Division Description Changes — Bills — Marriage Amendment (Definition and Religious Freedoms) Bill 2017; Consideration in Detail — 7th Dec 2017

Change	Division
representatives vote 2017-12-07#3 Edited by mackay staff on 2018-03-28 13:41:41	Title Bills — Marriage Amendment (Definition and Religious Freedoms) Bill 2017; Consideration in Detail Marriage Amendment (Definition and Religious Freedoms) Bill 2017 - Consideration in Detail - Defence appointed celebrants Description <p class='motion-notice motion-notice-truncated'>Long debate text truncated.</p> The majority voted against [amendments](https://www.openaustralia.org.au/debate/?id=2017-12-07.42.1) introduced by Liberal MP [Alex Hawke](https://theyvoteforyou.org.au/people/representatives/mitchell/alex_hawke), which means they failed. ### What were the amendments? Hawke MP [explained that](https://www.openaustralia.org.au/debate/?id=2017-12-07.42.1): > This is a practical amendment. It will improve this bill by making sure that it does take account of the genuine conscientious objections of religious officers of the defence forces appointed by the CDF, giving them the ability to highlight that they have an objection prior to their deployment. ### Why did some Coalition MPs vote Yes and others No? The Coalition was split on this issue, with some voting Yes and others voting No. This split within the party is unusual but, given the nature of the subject matter of the vote, the Coalition decided to run this as a free vote, meaning that its members could vote however they chose rather than having to vote along party lines. ### What does this bill do? This [bill](http://parlinfo.aph.gov.au/parlInfo/search/display/display.w3p;query=Id:legislation/billhome/s1099) will allow same-sex couples to marry under Australian law. However, it will also: > enable ministers of religion, religious marriage celebrants, chaplains and bodies established for religious purposes to refuse to solemnise or provide facilities, goods and services for marriages on religious grounds; and make amendments ... to provide that a refusal by a minister of religion, religious marriage celebrant or chaplain to solemnise marriage in prescribed circumstances does not constitute unlawful discrimination. Read more in the [bills digest](https://www.aph.gov.au/Parliamentary_Business/Bills_Legislation/bd/bd1718a/18bd054).

<p class='motion-notice motion-notice-truncated'>Long debate text truncated.</p>
The majority voted against [amendments](https://www.openaustralia.org.au/debate/?id=2017-12-07.42.1) introduced by Liberal MP [Alex Hawke](https://theyvoteforyou.org.au/people/representatives/mitchell/alex_hawke), which means they failed.
### What were the amendments?
Hawke MP [explained that](https://www.openaustralia.org.au/debate/?id=2017-12-07.42.1):
> *This is a practical amendment. It will improve this bill by making sure that it does take account of the genuine conscientious objections of religious officers of the defence forces appointed by the CDF, giving them the ability to highlight that they have an objection prior to their deployment.*
### Why did some Coalition MPs vote Yes and others No?
The Coalition was split on this issue, with some voting Yes and others voting No. This split within the party is unusual but, given the nature of the subject matter of the vote, the Coalition decided to run this as a free vote, meaning that its members could vote however they chose rather than having to vote along party lines.
### What does this bill do?
This [bill](http://parlinfo.aph.gov.au/parlInfo/search/display/display.w3p;query=Id:legislation/billhome/s1099) will allow same-sex couples to marry under Australian law. However, it will also:
> *enable ministers of religion, religious marriage celebrants, chaplains and bodies established for religious purposes to refuse to solemnise or provide facilities, goods and services for marriages on religious grounds; and make amendments ... to provide that a refusal by a minister of religion, religious marriage celebrant or chaplain to solemnise marriage in prescribed circumstances does not constitute unlawful discrimination.*
Read more in the [bills digest](https://www.aph.gov.au/Parliamentary_Business/Bills_Legislation/bd/bd1718a/18bd054).