Labor has rejected demands for amendments to the cross-party same-sex marriage bill, the bill is already a compromise and Calls warning MPs on both sides to respect the postal survey result.

The treasurer, Scott Morrison, and other conservatives have promised to pursue amendments, despite the Turnbull government’s announcement of a religious freedom inquiry to report back in 2018.

The Liberal senator David Fawcett said that conservatives had dropped the suggestion commercial service providers, such as florists and bakers, should be allowed to refuse same-sex weddings but would propose other elements of the James Paterson bill as amendments.

While public advocacy of amendments has been limited to Coalition figures, the Labor senators have all refused to say how they will vote, despite the 61.6% victory for the yes campaign in the postal survey.

A Labor senator has said he will vote against same-sex marriage.

The attorney general has called for civil celebrants to be able to reject weddings and a “declaratory statement” that the bill does not harm religious freedom. Calls for a parental veto on classes that clash with their values and to shield organisations with traditional marriage views.

“We cannot entrench discrimination in the Marriage Act – it would be completely contrary to the outcome that the Australian community has asked for.”

Federal law giving parents the right to pull their children out of class might be unconstitutional because it is not sufficiently connected to marriage to come under the commonwealth’s head of power.

“We need to think very carefully before we give parents the right to interfere in secular education,”

“For example should we give parents the right to withdraw children from a science class because they believe in creationism?”

Fawcett said that different states and territories had inconsistent discrimination laws and the exemptions that religious organisations have to the federal Sex Discrimination Act should apply nationwide.

Fawcett backed Morrison’s position that no detriment clauses and freedom of speech provisions to prevent people from “harassing or threatening” others with traditional marriage views should be pursued regardless of the Ruddock review.

Earlier Dreyfus, the shadow attorney general, told ABC Radio: “We don’t think that anything should happen which gets in the way of marriage equality being made a reality in Australia by the end of this year.

There is challenges to the bill and the worry by activists that the Coalition of Conservatives will try and lighten the bill and go against the will of the people by stealth and implement discrimination in many factors including Education, workplace laws, service providers. The Survey result MUST be respected activists say, We expect nothing less and no dressing up the bill or protections hidden behind religious freedoms will be expected.