Greens senator Robert Simms said it was time to end discrimination against gay Australians.
The Government intends holding a national vote on same-sex marriage after the next election, but the Greens say a plebiscite is an unnecessary cost because it is clear a majority of Australians would vote yes.
Senator Simms said Australia was on the wrong side of history with the US and Ireland having legalised gay marriage.
“Can anyone seriously suggest that we should be spending more than $100 million of taxpayer funds on a question we already know the answer to?” he said.
“The last thing I want is to see taxpayer money being spent on a divisive campaign against marriage equality, what in effect would become a state-sanctioned, state-funded hate campaign.”
Liberal David Fawcett, who doesn’t support gay marriage, insisted the issue needed to be put to the Australian people.
Those who didn’t support same-sex marriage should not be silenced or labelled “bigots” and were entitled to express their views.
He rejected claims Australia lagged behind other countries, or that gay marriage should be legalised based on polls showing the majority of Australians supported it.
“Sometimes polling doesn’t get it right and that’s why we have elections,” he said.
Nationals Senator Matthew Canavan said the evidence was “abundantly clear” that outcomes for children were best on average when their biological parents were married.
He spoke of how his grandfather had walked out on his father as a child and how he still regarded his fatherless upbringing as a “tragedy”.
“The combination of a mother and father make for a very nurturing and supportive environment for children,” he said.
Senator Canavan said love was not a sufficient condition for marriage because it was also about creating children, something only heterosexual couples can do.
Changing the Marriage Act in the way the Bill proposed would not be a celebration of diversity.
“It will be a celebration of uniformity,” he said.
“It will make all relationships that just simply involve love between two human beings the same.”
Senator Canavan again argued that any change to the Marriage Act that did not respect religious views would be a contravention of human rights.
