Australia, like many countries, is wrestling with the question of whether or not same-sex couples should have the freedom to marry. The head of Australia’s Presbyterian Church, Reverend David Jones, believes that Christians opposed to the change are in no way being discriminatory:

JONES: We continually are told that the legalisation of same-sex marriage would end perceived discrimination against same-sex couples who are currently not able to marry under federal government law. But at least from the church perspective, opposition to such legalisation has nothing to do with discrimination. Plain and simply, Christians oppose same-sex marriage because the Bible, the word of the God who created male and female and also created marriage, clearly and distinctly says that marriage is between one man and one woman – which means not between two men or two women.

Jones, just like the conservative Christians in the U.S. who oppose marriage equality (and defend Chick-fil-A), seems to believe that “discrimination” and the Bible are always mutually exclusive. While it may not be convenient for them to admit this, the reality is that a belief can both be “Christian” and “discrimination” at the very same time. Indeed, most of the forms of inequality society has left behind in the history books were in the Bible to begin with. Same-sex marriage is no different, and the inequality experienced by same-sex couples should be a much bigger priority than appeasing the consciences of those defending discrimination.

Many do not realize that the bell-ringing Salvation Army is actually a Christian church organization with many conservative tenets and a military-style structure. Last week, an Australian Salvation Army official, Major Andrew Craibe, addressed questions about the organization’s anti-gay policies in a radio interview, acknowledging multiple times that the Bible calls for LGBT people to be put to death if they do not “come to know salvation” (i.e. chastity).

Hours after Truth Wins Out first reported the interview, the Salvation Army Australia issued an apology for Craibe’s “miscommunication,” explaining that the Bible refers not to “physical death” but to “spiritual death”:

The Scripture in question, viewed in its broader context, is not referring to physical death, nor is it specifically targeted at homosexual behaviour. The author is arguing that no human being is without sin, all sin leads to spiritual death (separation from God), and all people therefore need a Saviour. [...]

The Salvation Army sincerely apologises to all members of the GLBT community and to all our clients, employees, volunteers and those who are part of our faith communities for the offence caused by this miscommunication.[...]

We pledge to continue to offer services to all Australians and to treat each person with dignity, respect and non-discrimination.

The statement does not fully address the Salvation Army’s on-going anti-LGBT policies. The controversy in Australia has erupted after openly gay pop star Darren Hayes (formerly of Savage Garden) called for a boycott because of the group’s antagonistic beliefs on sexuality. LGBT blogger Bil Browning did the same this past year in the U.S., citing the organization’s anti-gay lobbying efforts and its expectation that gay people who benefit from its charity be celibate.

The Australian state of Queensland decided last night to take some rights away from same-sex couples. The Legislative Assembly downgraded civil partnerships to the class of “registered relationships,” revoking the option for couples to have an official ceremony. Worse yet, Attorney-General Jarrod Bleijie announced that single people and gay couples will no longer be allowed to have children through a surrogate, increasing the difficulty for them to start families.

A former campaigner for the conservative Liberal National Party, which is responsible for the downgrade, explained the thinking behind the change. According to Graham Young, surrogacy treats children like property:

YOUNG: I don’t think you treat children as chattels, as possessions you have some sort of a right to have, I think they rise out of your situation and if you’re a heterosexual couple it arises naturally out of it. If you’re not a heterosexual couple then it can’t arise naturally out of it and I think that is just a consequence of not being in a heterosexual couple, or being barren. It troubles me, this idea that people have a right to have a child and that the child then becomes something which is sort of organised between people.

Apparently conservatives like Young believe that children are better off when parents are not prepared to raise them and do not have the proper resources. This obvious deficit of logic can only be explained by a bias against same-sex couples or some bizarre subscription to a “natural law” with no foundation in reality.

In an interesting aside, Queensland’s highest court ruled this week that people who are bisexual can claim compensation if they are vilified with homophobia. Perhaps the state’s LGBT community should file a complaint against the entire Legislative Assembly.

LGBT advocates in Australia are calling a clip from the debate show Q&A a “watershed moment” in the nation’s struggle over marriage equality. In the short clip, Shadow Treasurer Joe Hockey responded to a question about his opposition to same-sex marriage and why he believes he and his wife are better parents than Finance Minister Penny Wong and her female partner. After Hockey’s response, Wong, clearly a bit shaken by the unexpected question, reacted with quiet confidence, “I know what my family is worth”:

HOCKEY: I must confess my views have changed since I’ve had children… I think in this life we’ve got to aspire to give our children what I believe is the very best circumstances, and that’s to have a mother and a father. [...]

WONG: Well there’s almost nothing I can say… It is sad, I think that some families have to feel that they have to justify who they are. Because when you say those things, Joe, what you’re saying to not just me, but to people like me, is that the most important thing in our lives, which is the people we love, is somehow less good, less valued. If you believe that, you believe that, but I have a different view.

MODERATOR: Is it hurtful?

WONG: Of course it is. But, you know, I know what my family is worth.

Watch it:

Wong’s office has been overwhelmed by calls and messages of support, and the clip is quickly going viral. While this may have more direct political ramifications in Australia, the calm, quiet pride Wong expresses in her family will no doubt resonate across the globe.