspoll	62%	32%	6%
August 2016	Essential	57%	28%	15%
March 2016	Essential	64%	26%	11%
March 2016	Roy Morgan	76%	24%	–
October 2015	Essential	59%	30%	11%
August 2015	Essential	60%	31%	10%
August 2015	Ipsos	69%	25%	6%
July 2015	ReachTEL	53.8%	32.8%	12.4%
June 2015	Ipsos	68%	25%	7%
July 2014	Newspoll	69%	26%	6%
July 2014	Crosby Textor	72%	21%	7%
August 2013	Nielson	65%	28%	7%
May 2013	Ipsos	54%	20%	26%
May 2013	Roy Morgan	65%	35%	–
August 2012	Galaxy	64%	30%	5%
July 2011	Roy Morgan	68%	30%	2%
October 2010	Galaxy	62%	33%	5%
June 2009	Galaxy	60%	36%	4%
June 2007	Galaxy	57%	37%	6%
June 2004	Newspoll	38%	44%	18%

Community debate

Religious and lobby groups

In August 2015, a group of Australian Aboriginal community elders lobbied the Federal Government to retain the definition of marriage as between a man and a woman, sparking a response from a number of Aboriginal Australians in favour of same-sex marriage.

Those advocating the retention of the existing Marriage Act have argued:

• that marriage has been defined as a heterosexual union "throughout history, transcending time, religions, cultures, and people" and that, "the modern state recognises and regulates marriage because of its importance to the good of society".
• that the institution of marriage involving a woman and a man for the purpose of having children is one of the bedrocks of Australian society and is common across cultures and has existed for generations. There are good reasons as to why it is so enduring.
• that the institution of marriage involving a woman and a man provides health benefits for society.
• that up until now there have been too many "slogans, emotional spin and almost unprecedented public bullying of opponents" and that, "we should resist being railroaded into this social change too quickly". There are, "debates within gay communities" as to, "what sort of marriages do homosexual people want?"
• that the word marriage isn’t a label that can transferred to various relationships, as it "has an intrinsic or natural meaning prior to anything we may invent or the state may legislate.

Concern has been raised by both Catholic and Anglican church leaders that if same-sex marriage is legislated, there is the probability of restrictions in religious freedom.

Peter Jensen has argued that same-sex marriage makes words like husband & wife and bride & groom genderless. Catholic archbishops in a pamphlet titled "Don’t Mess with Marriage" have stated that terms such as man & woman and father & mother become "interchangeable social constructs" if same-sex marriage is allowed. Similarly, it has been argued that the terms dad & mum and male & female (particularly as reported, a third of transgender people do not identify as male nor female) all become valueless.

A spokesman for the Catholic Church has said, "By logic, if marriage can be redefined as not exclusive to a man and woman then that redefinition can apply to any number of unions and relationships." A convenor of the ACT Greens party has said when same-sex marriage is limited to, "two consenting adults [this] discriminates against others in the gay community, including polyamorists". He accused the Australian Greens of being "hypocrites" because the logic they use to argue for marriage equality should extend to people who have multiple partners. While Sarah Hanson-Young says that the, "institution of marriage should involve only two consenting adults",

While there have been studies carried out on the children of LGBT parents, with some supporting same-sex parenting, and some not, an American sociologist has stated that it is, "too early for social scientists to make far-reaching conclusions about families headed by same-sex couples".

Some critics or marriage equality have warned that changes to the Marriage Act will have a detrimental effect on children. The Australian Marriage Forum has claimed that children have a birth-right, wherever possible, to both a mother and father, with same-sex marriage being a calculated decision by which a child is forced to miss out on a mother or a father with governments being in the marriage business, "because the union of a man and woman can produce a child and children need a mum and a dad."

In 2017, over 500 religious leaders in Australia wrote an open letter to the Australian Government to support marriage for same-sex couples, saying, "As people of faith, we understand that marriage is based on the values of love and commitment and we support civil marriage equality, not despite, but because of our faith and values."

Polling in 2017 showed that same-sex marriage is supported by 66% of Australian Catholics, 67% of people of faith in non-Christian religions, and 59% of Australian Christians in Uniting Church, Anglican and Church of England traditions.

