Why isn't the Discrimination Act used against parliament?
Discrimination on the grounds of gender is illegal is it not?
The Federal Government has waged a fear campaign in the Australian community for years now. Maintaining fear of homosexuality fits right in with this. Anxious, paranoid and insecure people tend to vote right, so keeping up the fear message is good for conservative politics. The Liberals also foster conflict over consensus in most of their administration believing conflict is beneficial in causing the change they want to happen.

Gays tend to represent an educated slice of the community that votes left, so why would the conservatives favour them? they don't, they just don't care that much about citizen's rights. Those on the right that do care want to punish gays. The churches have a lot to do with this, still broadcasting their homophobic, anti feminine superstition at any anyone who will listen.

Homophobia is only one type of anxiety, but those exhibiting it are often scared of many other things. It is their general state of anxiety that needs addressing, not just the one phobia, but the many together and the solutions for these frightened people. Blaming them and ridiculing them for expressing their fear is not a solution -that is their response to the things they fear. These people need education, reassurance and reasonable explanations to help with attitude change.

Just thought I'd re-post BOAZ_David's comments, but change "homesexual" to "christian". It's just as logical and I'm sure he would agree with the sentiment. The words are his own, so he cant find them offensive in any way.
What exactly is a anti-christian law?
Why do christian people and their supporters deal with opposition to their views by labelling those who disagree with them anti-christian? What is the point of such name calling? Surely if you have a good argument you can deal with opposing arguments without resorting to such childish behaviour.
Or are we to presume that everyone who disagrees with christians about any issue does so only because they are afraid of them? Christian people cannot be wrong they can only be victims of ‘anti-christian’.
There may even be discrimination but that does not automatically mean that people who discriminate are afraid of christians or christianity.
People who promote christian rights do nothing for their integrity or their cause when they resort to such defensive tactics.
It is like saying someone who disagrees with the policies of Robert Mugabe is just a racist. Is it not possible his policies are just wrong?
“Laws that discriminate against christian couples cannot be justified for any other reason than a dislike of their religiousity”
Of course they can. Many people do not think children should be brought up by christian couples and give very good reasons to support their argument. Christian people may not agree with them but that does not mean those people are motivated only by a dislike or aversion towards christians. They may be motivated by a deep concern for the children.
The term ‘anti-christian’ is not only used in relation to discrimination. Whenever anyone disagrees with the apologetic put forward by christian people to justify their religious behaviour they are also labelled ‘anti-christian’.

AND MORE...
Christian people may argue that their behaviour is quite natural and give reasons to substantiate their claim. Someone else may criticise their argument and provide good reasons to show that their argument is false and that therefore christian behaviour is not natural. You could not deduce from this that the person has a dislike or aversion to christians nor could you deduce that they have a like of christians. All you can deduce is that they base their judgements on reason and logic.
The reality is that there is no discrimination. There is no anti-christian. There is no such thing as religious preference. There is no such thing as a christian.
There are just a lot of people in emotional pain. Some people dull their pain with alcohol, some with drugs, some with eating disorders, some with religion, some with work, some with play. Some people try and avoid facing their pain by getting involved in relationships that can never bring them the peace they seek. Some people try to find solace in unnatural religious behaviour. Some people combine two or more behaviours in the quest for relief from their pain.
When they are challenged they begin to rationalise their behaviour. Like the alcoholic who says he just likes the taste of drink or the company of his mates. Like the drug addict who says it is only ‘recreational’. Like the religious person who says it is what ‘God’ wants.
People who use dysfunctional relationships and unnatural religious behaviour to avoid their pain will try and rationalise it in many ways. They become very aggressive when their rationalisations do not stand up to critical analysis. They seek to attack and hurt those who threaten to expose the underlying pain from which they are trying to escape.