Lyle Shelton reveals the ACL has been approached by the government to discuss its role in a plebiscite and potential public funding for its campaign against marriage equality

This article is more than 4 years old

This article is more than 4 years old

The head of the Australian Christian Lobby, Lyle Shelton, has said changing the definition of marriage may cause some people to think he is gay, as he revealed that the organisation has been approached by the government to discuss the “no” campaign of a same-sex marriage plebiscite.

Shelton was asked on Sky News on Sunday night how allowing same-sex marriage would affect his own marriage.

“If the definition of marriage is changed, it’s no longer assumed ... that I’m married to a woman. So that affects me straight away,” he said.

Irish marriage equality campaigner says Australia needs to have open debate Read more

“So you’re worried that people may think you’re gay if the law changes?” host Patricia Karvelas asked.

Shelton replied: “They may or may not, but certainly the terms of my marriage have changed, and of the millions of other marriages in Australia”.

The Australian Christian Lobby (ACL), an organisation vocally opposed to changing the definition of marriage, partly due to the argument that children need both a mother and a father, has been approached to discuss its role in a potential plebiscite on the issue, Shelton said.

“We’ve had some initial discussion,” he said. “The government has reached out to us and some other groups in this space.”

Last week attorney general George Brandis told Senate estimates that consultations have started with stakeholders on a possible plebiscite. Shelton has confirmed with Guardian Australia that the ACL has been part of that consultation process.

“We’re thankful for that conversation,” he said. “We have every confidence that this will be a fair process.”

But the ACL has warned against truncating the process, after suggestions that the plebiscite could be held as early as October.

“I think people need time to realise the importance of changing the definition of marriage,” he said. “An October plebiscite would be a surprise ... It seems an unrealistic time frame.”

The prime minister, Malcolm Turnbull, has committed to holding the $160m plebiscite if the Coalition wins the next election, despite being personally for marriage equality.

Brandis is due to take a proposal on the mechanisms of the vote, including if it is binding on Coalition MPs who are against same-sex marriage, to cabinet for approval shortly.

Labor says a plebiscite is unnecessary and has pledged to hold a vote on the issue within 100 days of winning office.

Despite the outcome of a plebiscite, parliament will still need to vote to remove restrictions in the Marriage Act that limit marriage to being between a man and a woman.

Shelton wants the no campaign to be funded in the same way that the yes campaign is funded.

“I would expect that equal funding would be provided to both sides as there is to any normal referendum, or in this case, plebiscite,” Shelton said.

“It’s got to be fair debate and I think, more importantly, people from our side of the debate have got to feel free to speak without being labelled as haters or homophobes or bigots. That’s been really tough in this whole thing. None of us want to see that ugliness in this debate. We want to be respectful to the other side, but we want to be able to be free to be able to speak about why marriage should be retained as between a man and a woman.”

Jason Tuazon-McCheyne, a candidate for the Australian Equality party, said neither side of the campaign should receive government money.



“I’m against public funding ... equally, no funding,” he told Sky News.

He thinks a plebiscite will be divisive and dangerous for members of the lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, intersex and queer (LGBTIQ) communities.

“I think a fear campaign is very, very easy to sway people’s minds. People don’t understand [the issues], necessarily,” he said.

Tuazon-McCheyne said that the government should fund more counsellors and psychologists to work during the plebiscite campaign, citing already high numbers of suicides or attempted suicides by members of the LGBTIQ communities.

Shelton labelled that “terrible emotional blackmail” and said that the no campaign has “respectfully” put forward its case until now.

“No one is saying that same-sex couples can’t be good parents. Of course they can,” Shelton said.

He said the next logical step in the debate would be about assisted reproductive technology, like surrogacy and in-vitro fertilisation (IVF).

“I’m not sure we have had a proper community debate on this,” Shelton said. “I’m with the global feminist movement because I want a ban on all surrogacy. It’s inherently exploitative of women.”