An Australian National University election survey conducted in June 2015 showed that 41 to 45% of Catholic, Anglican, Uniting Church or Presbyterian, voters support same-sex marriage. The same survey showed that same-sex marriage was supported by 15% of Muslim voters. The federal electorate of Reid has a large Muslim population, "implacably opposed to marriage being redefined and same-sex marriage made legal." Australian Islamists are also strongly opposed. The Australian Federation of Islamic Councils does not support same-sex marriage. Of notable Australian Muslims, Ed Husic supports same-sex marriage, Waleed Aly is said to support same-sex marriage and Keysar Trad does not support same-sex marriage.

In December 2013, Australian Marriage Equality (AME) criticised the tactics of the Australian marriage equality lobby group Equal Love as "counterproductive and unrepresentative" to the movement. A committee member for Equal Love said that AME had launched an "unsubtle attack" and defended their tactics, stating "a visual display of community outrage over the issue emboldens those who want change" There have also been differences in campaigning-strategies between AME and Community Action Against Homophobia in their respective lobbying tactics for marriage equality.

Companies

A number of companies both big and many small companies have expressed views on this subject.

File:Marriage equality(1).jpg

Sign showing a small business in favour of same-sex marriage

Views of public and corporate figures

In May 2015, Radio broadcaster Alan Jones commented on the push to legalise same-sex marriage saying, "my view is that when people find love, they should be able to celebrate it. And they shouldn't be discriminated against according to the nature of that love. To deny people the recognition for a relationship which is based on love is to deny, in my opinion, one of humankind's most basic, but as I said elusive, qualities. Let the Parliament vote. It makes the laws of the land... we shouldn't be frightened about celebrating the love of one person for another." Prime Minister Abbott said "I deeply respect his views and I’m confident that he would respect mine, he would respect my sister’s, he would respect Bill Shorten’s and Tanya Plibersek’s and Warren Entsch’s, and that’s what we need – we need to see mutual respect of all the different views on this debate because as I said, decent people can differ on this subject."

Also in May 2015, a number of large companies took out a full page ad in The Australian declaring support for marriage equality, including Westpac, St.George, ANZ, the Commonwealth Bank, BT Financial, Bankwest, Telstra, Optus, Qantas, KPMG, PricewaterhouseCoopers, Foxtel and Google. With the SBS logo featuring in that full-page newspaper advertisement, a Senate Committee hearing asked why does SBS as a public broadcaster, involve themselves in this political campaign. Managing Director Michael Ebeid, defended SBS saying he did not believe, "same-sex marriage is a political issue" and that "we are an organisation that does everything we can to support equality". Politicians also noted that SBS had pulled an anti-marriage equality ad ahead of its telecast of the Sydney Gay and Lesbian Mardi Gras. The Australian Football League and National Rugby League have declared support for same-sex marriage.

In August 2015, former Prime Minister Julia Gillard, in office from 2010 to 2013, announced a personal reversal of opinion on same-sex marriage, now in favour of it. Ms Gillard also criticised the proposal for a plebiscite or referendum.

In July 2015, Senators Penny Wong and Cory Bernardi debated same-sex marriage at the National Press Club, using most of the common arguments for and against same-sex marriage. Wong referred to Obergefell v. Hodges and the Irish referendum, and argued that the children of LGBT parents in Australia would benefit from their parents being able to marry. Wong said she would not support multi-member relationships. Bernardi argued that religious liberty, freedom of expression and children's rights would be curtailed if same-sex marriage was enacted.

Former ABC Director and Chairman, Maurice Newman commented in September 2015 on the merits of a plebiscite; "people of various faiths have been taught throughout history that marriage is between a man and a woman. Now these beliefs are pushed by the media as hateful and backward, and those who hold them are bigots. Who knew? There’s a lot of unlearning to be done.... Surely from time to time, on matters of deep social significance, there is much to be said for a plebiscite. A popular mandate will provide an endorsement that parliaments can’t provide".

In July 2015, Guy Rundle Crikey's writer-at-large said, "Same-sex marriage is absurd.... If Labor has nothing more progressive to offer than same-sex marriage, there is nothing left." In October 2015, Simon Copland wrote in the LGBT magazine Star Observer: "After years of failure... I suspect we may not see marriage equality for a long time yet."

