Why was progress towards marriage equality slow in Australia?

This essay discusses the reasons behind the slow progress of marriage equality in Australia. It covers political, traditional, and spiritual factors that hindered the progress. The essay also highlights the positive opinion of the Australian population towards the legalization of marriage equality.

Running Head: MARRIAGE EQUALITY
0
Marriage Equality
Student Name

MARRIAGE EQUALITY
1
Why was progress towards marriage equality slow in Australia?
Marriage equality denotes to the political prominence in which same-gender wedding and
opposite-gender marriage are accepted as equivalent by the law (Cimmings, and NeJaime,
2009). Distinct the word “gay wedding,” the term “marriage equality” is the wider umbrella
term that is comprehensive of weddings between a male and a female, two females, or two
males; in short, among two people (Herek, 2011). Users of this word, however, are nearly
always followers of the wedding for the same-gender pair who trust in the equality of
relations between same-sex pairs and opposite-sex twosomes; and in specific, an equivalent
distribution of privileges and profits to all wedded couples, irrespective of their sensual
orientation or sex individuality. More than 3,000 same-gender pairs married in Australia
between December and 30 June 2018, novel statistics demonstrated (Webb, and Chonody,
2012). By insinuation, those not helping “marriage equality” signify “inequality” in wedding,
specifically adopting the superiority of relations between persons of those of the conflicting
gender over those between those of the similar gender. Religious traditionalists, therefore,
push back in contradiction of this term as creating an inherent charge of their own location as
integrally prejudiced (Herek, 2011). In this particular essay, the reason behind the slow
progress towards marriage equality in Australia will be discussed.
Although the same sex marriage has been pronounced legal in Australia the political view
towards it is not changing that much the progress is still very slow compared to other
countries like Ireland (Healy, Sheehan, and Whelan, 2015). In November 2017 Australian
people overwhelmingly voted in support of changing the legislation to permit the same sex
marriage in Australia (Aviram, and Leachman, 2015). Around 61.6 percent of Australian
population voted “Yes” in favor of legalization of same sex marriage. Before the 1970s,
Australia has some strict legislation that prohibited homosexual activities. However, between
1975 and 1977, the Australian regions repealed legislation prohibiting the same gender

MARRIAGE EQUALITY
2
marriage or relationship and favor for LGBTI right started to flourish (Melby, and Carlsson
Wetterberg, 2009). In 2003, the states and different territories started to grant the domestic-
partnership benefits to same gender couples, involving the privileges for supervision,
acceptance, and the capability to have lawfully accepted same gender mergers. But since
2004, nearly 22 bills have been published to address the same gender unions, and all four that
came to an election were beaten. In 2013, the Australian Capital Territory or ACT legalized
the same gender marriage territory-wide. This the first time a state challenged federal
legislation for the same-gender marriage (Aviram, and Leachman, 2015). In 2015, afterward
many years of improvement, the US Supreme Court rules in support of same gender marriage
(Redwoood, 2013). And in 2017 most of the people voted in favor of same sex marriage.
Therefore it can be said the same sex marriage has been accepted by the law but the progress
of marriage equality is still slow and not progressing as much as it should (Melby, and
Carlsson Wetterberg, 2009).
In the slow progress of marriage equality in Australia, the churches played a major role
(Walls, 2010). There were three factors affect the progress of marriage equality in churches
context, how the read the Bible, how they understand church traditions, and how that view
the relations among the world around them and the life of the church (Carbery, 2010). The
first factor relates to the misinformation that resulted in fear, the fear was that the churches
might be coerced into marrying the same gender unions. This particular was the factor
driving the present inquiry into the religious freedom. The other factor was related to the
policy and practice of the specific denomination ((Walls, 2010). In most of the scenarios, the
episcopal governance travels in close relationships with social and ecclesiastical
conservatism.

MARRIAGE EQUALITY
3
In 2013, with the query of marriage equality attaining attraction in Australia, the High Court
ruled that it was up to the Federal Government to pass the change to laws concerning all
types of the wedding including same-sex marriage (Walls, 2010).
Since then, extra pressure has been positioned on the Government to cancel any form of the
ban against same-sex marriage. However, the Federal Government has asserted on a
plebiscite as the means for all Australian people to have a chance to vote and have their
thought on the problem (McAllister, and Snagovsky, 2018).
A plebiscite is a countrywide vote to measure public feedback on the political suggestion; one
that has expected wide-spread censure for a number of causes (Webb, and Chonody, 2014).
First, contrasting a plebiscite, the outcomes of a referendum are not lawfully binding. As
specified, the outcomes are merely reaction and it is still in the hands of the Federal
Government to pass change (Aloni, 2010). Voting was also not required and the queries can
be established by the Prime Minister. This has been understood by marriage equality
supporters as the way to influence. Queries would be established by Prime Minister Malcolm
Turnbull who has spoken that he would not favor a bill connecting to gay marriage till there
is an election of the Australian individuals. Second, as demanded by gay rights campaigners,
the referendum could upsurge perception against Australia’s gay communal (Sloane, and
Robillard, 2018). Of specific importance is the Christian Lobby’s thrust to supersede the
country’s current anti-discrimination rules throughout the campaign. Finally, the referendum
has also come under the fire line. As such, it has been understood as “a huge and very costly
opinion election, and this was after many opinion censuses have previously shown that a
strong bulk of Australians are in favor of this alteration (Sloane, and Robillard, 2018). Even
after the positive opinion of the Australian population toward the legalization of marriage

