The Senate has voted for same-sex marriage, rejecting all calls to increase religious protections.

Key points: Same-sex marriage laws pass the Senate without amendment

Same-sex marriage laws pass the Senate without amendment Push to allow civil celebrants to refuse to marry same-sex marriage couples has failed

Push to allow civil celebrants to refuse to marry same-sex marriage couples has failed Religious ministers will have the right to refuse marrying same-sex couples

The legislation will go to the House of Representatives next week where it is expected to pass easily, making same-sex marriage law.

There's been a lot of debate about what's in the legislation. Here's a quick guide.

What's the definition of marriage?

Liberal senator Dean Smith's private member's bill would change the definition of marriage to: the union of two people to the exclusion of all others.

That would replace the previous definition, which specifically stated marriage was between a man and a woman.

Some conservative senators wanted to create two definitions of marriage, which would preserve the traditional view of marriage and also allow same-sex marriage.

This was defeated, with opponents saying it would create two classes of marriage and continue discrimination.

What can a minister of religion do?

The legislation makes it clear that religious ministers will have the right to refuse to marry a same-sex couple.

They can do so if same-sex marriage is contrary to their religious beliefs, or the beliefs of their church.

This is outlined in section 47a of the bill, which allows ministers to object to a marriage for other reasons too.

This religious protection has bipartisan support.

What about churches?

Churches or religious organisations will be allowed to refuse access to their facilities if they're being used for a same-sex marriage.

They can only do so if the wedding does not conform to their religious views of marriage.

So far, this section is also unchallenged.

What about civil celebrants?

This has been a real point of conjecture so far.

New celebrants will not be able to refuse to marry same-sex couples.

There will be a grandfathering provision that allows celebrants who are already registered to object.

Some politicians want new civil celebrants to be able to object on religious grounds. They say they should not be forced to perform marriages against their will.

Senator Smith says there should be one law for marriage and civil celebrants must comply with that.

So far, these amendments have been defeated.

What about freedom of speech?

Senator Smith's bill does not make any specific reference to freedom of speech.

Attorney-General George Brandis introduced amendments so people could speak freely about their traditional view of marriage without fear of legal action.

When the change was mooted, he said he did not think it was necessary but did so in good faith for those concerned about religious protection.

Liberal senator James Paterson also floated similar protections before the Senate debate.

These amendments have been defeated.