In April 2016, Telstra pulled out of actively supporting same-sex marriage, however this decision was reversed less than a week later following public outcry.

In March 2017, 20 of Australia's most prominent CEO's of high-profile companies signed an open letter to Prime Minister Turnbull calling on the Government to promptly legislate for same-sex marriage in the Federal Parliament. The letter prompted a vociferous objection from Immigration Minister Peter Dutton who said company executives should "stick to [their] knitting" and not "bully" the Government into changing policies.

In May 2017, the Australian Medical Association issued an official position statement supporting same-sex marriage and contending that the federal ban on same-sex marriage in Australia is "an omission that has significant psychosocial and psychological health consequences for LGBTIQ identifying Australians".

Local governments

In June 2016, the Australian Local Government Association (ALGA) approved a motion supporting the legalisation of same-sex marriage. The motion was put forward by Lord Mayor of Darwin Katrina Fong Lim and Meghan Hopper, a member of the Council of Moreland. It was approved by a strong majority at ALGA's National General Assembly. The motion reads the following:

That this National General Assembly call on the Federal Government to treat with dignity and respect all members of the community regardless of gender or sexuality by supporting changes to the Marriage Act to achieve marriage equality for same-sex couples.

The motion went before the ALGA's board for approval, which the board provided on 21 July 2016.

As of 14 September 2017, of the 546 local governments (also known as "councils" or "shires") in Australia, a total of 57 are known to have passed formal motions in support of the legalisation of same-sex marriage.

57 / 546 (10%)

Those local governments are:

• City of Sydney, City of Greater Geelong, City of Hobart, City of Moreland, City of Vincent, Camden Council, City of Hawkesbury, Coonamble Shire, City of Randwick, Tenterfield Shire, Inner West Council, Lachlan Shire, Bega Valley Shire, City of Blue Mountains, Surf Coast Shire, Shire of Hepburn, City of Lismore, City of Albury, City of Ballarat, City of Wodonga, City of Glenorchy, Byron Shire, City of Port Phillip, City of Glen Eira, City of Hobsons Bay, City of Darebin, Shire of Buloke, City of Greater Shepparton, City of Maribyrnong, Central Coast Council, Kingborough Council, Shire of Strathbogie, Richmond Valley Council, City of Melbourne, City of Banyule, City of Yarra, Shire of Indigo, Town of Port Hedland, City of Darwin, City of Brisbane, City of Lake Macquarie, City of Shoalhaven, City of Monash, City of Whittlesea, City of Fremantle, City of Bayswater, Bass Coast Shire, Shire of Cardinia, City of Willoughby, North Sydney Council, City of Warrnambool, Shire of Noosa, Municipality of Woollahra, Shire of Douglas, Shire of Campaspe, City of Newcastle and City of Moonee Valley

No other local governments are considering a motion to support same-sex marriage.

At least wo local governments have rejected motions to support same-sex marriage:

• City of Launceston
• Shire of Campaspe (later voted to support same-sex marriage)

Parenting

See also: LGBT adoption and parenting in Australia

Adoption

Adoption by same-sex couples is legal within all jurisdictions within Australia, with the exception of the Northern Territory. Debate regarding religious exemptions for faith-based adoption agencies occurred during Victoria's legalisation of same-sex adoption in December 2015. New South Wales and Victoria include such exemptions in their adoption laws.

Assisted reproduction

Altruistic surrogacy is legal for same-sex couples in all jurisdictions within Australia, with the exception of Western Australia, which restricts this service to opposite-sex couples. Some have suggested such restrictions create an inequality for gay couples wanting children. Commercial surrogacy is illegal nationwide in Australia for all couples, though some same-sex couples and opposite-sex couples employ the services of a surrogate in foreign countries. In Australia, the TV drama House Husbands which brings, "the idea of gay relationships, gay marriage and surrogacy, to the forefront" has used altruistic surrogacy for a gay couple as a storyline. Debate is continuing into commercial surrogacy in Australia to help gay men start a family in a safe and regulated industry. Ethical issues associated with same-sex surrogacy, including the linkage between the child and its biological parent, are being discussed and debated.