MARRIAGE EQUALITY
4
equality it has taken so much time to do the changes, this happened due to the different
political views on the same sex marriage (Brennan, 2016).
While the referendum has sustained prominence in the same-gender wedding discussion, it is
nonetheless one fragment of a wider discussion. Specifically, a conversation on what are the
traditional standards that describe Australia’s meaning of marriage. Australia turns into a
federated country in 1901. Since after, it has broadly been accepted as a secular nation.
However, it is still not a state deprived of religious effect. As a mainly Christian nation,
Australians like unencumbered religious practice which is sheltered by Section 116 of the
Australian Constitution (McAllister, and Snagovsky, 2018).
The Generous Government, inside their federal stage, have spoken a trust “in the basic
liberties of thought, adoration, speech, relationship and choice” along with “the regulation of
law” to be the main adjudicator for fairness; representing a devotion to secular standards of
civilization which would bring an easy stage for change. However, the Liberal Government
was prepared likely through an alliance forged with The Residents who, as specified, follow
to Christian ethics. As such, it develops doubtful as to which traditions Australia follows to
when it is about defining wedding, how people perceive the effect of Christianity in national
problems, and who has the concluding say when it is about modeling Federal rule, queries
that cannot be replied through a referendum (Aviram, and Leachman, 2015).
An issue of conscience is another problem that hinders the progress of same sex marriage or
marriage equality in Australia ((Johnson, and Tremblay, 2018). It was not till 2011 that the
extended fight within the ALP lastly ensued in an alteration to the party stage to favor same-
sex wedding. In 2013, the prime minister proclaimed that he now favored same-sex wedding
on the estates that it was genuine for the nation and the church to have dissimilar policies on
the wedding in a secular civilization (Gilreath, 2010).

MARRIAGE EQUALITY
5
Had Labour’s backing for same-sex wedding been a compulsory vote; as was the situation
with contrasting same-sex matrimonial or with the outline of the 2008 improvements lawfully
distinguishing same-sex relationships, the Labour management could have been near to
having the figures to present same-sex wedding throughout the Gillard or second Rudd
government. Though, Labour MPs were allowed a conscience election (Chonody, Smith, and
Litle, 2012). The attitude of opposite sex couples o the same sex marriages has also been a
reason behind the slow progress of marriage equality in Australia. The mentality or thoughts
of the Australian straight people were negative and mostly favors the opposite sex wedding;
however, this trend has been changed. But there are still some people who do not support the
idea (Chonody, Smith, and Litle, 2012).
That integrity vote specifies that the parting between religious belief and the nation is not yet
completely adopted in Australian government (Philpot, Ellard, Duncan, Dowsett, Bavinton,
Down, Keen, Hammoud, and Prestage, 2016). Labor policies had leftward the query of whom
spiritual organizations should wed, which is obviously a problem of spiritual conscience, for
sacred bodies themselves to choose according to their personal (varied) opinions. Labour
MPs were efficiently being permitted a devout conscience election on the matter of whom the
nation should be capable to wed in a republic where presently 72.5% of pairs who married
choose to have public rather than spiritual ceremonial (Sanders, and Hinman, 2016). The
state-authorized same-sex wedding was still being mounted partially as an individual
morality problem rather than mostly as an equality concern. By presenting a bill, Shorten
seems to have regulated off a thrust for a compulsory election for Labour MPs (Philpot et al.,
2016).

MARRIAGE EQUALITY
6
The residual religious enclosing is one of the explanations same-sex wedding has not yet
been well progressed in Australia. It has shown much calmer (and quicker) to present in
republics that have mainly built same-sex wedding as the equality concern, like Canada
(Johnson, and Tremblay, 2018). Ireland's plebiscite election was so significant because it
proves that, even in a nation that is customarily staunchly Catholic, the bulk of electorates
understand that spiritual definitions of the wedding should be limited to religious wedding
ceremonies and not be obligatory on the state's meaning of marriage (Kirby, 2016). Most
labor representatives in Australia now grasp that position moreover. This comprises some
MPs who were before worried about the influence of same-sex wedding on their seats, like
Chris Bowen, Tony Burke, and Ed Husic, all of whom inhabit western Sydney voters
(Sanders, and Hinman, 2016). Temporarily, numerous Liberals are advising that they must be
settled an integrity vote on permitting same-sex wedding. They are probable to be given one.
Beforehand, Generous MPs have not had an option over whether the same-sex wedding is
constructed as a question of equal privileges for loving grown-ups. Australia has extended
lagged behindhand the rest of the globe on marriage equality, which has previously been
approved into regulation in greatest English-speaking nations. Many of the zones of
discrimination do not have the similar level of discernibility as marriage equality; chiefly
issues upsetting Trans, gender varied and intersex persons but that does not make them any
less essential (Brennan, 2016).
Marriage equality described as the political prominence in that the similar gender unions and
opponent sex wedding are adopted as equal actions by the law. In Australia, this issues has
been a topic for debate for a long time. Previously the same sex marriage was prohibited in
Australia; however, most of the Australian population supported the same gender marriage.
But it has taken so much to legalize two people with same sex to get married. There are
various issues or factor that slows down the progress of marriage equality in Australia such as

