THE CHOKING hypocrisy of the ‘no’ side of the same-sex marriage debate shows they know they’re losing and will resort to any desperate, dirty tactic at their disposal.

But why are we letting them get away with it? Why are the expectations of factual civility so shockingly low for those who advocate a ‘no’ vote?

The people who demanded we hold a divisive national poll on if two people in love can legally wed now aren’t happy with how that discussion is going.

They insisted we have this postal survey, which ABS data this week showed 57.5 per cent of eligible voters have participated in thus far.

But the ‘no’ camp describes arguments put forward by the ‘yes’ side as imposing, jammed down their throat. Leaflets comparing homosexuality to child abuse, a mental disorder and some sort of stain on modern society are just free speech though.

A ‘vote yes’ text message was an invasion of privacy, they cried just a week after writing “VOTE NO” in the sky above Sydney.

media_camera Cory Bernardi speaking at the Coalition for Marriage's, "It's OK to say No" event at Adelaide Town Hall. (Pic: Matt Loxton/AAP)

These are the same people who plan on sending a letter to every household in the country but were suddenly worried about an SMS and its impingement on the sanctity of the mobile phone inbox.

And then just days later, they sent a text of their own.

The ‘no’ camp have been in hysterics about how gay marriage will somehow erode freedom of speech. In the next breath, they called for an award-winning musician to be banned from performing his chart-topping song at the NRL Grand Final.

It was a suggestion that would be at home in some Communist dictatorship where messaging is carefully controlled. You know, the sort of socialist utopia that strident ‘no’ campaigners warn gay marriage will cause.

They trot out the few people of prominence who oppose equal marriage but screech like banshees when the ‘yes’ side does the same.

They whinge about being silenced by the media, even though analysis shows they’re receiving four times the coverage.

They say they’re being outspent, when analysis of ad buying shows that’s a blatant lie.

They cry poor, saying they’re running on the smell of an oily rag, when they’re receiving millions from hard-core evangelical churches in America.

They talk of the non-existent danger to children that homosexuals apparently pose and then advocate the right of parents to force their kids into dangerous, discredited ‘gay therapy’.

They tell ‘yes’ supporters struggling with the disgraceful tone of this debate to grow a spine and stop being so precious, then paint themselves as the victims of bullying.

They demand the ‘yes’ camp “control its extremist supporters” but refuse to condemn instances of horrific violence, abuse, homophobia and harassment from ‘no’ supporters.

media_camera Frances Abbott, daughter of former Prime Minister Tony Abbott joined the ’yes’ campaign last week. (Pic: Supplied.)

They describe shocking incidents of violent homophobia as not reflective of the ‘no’ campaign, and then try to link a random stand-alone incident to the ‘yes’ side.

They find some anarchist graffiti in an abandoned warehouse that almost a decade earlier was the office of the mardi gras committee — but has since been a squatter’s haven — and grasp at straws to implicate same-sex marriage.

Yet when Nazi-inspired, anti gay marriage slogans are scrawled on trains, homes or businesses, that’s got nothing to do with them.

Neither was a threat to the AFL headquarters, an arson threat against a business with a ‘yes’ poster in its window, and residences with messages of support on their fences defaced and vandalised.

Vote how you like. But just pause and think about the increasingly unhinged arguments being made by the ‘no’ camp.

They’re lying. They’re manipulating situations. They’re relying on shocking double standards and contradictions.

They’re talking about literally everything else apart from the idea that a loving couple should be able to enjoy civil marriage like everyone else.

Why? Because they have no valid arguments left and no good reasons. They’re on the wrong side of rational decision-making and history itself.

Do you want to hitch yourself to that wacky wagon? Choose your friends wisely, as they say.

Originally published as How low will SSM ‘No’ voters go?