Children

Various international studies have been carried out on LGBT parenting, and organisations including the Australian Institute of Family Studies have commissioned systematic reviews to assess the methodology of individual studies, and evaluate the conclusions of each of the (child-focussed) studies. Such studies have found that "research to date considerably challenges the point of view that same-sex parented families are harmful to children. Children in such families do as well emotionally, socially and educationally as their peers from heterosexual couple families." Maya Newell produced the documentary Gayby Baby, looking at children in same-sex relationships, with the film marketed as "stirring" political debate on same-sex marriage.

Former Victorian Premier Jeff Kennett stated in 2011 "happy heterosexual marriages are the best environment for the mental health of children". Conjecture regarding his status in charity organisation beyondblue followed, though his views on same-sex parenting quickly reversed. In May 2012, Kennett announced he supported a change in the federal Marriage Act to legalise same-sex marriage. In March 2016, following a vigorous parliamentary debate on the merits of the federally funded Safe Schools program in schools, Kennett penned his most passionate defence of same-sex marriage and LGBTI rights yet, arguing "why should we deny those who love each other, regardless of their sex, the right to marry?" and "...ending discrimination against those of the same sex marrying fits into this broader campaign" of anti-discrimination and anti-bullying.

Free expression and religious liberty

Queensland general practitioner David van Gend has said on the Australian Marriage Forum website that same-sex parenting will create a stolen generation. Julia Gillard has sought legal advice for van Gend using her remarks about forced adoption in political advertising in April and again in August 2015. TV channels that ran his ads, in March 2015, during the Sydney Mardi Gras were widely criticised on social media, and the Advertising Standards Bureau received "a large number of complaints" but cannot adjudicate over political advertising.

Following another TV advertisement screened in August 2015 by van Gend's organisation, Foxtel were "bombarded" with threats of subscription cancellations from customers, and multiple radio and TV networks declined ads from van Gend, with NOVA Entertainment saying the ads don't fit with their youthful brand. The Australian Communications and Media Authority subsequently found that the advertisement was not in breach of the television codes of practice.

An August 2015 episode of Media Watch argued that "both sides of the debate have an equal right to be heard". In relation to attempts to suppress the second TV advertisement mentioned above, host Paul Barry said, "Whatever happened to freedom of speech? And was the ad really so offensive?... All pretty mild, surely?... The ad in fact makes hardly any claims at all and in my opinion to say it’s inviting hate is ridiculous".

In many Australian public schools, discussion of controversial issues must be for educational purposes only. The Safe Schools Coalition is a taxpayer funded initiative that is marketed as reducing bullying of LGBT students in schools, and while they have been told by government to "stay silent" on same-sex marriage they encourage students to express their support for same-sex marriage in school assignments and at political rallies, and to organise guest speakers talking on subjects such as, "why we support equal marriage."

In 2015, Tasmanian Archbishop Julius Porteous distributed a booklet outlining the Catholic Church's position on marriage, titled "Don't mess with Marriage". It encouraged parents to lobby parliamentarians against same-sex marriage. An application was made by Martine Delaney, a Hobart transgender activist and Greens candidate, to Tasmania’s Anti-Discrimination Commission over the booklet. John Roskam, writing in the Australian Financial Review has said, "A vote in a plebiscite or referendum, in which one side is not allowed to present its case, is not a legitimate vote. That's why both supporters and opponents of same-sex marriage should be concerned by the complaint against Archbishop Porteous and the Catholic Church. Freedom of speech is fundamental to liberal democracy. Freedom of speech confers legitimacy on political outcomes". The Anti-Discrimination Commission subsequently upheld the complaint. Senator Eric Abetz said that the church’s right to "teach its flock" its beliefs on marriage were being "shut down". Janet Albrechtsen, writing in The Australian says, "This is not one of those thorny cases of conflicting rights where you have to come down on one side or another. It’s not a case of either supporting same-sex marriage or supporting free speech. Here you have the luxury of both. This is not about defending the Catholic bishops. The real issue is the emergence of yet another orthodoxy that is strangling free speech".

