Australian politics does only one thing superbly: delay the inevitable.

Whatever the high court decided on Thursday, equal marriage was going to happen. One way or another, this year or next, parliament will vote for a change that’s now accepted across the western world.

All the court did was leave an obstacle in its path.

Don’t doubt this is a great victory for the backers of the vote. The idea came out of Queensland, the brainchild of LNP opponents of change. Peter Dutton had the gall to call it a “cleaner process” than a parliamentary vote.

Cleaner?

The answer's in the post – Australian marriage equality vote explainer Read more

And it was always a get-around. The postal vote never had the support of parliament. That was the whole point. And the high court has been happy to back the strategy of sidestepping the Senate.

Out on the right there’s a narrative that courts are undemocratic. It’s an American idea born out of rage that the US supreme court has allowed black kids into white schools, women to have abortions, and blokes to marry each other.

How different it is in Australia. How reluctant the high court is to block the strategies of government. This is, after all, the court that has allowed this country to imprison refugees on distant Pacific islands.

We’ve yet to see the reasons for Thursday’s decisions. They may be spellbinding. But finding a way to hold a public vote on equal marriage without parliamentary approval is going to take some fancy footwork.

So the postal vote will happen. It will cost a fortune and almost certainly end in a victory for the forces of yes. The figures are firm. Last week’s Essential Report showed every demographic and every political group is planning to vote yes.

Out among the “other” voters where a great contest is under way between Pauline Hanson and Cory Bernardi to win over the most conservative hearts and minds, the vote is split 48% to 47% in favour of the Yes vote.

Even the more colourful and intransigent columnists on the Australian have – despite their dark fears for religious freedom – plighted their troth with the yes camp.

What’s more, many opponents of change are signalling they won’t bother to vote. It’s a very Australian response: they don’t welcome the change but they aren’t angry enough to stand in its way. They’ll bin the envelope.

So if change is coming, what’s the resistance about?

To put it down to bickering in the ranks of the Coalition is let Australian politics off too lightly. Yes they are at each other’s throats in the government party room but there’s a deeper purpose here.

Abbott's obstruction of gay marriage is a defence of privilege and the power of shame | David Marr Read more

Australia is being taught an old lesson all over again. The delay, the cost and the years of bitter debate are worth it according to the warriors of no to remind Australians that change in this country is hard, hard work.

This is nothing new but it’s marking us now. We’re a middle-of-the-road country with ambitions for change caught in a political culture that’s come to see its mission as preventing the future.

Equal marriage is just the latest occasion for displaying the clout of the reactionaries. Though they know, in the end, they probably won’t be able to bring change to a halt, they want us to know the ground rules here: change in this country only comes with a great deal of pain.

That’s the plan and the high court has now given it a tick. Let the weeks ahead be decent and good humoured. Let’s listen to one another. Let’s try to stick to the point. And let the vote show who we are, a country not afraid of the future. The only difficulty we ever face is getting there.

• Support our independent journalism by giving a one-off or monthly contribution