MARRIAGE EQUALITY
7
political view, spiritual factors. the same sex marriage has been started to favored in 2003
even by the lawmakers, but it took nearly 24 years to completely legalize it. In November
2017, nearly 65 percent of the Australian people voted in favor of marriage equality. The
main reason behind the slow progress of towards marriage equality was that the politician
was not very focused on this topic as this position was not effecting due to this problem. The
traditional and spiritual views also slow down the progress as they were not fully accepted
the fact that same sex marriage is favored by the people.

MARRIAGE EQUALITY
8
References
Aloni, E., 2010. Incrementalism, civil unions, and the possibility of predicting legal
recognition of same-sex marriage. Duke J. Gender L. & Pol'y, 18, p.105.
Aviram, H., & Leachman, G. M. 2015. The future of polyamorous marriage: Lessons from
the marriage equality struggle. Harv. Women's LJ, pp. 38, 269.
Brennan, F., 2016. Plebiscite the only way forward for Turnbull on marriage equality. Eureka
Street, 26(17), p.26.
Carbery, G., 2010. Towards homosexual equality in Australian criminal law: a brief
history. Sydney: Australian Lesbian and Gay Archives Inc.
Chonody, J.M., Smith, K.S. and Litle, M.A., 2012. Legislating unequal treatment: An
exploration of public policy on same-sex marriage. Journal of GLBT Family Studies, 8(3),
pp.270-286.
Cimmings, S.L., and NeJaime, D., 2009. Lawyering for marriage equality. UCLA L. Rev., 57,
p.1235.
Gilreath, S., 2010. Not a Moral Issue: Same-Sex Marriage and Religious Liberty.
Healy, G., Sheehan, B., and Whelan, N., 2015. Ireland says yes: The inside story of how the
vote for marriage equality was won. Merrion Press.
Herek, G. M. 2011. Anti‐equality marriage amendments and sexual stigma. Journal of Social
Issues, 67(2), pp. 413-426.
Johnson, C. and Tremblay, M., 2018. Comparing same-sex marriage in Australia and Canada:
institutions and political will. Government and Opposition, 53(1), pp.131-158.

MARRIAGE EQUALITY
9
Kirby, M., 2016. The act marriage equality case-losing the battle but winning the
constitutional war. S. Cross UL Rev., 18, p.79.
McAllister, I. and Snagovsky, F., 2018. Explaining voting in the 2017 Australian same-sex
marriage plebiscite. Australian Journal of Political Science, 53(4), pp.409-427.
Melby, K. and Carlsson Wetterberg, C. eds., 2009. Gender equality and welfare politics in
Scandinavia: the limits of political ambition?. Policy Press.
Philpot, S.P., Ellard, J., Duncan, D., Dowsett, G.W., Bavinton, B.R., Down, I., Keen, P.,
Hammoud, M.A. and Prestage, G., 2016. Gay and bisexual men’s interest in marriage: an
Australian perspective. Culture, health & sexuality, 18(12), pp.1347-1362.
Redwoood, J., 2013. Marriage equality before the US Supreme Court. Bar News: The Journal
of the NSW Bar Association, (Winter 2013), p.45.
Sanders, M. and Hinman, P., 2016. Marriage equality: No more delays. Green Left Weekly,
(1108), p.5.
Sloane, J.L. and Robillard, L.M., 2018. Factors affecting heterosexual attitudes toward same-
sex marriage in Australia. Sexuality Research and Social Policy, 15(3), pp.290-301.
Walls, N.E., 2010. Religion and support for same-sex marriage: Implications from the
literature. Journal of Gay & Lesbian Social Services, 22(1-2), pp.112-131.
Webb, S.N. and Chonody, J., 2012. Marriage equality in Australia: The influence of attitudes
toward same-sex parenting. Gay and Lesbian Issues and Psychology Review, 8(3), p.165.
Webb, S.N. and Chonody, J., 2014. Heterosexual attitudes toward same-sex marriage: The
influence of attitudes toward same-sex parenting. Journal of GLBT Family Studies, 10(4),
pp.404-421.