Exclusive: Advocates fear Coalition’s proposed exemptions to anti-discrimination law could allow civil celebrants, registrars, bakers and florists to refuse service

This article is more than 4 years old

This article is more than 4 years old

The government will propose new protections for “conscientious objectors” to same-sex marriage which marriage equality advocates fear could allow civil celebrants, registrars and even bakers and florists to refuse to serve same-sex weddings.

According to briefing notes on the plebiscite prepared for the Coalition party room, seen by Guardian Australia, the legislation would allow “conscientious objectors” to reject same-sex weddings, an exemption more extensive than merely allowing religious leaders to refuse to conduct them.

The prospect of extensive exemptions to discrimination law would provide a further reason for Labor and others to block the plebiscite, and and could split the yes vote if the plebiscite went ahead.

Marriage equality plebiscite appears doomed as Shorten moves to block bill Read more

The note said the government will introduce proposed amendments to the Marriage Act and other relevant legislation to give effect to the decision of the plebiscite “well in advance” of the popular vote.

“Those amendments will also include appropriate protections for religious freedom and conscientious objections,” it said.

On Wednesday the prime minister, Malcolm Turnbull, introduced the same-sex marriage plebiscite-enabling legislation which confirmed voters would be asked: “Should the law be changed to allow same-sex couples to marry?”

But the bill did not contain any details of the proposed “protections for religious freedoms and conscientious objectors” which will follow in a later bill.

The Labor and cross-party marriage equality bills contain exemptions that allow ministers of religion to refuse to solemnize same-sex marriages, but do not contain any reference to other “conscientious objectors”.

Long-time marriage equality advocate Rodney Croome told Guardian Australia he was “deeply concerned” by the “undefined exemptions on the grounds of religion and to allow conscientious objection”.

“I believe ministers of religion should be free to marry who they want, but the government’s proposal could mean civil celebrants, marriage registrars and wedding service providers like bakers and florists are all free to discriminate.”

In June, Guardian Australia reported that the attorney general, George Brandis, refused to rule out such exemptions to anti-discrimination law. Bill Shorten ruled out Labor backing such exemptions at a Guardian Australia event in March.

The Australian Christian Lobby director, Lyle Shelton, said: “Bill Shorten has said that lay people will be forced, with the threat of fines, to provide services to weddings they don’t believe should be engaged in.

“People should be free to live out your beliefs – not just if you’re a minister but also if you’re photographer or own a wedding reception venue.”

On 21 June and 23 August a spokeswoman for Brandis said: “The mechanics for the plebiscite and amendments to the Marriage Act, including appropriate protections for religious freedom, will be subject to the usual cabinet, party room and parliamentary processes, and it is inappropriate to pre-empt these.”

On Wednesday a spokesman for Brandis said “the government will release any proposed amendments to the Marriage Act soon”.

The Labor equality spokeswoman, Terri Butler, told Guardian Australia the exemptions solved a nonexistent problem because there was no “mass movement to force registrars to marry people” whose weddings they disapprove of.

“[The government] has got to realise if they start building in all of these additional conditions, that’s going to make it even more difficult to support the plebiscite,” she said. It is understood Shorten will recommend Labor blocks the plebiscite.

Butler said discrimination law exemptions were equivalent to allowing businesses to refuse to serve Muslims, women or blind people.

The Greens LGBTQI spokeswoman, Janet Rice, said “extending exemptions this far would be outrageous”, and called on Labor to block the plebiscite.

“This shows how beholden the prime minister is to the fringe on his backbench.”

The Australian Marriage Equality (AME) national spokeswoman, Shirleene Robinson, told Guardian Australia exemptions for conscientious objectors “are not something we’d be supportive of”.

“Anti-discrimination law regulates how people respond to others, so they can’t discriminate against people based on certain characteristics”, which include sexuality, she said.

Coalition conservatives fail to blink in same-sex marriage plebiscite's game of chicken | Katharine Murphy Read more

“Anything that would override those protections would be a worry.”

The AME co-chairman, Alex Greenwich, said extensive exemptions to anti-discrimination law were “concerning” and added “that is the whole problem with the plebiscite proposal, people don’t know what the legislation they are voting for actually is”.

“Any amendment to the Marriage Act should make sure same-sex couples are treated the same as opposite-sex couples,” he said. AME’s position is that churches should still be able to decide which couples they marry, he said.

Croome said parliament should not support the plebiscite given its “implications are so unclear and potentially radical”.



“The hidden danger in the government’s proposal is that it will split the yes vote and sink marriage equality in the same way as the republic referendum.

“Some marriage equality supporters will balk at voting yes if removing an old form of discrimination comes at the price of entrenching new forms.”

He said the proposal would see the importation of a US-style culture war, where county clerk Kim Davis was jailed for continued refusal to either issue marriage licenses to same-sex couples or allow her deputies to do so.