Lyle Shelton from the Australian Christian Lobby. Credit:Alex Ellinghausen As well as federal laws, all states and territories have anti-discrimination laws, which prohibit discrimination on the basis of sexuality. For example, in NSW, there are laws against "any public act that could incite or encourage hatred, serious contempt or severe ridicule", however the specifics of laws vary between jurisdictions. The Turnbull government has been been consulting with the "yes" and "no" camps on how the plebiscite will work, and Mr Shelton said the ACL had pressed for "some sort of ... setting aside of these [anti-discrimination] laws". Mr Shelton stressed that those in the "no" camp were not seeking to say anything bigoted, but to put forward the "millenia-old" argument that marriage should only be between a man and a woman. The Law Council of Australia said any exemptions to discriminatory behaviour when it came to marriage equality "should be construed as narrowly as is absolutely necessary".

Illustration: Ron Tandberg. "People cannot use their religious beliefs as an excuse for unlawful discrimination in business and the same principle would apply to public political campaigns," president-elect Fiona McLeod said. Australian Marriage Equality said it was concerned the plebiscite was being used "as an excuse to suspend laws that protect vulnerable Australians". Illustration: Cathy Wilcox "It's impractical and unnecessary to suspend anti-discrimination laws in every state and territory," national director Rodney Croome said.

Mr Croome said the "yes" and "no" camps should work out an agreement between themselves on how the debate should be conducted. "Both sides should be mature enough to sit down and agree on the framework for a free and respectful debate, facilitated by the Human Rights Commission or some other impartial body," he said. Concerns over free speech in the plebiscite debate come as questions are asked over what, if any, public funding should be given to the opposing sides. Mr Shelton said he wanted to ensure funding was equal for both sides and that international funds were prohibited. While some within the "yes" camp are against any public funding for either side - as they believe taxpayers' money should not be used for arguments that are potentially hurtful to gay people - Mr Croome said funding should be equal and "kept to the bare minimum".

He said federal funds should be "directed instead to counselling for those people whose mental health will suffer from attacks on their basic rights". Attorney-General George Brandis was travelling overseas on Monday and could not be reached for comment. Last week in Senate estimates, he said there had been a "great deal of stakeholder consultation" on the plebiscite and that he would take a submission to cabinet "in coming months". Senator Brandis added the submission would also make a recommendation on public funding of the "yes" and "no" cases. There is no date set yet for the plebiscite, which is due after the federal election.