Christians exposed to courts and fines by homosexual marriage

Some Coalition MPs are warning that the redefinition of marriage will leave churches, schools, charities and individuals that defend traditional marriage exposed to legal challenges in the future.

West Australian Liberal MP Andrew Hastie said yesterday that religious protections in Dean Smith's SSM bill were insufficient.

“The Smith bill only offered protections to individuals involved in the conduct of weddings. It failed to grasp the far-reaching significance of redefining marriage," he said.

Mr Hastie suggested discrimin­ation laws across the country were skewed against those who continued to defend traditional marriage — individuals could be left legally exposed for simply speaking their minds while non-government schools could be forced to change their teachings if same-sex marriage was passed.

“What about Australians who hold to the view of marriage as a union between a man and a woman based on empirical evidence, biology and historical precedence? This is how I’ve made the case as a parliamentarian — without reference to sexuality or ­religion … will that view be acceptable if we change the definition?

“Will people, churches, schools, charitable organisations and businesses be protected if they hold to the common view of marriage?”

His comments were backed by Victorian Liberal MP Kevin Andrews and echoed by the Moderator General of the Presbyterian Church of Australia, John P. Wilson, who told The Australian the lack of religious protections in the Smith bill posed a threat to Presbyterian schools. “There is no doubt that teachers will be required to teach pupils about the validity of same-sex marriage. What protections will there be if they conscientiously object?” Mr Wilson said.