Opinion: Marriage Trojan horse
THERE has already been plenty said and there will be much more to come following Tuesday's decision by the Federal Government oppose a conscience vote on same-sex marriage.
While it is understandable that in a conservative government there will be a significant number of people opposed to such a significant social change, it is impossible to ignore the fact those against same-sex marriage are trying to hold back a wave of reform.
They will be swamped.
The Prime Minister's plan to hold a public vote during the next parliament is politically expedient at best; an attempt to undermine change at worst.
Whether the vote will be a plebiscite or a referendum is undecided, but both present serious problems.
A plebiscite comes with no legal obligation to follow the result, although any government that held a vote and ignored the result would be committing suicide.
Any push to hold a referendum should be seen as no more than a Trojan horse being constructed by those opposed to same-sex marriage.
A referendum would mean a change to the constitution to include some type of marriage definition.
This would lead to a divisive debate and would, based on Australia's history with referendums, be unlikely to win approval.
It is hard to avoid the view that outcome is exactly what some opposed to same-sex marriage want to achieve.