Sam Butler: Civil Disobedience?

Last week saw a disheartening but perhaps necessary reality check on marriage equality.

Labor's Joel Fitzgibbon and the Coalition's Warren Entsch jointly highlighted the likelihood of Stephen Jones' private members marriage equality bill passing this year – minimal. Their proposed civil union alternative is problematic for so many reasons that have been explained myriad times here and elsewhere.

But it has a fighting chance.

In fact, based on comments from MPs during the electorate consultation exercise last year on this issue, it has more than a fighting chance. Even some of the strongest anti-equality members of both parties signalled their open-mindedness to some kind of civil union scheme.

Perhaps lobbyists holding out for marriage equality or nothing know something we don't – they certainly spend a lot of time in Canberra working very hard in the face of great adversity. But as an outsider to that process, a few things look clear to me:

1.    Tony Abbott will be Prime Minister less than two years from now, most likely with a comfortable buffer of seats and even holding the balance of power with conservative independent senators.

2.    Abbott has absolutely no interest in legislating for marriage equality and, based on his form so far, will promote similarly queer-unfriendly Coalition members to his senior team. The internal battle then for moderates such as Entsch will shift from hard to near-impossible.

3.    Unless marriage equality is law before Abbott wins – highly improbable – he and his new government will want to bury the issue as well as any alternatives. Just because he no longer says aloud that he's threatened by gays doesn't mean it's not still how he feels in his heart – and he's in good company with so many of his Coalition peers.

Entsch argues that civil unions won't “satisfy the hardliners, but I think it's certainly going to make a difference for a very significant number of gay couples”. His approach to LGBTI rights has always been pragmatic and grounded in the realities of conservative government.

And there are plenty of same-sex couples who don't see any symbolic importance in being part of a historically oppressive and exclusionary institution, but who'd like their relationships to be formally recognised and certifiable for practical purposes.

Politics is the art of displeasing the fewest amount of people. You can understand, then, why politicians juggling a raft of interest groups and diverse voters are keen on civil unions.

I'll always believe in marriage equality for all committed couples but am much less confident about this becoming a reality than I was before Abbott became Opposition Leader and Labor began its slow self-immolation. Are we really prepared to wait up to another decade for a symbolic victory, or is now the time to settle for a pragmatic compromise?