Christian organisations have said that non-discrimination laws should not be allowed to limit freedom of religion, and have argued for new laws to enshrine a right to discriminate against same-sex couples. ACT Attorney-General, Simon Corbell has said, in the ACT, it will be, "unlawful for those who provide goods, services and facilities in the wedding industry to discriminate against another person on the basis of their sexuality or their relationship status. This includes discrimination by refusing to provide or make available those goods, services or facilities." Tim Wilson has argued that religious anti-discrimination exemptions should be included in same-sex marriage laws. Others though, such as Australian lawyer and associate director and research fellow in the Public Interest Law Centre at New York University School of Law, David Glasgow, have argued that the core of this religious freedom campaign is simply desiring "the liberty to refuse service" to particular customers. Glasgow contends that Australian anti-discrimination law includes sexual orientation and gender identity as protected attributes akin to race or religion "because we recognise that those attributes should not impede a person's participation in civic life" and that "the law insists, rightly, that to reap the benefits of opening a business to the public, the business must be open on equal terms." Some are concerned that allowing religious business owners and service providers to right to refuse to provide services related to same-sex weddings/ceremonies (i.e.: wedding cakes and/or flowers) might lead to further exemptions not related to same-sex marriages but rather anything to do with homosexuality. Others have lamented the fact that, increasingly, much of the religious-based opposition to same-sex marriage has lost touch with the secular reality governing Australian laws and legal principles.

Opponents of same-sex marriage say they have faced attempts to limit freedom of speech. Joe de Bruyn has argued against Labor using a binding vote on the issue. David van Gend's business was graffitied, which included the word "bigot". A university student union called for the cancellation of a lecture, the subject of which was "assumed" to include opposition to same-sex marriage. At another university when it hosted "an evening with 'Traditional Marriage Champion' Dr. Ryan Anderson PhD" the student union leader said, "because we're a publicly funded university, we have a responsibility to be politically correct and this is not politically correct". The online 'star ratings' and reviews of an international hotel were targeted, however that campaign rebounded. Wendy Francis has said she received "abusive phone calls and emails" in 2012. Lyle Shelton says that he dislikes Bernard Keane calling him a "nauseating piece of filth" on Twitter, and that criticism of a Q&A guest amounts to "vicious attacks". Other issues have included threatening legal action, refusing advertisements. Roman Catholic bishop Anthony Fisher and columnist Paul Kelly have claimed that if same-sex marriage becomes law, there would be concern for future freedom of speech.

In March 2016, Labor leader Bill Shorten committed that the party would oppose any effort to extend discrimination law exemptions to allow people who object to same-sex marriage to deny goods and services to same-sex couples.

Transgender and intersex issues

In the 2001 case Re Kevin – validity of marriage of transsexual, the Family Court of Australia recognised the right of transsexual people to marry according to their current gender as opposed to the gender of their birth; this did not permit same-sex marriage from the perspective of the genders the couple identifies as, but it did mean that a male-to-female transsexual could legally marry a man, and a female-to-male transsexual could legally marry a woman.

In October 2007, the Administrative Appeals Tribunal overturned a decision by the Foreign Affairs Department refusing to issue a transgender woman a passport listing her as female because she is married to a woman. The tribunal ordered that she be issued a passport listing her as female, in accordance with her other official documents, thereby recognising the existence of a marriage between two persons who are legally recognised as female. Same-sex marriage advocates have noted that where same-sex marriage legislation is unclear on the rights of transgender or intersex people (such as in NSW in 2013), they have asked to ensure that any such legislation delivers same-sex marriage for all Australians, with intersex people being skeptical of the term same-sex marriage. The concurrent requirement, same-sex divorce law, is being discussed. Transgender divorce represents one challenge.

The 2015 winner of Australia's GLBTI Person of the Year, transgender advocate, Sally Goldner supports same-sex marriage, as "we're supposed to be about equality and equity" but says same-sex marriage has become a "bottleneck" that has prevented the airing of other LGBTI issues such as more recognition of "diversity within diversity."

See also

• Australian family law
• LGBT rights in Australia
• Marriage in Australia

External links

• Parliament of Australia – Same-sex marriage: issues for the 44th Parliament – publication detailing the same-sex marriage issue in Australia and recent developments