Let's be honest. Abrahamic faiths — Judaism, Christianity and Islam — find any behaviour outside what they deem the sexual norm to be a fundamental threat to family and community.
That doesn't stop Jews, Christians and Muslims from being gay, lesbian, bisexual etc. It also doesn't stop some religious leaders from overcoming their moral qualms and embracing LGBTIQ parishioners. But the fact remains that a fair few devout folk, as well as not-so-devout bigots, will take all lawful steps to stop the lawful recognition of same sex marriage.
Notwithstanding all the obstacles, despite the No folk having virtually the entire Newscorp press on side, Aussies expressed an overwhelming wish to have parliament change the definition of marriage to include Adam and Steve.
Most Aussies, but not all. I strongly doubt my mum voted Yes. A majority of her Sydney electorate of Bennelong, which has a huge South and East Asian population, voted No. Western Sydney electorates, including Parramatta, Reid and Blaxland, home to large Middle Eastern communities (both Christian and Muslim) voted No.
It wasn't just conservative Sydney Anglicans, Catholics or the Australian Christian Lobby that encouraged people to vote No. During the month of Muharram, sacred to Shia Muslims, the No message was being handed out at mosques and spoken from the pulpits.
Sunni Muslims, including influential home-grown imams, reminded the flock about Sodom and Gomorrah, of the sinful nature of homosexual intercourse and of how the sacred law only recognises Adam and Eve and their not-so-same sex relations. They repeated the ACL mantra of the slippery slope and of Safe Schools programs transforming their sons into skirt-wearing queers.
These imams were condemned and harassed by newspapers like The Australian, which happily allowed almost identical messages to be printed on their pages. What's good for the conservative Christian goose isn't good for the conservative Muslim gander.
"Does the concept of solidarity between minorities mean anything in this time of majoritarian populism?"
Interestingly, none of the No material featured pictures of men in beards or women in headscarves. East Asian faces were prominent. Was this done out of fear or prejudice? Or was it the No folk taking Muslims for granted? I have no idea how Muslims as a whole voted. Many of them don't reside in the usual 'Muslim' suburbs. There is a substantial LGBTIQ Muslim population, though many prefer not to go public about their sexuality.
But there's another deeper point in all this. What we seem