The ‘Yes’ campaign’s first ad focused on the evidential flaws with the ‘No’ campaign’s ads.
The history of widespread advocacy campaigns shows that the 'No' campaign has many unfair advantages in the marriage equality debate.
We don’t yet know why the High Court decided the way it did in upholding the validity of the postal vote.
To find the government's postal plebiscite on same-sex marriage valid, the High Court had to work through several quite technical constitutional and legal arguments.
Many of the studies on this question examine the outcomes for children in same-sex parented families where both parents are women.
Discussing his opposition to same-sex marriage, Liberal MP Kevin Andrews said children who are brought up with a mother and father are 'better off than those who are not'. Let's look at the research.
If marriage is to be redefined, substantial protections should be provided for conscientious objectors.
Conscience protections for those opposed to same-sex marriage should not be seen as excusing bigotry. Rather, it is a legitimate means of best promoting everyone’s welfare.
Increasing numbers of Australians agree with the notion of same-sex couples having the same rights as different-sex couples.
HILDA data reveal an overwhelming tide of support toward the rights of same-sex couples within Australian society.
Marriage is not an automatic right for anyone.
We need to get beyond hyperbole and half-truths from those both for and against marriage equality, and go back to basics.
Marriage equality supporters protesting outside the Tasmanian Liberal Party state council this week.
A 'No' result in the postal ballot would leave a running sore that would further reduce Malcolm Turnbull's diminished authority.
Community leaders will play a very important role in whipping votes for or against in the same-sex marriage plebiscite.
Social conservatism among many ethnic communities will be a key factor in deciding the result of the upcoming same-sex marriage survey.
Christians who call on the Bible to support their arguments against marriage equality are on shaky ground.
For Christian groups to claim the Bible speaks against same-sex marriage is simply a misreading of biblical values.
There are considerable mental health and wellbeing benefits conferred upon those in the fortunate position of being able to legally marry.
The majority of academic research is either non-committal or in favour of the benefits afforded by legalising same-sex marriage.
Cory Bernardi’s views on same-sex marriage may be crude and ignorant, but the media are nonetheless obligated to report how he uses his power.
In the marriage equality debate as in any other, media outlets must balance the right to freedom of speech with the balance of evidence.
With the eligibility of the Nationals’ leadership under question, Malcolm Turnbull has had a nightmarish week.
Malcolm Turnbull is an optimist, or so he always tells us, and he'll be looking at how things could all work out for the best in the best of worlds.
Like its Tasmanian predecessor, the marriage plebiscite has been engineered by the leader’s intransigent opponents.
Malcolm Turnbull’s postal plebiscite on marriage equality is on the cusp of recreating the mistakes of Doug Lowe’s Tasmanian dams plebiscite.
Michelle Grattan and Nicholas Klomp discuss the week in politics.
Bill Shorten has promised an all-out effort to promote a yes vote, while continuing to attack the ballot.
While Bill Shorten has little at risk, his campaigning on same-sex marriage could come to Malcolm Turnbull's aid.
For the ABS, even the basic task of sending out ballot papers will not be straightforward.
The key question in a legal challenge to the 'postal plebiscite' is whether information about Australians’ opinions on same-sex marriage constitutes 'statistical information'.
Malcolm Turnbull has bought himself immediate relief from the backbench revolt.
When it comes to the Liberals and same-sex marriage, each “solution” seems to lead to a new problem. Tony Abbott’s plebiscite became bad news for Malcolm Turnbull; now Turnbull’s postal vote – to ask people…
Throughout Australian history, previous parliaments have changed the legal understanding of marriage – none needed a plebiscite.
The government seems determined to give voters a voice on marriage equality, and equally determined not to be bound by what those voters say.
This is a potent slogan, although there is a deeply conservative undertone to the idea that love always requires marriage.
The marriage equality movement could still back the plebiscite on condition that its results are binding.
At Monday’s meeting of nearly two hours, only Warren Entsch reserved his right to cross the floor.
Having lit the match that fired same-sex marriage back onto the government’s immediate agenda, the five Liberal rebels have left Malcolm Turnbull with a dangerously smouldering issue that will burn on…