This amendment simply seeks to protect the ability of anybody, after today or after when this legislation receives royal assent, to say respectfully—and not, as the member for Canning pointed out, in any hateful way—that they still believe this is what the meaning of marriage is. That is what is before the House today. Can I make this point to those in the galleries or elsewhere. The day you start to cherrypick which human rights are most important is a dangerous day. That is why the United Nations and others have said that there is no hierarchy of rights. That is why we're saying that, along with the claim being upheld and propounded by so many people that there's a right to marry regardless of what gender a person is, this amendment does not extinguish the right of other Australians to say, 'Nonetheless, I believe this is the definition of marriage from a personal conscientiously or religiously believed point of view.' That is simply what is being asked for here. To not to uphold this is, I think, a dangerous path.