Malcolm Turnbull’s rightwing extremists, using his wafer-thin parliamentary majority as leverage to get all they want, have backed Australia into a voluntary postal vote as their last ditch stand against the inevitability of same-sex marriage.

Equal marriage laws are coming to this nation as sure as tomorrow’s sunrise. Sadly, the deeply flawed postal vote now offers the quickest route to that outcome. If, as all the polls would have us expect, the yes vote wins, Turnbull says parliament will vote on the issue before Christmas.

But if the high court challenge to his government’s $120m spend on the postal vote succeeds, the issue is unlikely to be resolved until after the 2019 election.

‘You don’t speak for me’: Christian support for marriage equality is growing | Keith Mascord Read more

The argument against a postal vote is compellingly valid. Parliament was elected to make this decision just as it makes decisions on abortion, adultery, euthanasia and citizenship. The nation is facing a non-binding poll on equal marriage simply because there are enough bigots and homophobes in Turnbull’s ranks to have his government doing everything it can to delay the inevitable. If it can only engineer a majority of no votes, the postal vote could prove to be a great delaying tactic.

If the high court challenge fails, the postal vote will proceed and a yes majority will be followed by legislation passing the parliament before Christmas.

There is talk of boycotting the postal vote as a revolt against the petty and nasty delaying tactics of Turnbull’s extreme-right bully boys. But that would play into their hands. The best way to sideline them is for the postal vote to return a triumphant yes.

If this vote proceeds, there may be a lot of nastiness, bigotry, hate and destructive accusation. This is nothing new for the LGBTI community. Ladies and gentlemen of Australia, let’s gird our loins. I, for one, am ready to take the bullies on.

Not surprisingly, Tony Abbott was first cab off the rank in calling for a no vote. Echoing his three-word mantra of “no carbon tax” (how power prices have escalated since he implemented that policy!) Abbott gave three reasons for his negativity: opposition to same-sex marriage per se, the defence of religion, and his hostility to “political correctness”.

Most Australians support same-sex marriage, so he is on a loser there. Moreover, most Christian Australians support same-sex marriage too, including a majority of Abbott’s fellow Catholics – so he is bound to fail there. His claim of “political correctness” is a rabid neoliberal construct from 1990s America invented to pour scorn on true liberal innovation. That is, if you have a closed mind but are on a hiding to nothing in public debate, resort to name-calling your opponents instead: it won’t wash in Australia.

Of course, Abbott wasn’t so fast out of the blocks in advocating a no vote against equal marriage because this is the biggest issue of his career. Wresting the prime ministership off Turnbull is the biggest issue of his career. He is staking everything on this postal vote going no to vault him back into that plum position. Cream on the cake for those of us who would vote yes.

Marriage equality postal survey vulnerable to voter fraud, experts warn Read more

With support for equal marriage highest among the young, a postal vote maximises the chance of the no votes prevailing over the yes votes because, the theory goes, many young people will either not be registered in time to vote, or will have changed their address, or are simply out of touch with mail communication in this digital age. But I reckon droves of young Australians will go out of their way to letterbox their yes vote on this issue.

Another key argument against postal voting is that it is non-binding: the parliament could still vote no after a majority of Australians voted yes. This unlikelihood would see a lot of seats lost at the next election.

There are precious few examples of vote boycotting around the world which have aided liberalisation. I understand the impulse to turn backs on this odious political process. However, if the high court rules the postal vote valid, my partner Paul and I will, of necessity, be joining the vote yes campaign.

We think the crookedry of the process will actually increase the majority of Australians who will vote yes.

We’re all ready, set to go.