Contacting Parliament on sex discrimination amendments

“A number of Christian and other religious organisations are deeply concerned about the proposals in the ALP-sponsored private Bill due to be debated in the Senate on Monday Dec 3. As I have discussed in previous comments (here and here) the Bill, which started out as an agreed measure to stop religious schools from expelling gay students on the basis of their “orientation” alone, has a number of other serious consequences for religious freedom, not only for schools but for churches, mosques, synagogues and other religious organisations (such as, for example, University student ministries.)

The Bill amends the Sex Discrimination Act 1984 to remove some clauses which have previously provided protection for Christian organisations to operate in accordance with their religious beliefs. …

I have been asked how concerned citizens can contact their Parliamentary representatives. …”

– Associate Professor Neil Foster shares some points you might make to your Parliamentary representatives. (Emphasis added.)

Why Australian Religious Freedom is under legal threat

“Religious Freedom in Australia is under immediate legal threat.

A new bill introduced into the Senate last week (due to be debated this Monday, December 3rd) will, if passed unamended, severely erode Religious Freedom in our land. Especially for religious schools. …”

At the Gospel Coalition Australia, Akos Balogh urges Christians to pray and act, and explains why.

Government amendments to religious schools bill

“For those following the debates about proposed amendments to discrimination laws removing religious freedom from faith-based schools, the LNP Government has now tabled a number of amendments to the ALP Bill released earlier this week.

While these amendments are a move in the right direction, there are still some serious concerns about their effect on religious schools and their ability to operate in accordance with their religious beliefs. …”

– Associate Professor Neil Foster continues his coverage of the debates about religious freedom in Australia, at Law and Religion Australia.

ALP Bill on religious schools and students

“Senator Wong, leader of the Opposition in the Senate, has introduced a Private Senator’s Bill aimed at removing the power of religious schools to discriminate against same sex attracted students.

Unfortunately, the amendments do much more than stop schools expelling students on the basis of their internal sexual orientation (a goal all sides of politics agree on.) They will have a serious impact on the ability of such schools, and other religious bodies, to operate in accordance with their religious beliefs. A more nuanced approach is needed. …

Despite the assurances offered in the Explanatory Memorandum, I think there is a real danger that the amendments made by this Bill will seriously impair the religious freedom of faith-based schools, and more legislative clarification is required to avoid this outcome. As noted below, it will also have an impact on other institutions.”

– Associate Professor Neil Foster tracks the latest twists and turns in the religious freedom issue – at Law and Religion Australia.

Senate Inquiry into ‘Legislative Exemptions’ reports

“The Senate Legal and Constitutional Affairs References Committee (“LCAR Committee”) has now handed down its report into Legislative exemptions that allow faith-based educational institutions to discriminate against students, teachers and staff.

The inquiry has been incredibly short – the motion referring the topic was only passed on 13 November.

As expected (due to the preponderance of ALP and Greens committee members) the report recommends complete removal of religious freedom protections for faith-based schools relating to how those schools deal with same-sex attracted students. There is a strong dissenting report from Coalition Senators.

In my view the majority report would seriously impair the right of faith-based schools to operate in accordance with their religious ethos, and should be rejected by those considering changes to the law. …

… without reading the contents of the Ruddock Report, the Committee recommends two of its recommendations be rejected out of hand. …

I can’t help but also register my dissent from the Committee’s apparent preference for the ‘Tasmanian’ model of discrimination law …

I recommend a careful reading of the minority report, which is (in terms of page length) of comparable size to the majority, and in my respectful opinion, provides a much more persuasive analysis than the majority.”

– Neil Foster, Associate Professor in Law, takes a look at the Senate Report on ‘Legislative exemptions’.

He notes that, while the recommendations of the Ruddock Report on religious freedom were leaked prior to a recent by-election, the Ruddock Report itself has not yet been released.

Read his full comments at Law and Religion Australia.

Delaying religious freedom legislation comes with a major cost

Here’s a media release from the Australian Christian Lobby –

The Australian Christian Lobby today warned that the radical amendments which passed Tasmania’s lower house last night will mean freedom of speech is now all but dead.

ACL’s state director Mark Brown said, “The changes pushed by Labor and the Greens mean that gender will become opt-in for all Tasmanian’s – a move which 95% of 44,000 respondents to a news poll did not agree with.”

“There has been no community consultation and these amendments have been rammed through without any consideration of the unintended consequences they may have,” commented Mr Brown.

One of the amendments pushed by Labor and the Greens changes the definition of gender identity in the Anti-Discrimination Act to include gender expression which means, “…any personal physical expression, appearance (whether by way of medical intervention or not), speech, mannerisms, behavioural patterns, names and personal references that manifest or express gender or gender identity.”  

Managing director of the ACL Martyn Iles said, “Prohibiting speech that ‘offends’ or ‘insults’ based on gender expression opens a Pandora’s box. Gender expression includes any behaviour whatsoever if justified by reference to one of the infinite genders people have invented. It is unenforceable madness enshrined in law, which will be abused constantly.”

“Failing to use someone’s preferred pronouns will also be hate speech if these laws pass the upper house.”

“There was an opportunity for Parliament to repeal the section 17 hate speech law last year, but they baulked at the idea because the politics seemed too difficult at the time. Now we see it being weaponised even further.”

“We are now in a position where laws preventing and removing democratic freedoms are being pushed through parliaments across the country while legislation to protect religious freedom has stagnated.”

“This shows the increasing and compounding cost associated with the government delaying action on religious freedom in Australia,” said Mr Iles.

– Source. Emphasis added.

“White” on the new black-list

“A popular wedding magazine called ‘White’ has announced today that it is closing down. The reason? The Christian publishers had been asked to carry articles featuring same sex weddings, and had politely declined to do so.

The backlash on social media led to a number of advertisers withdrawing their custom, and some customers refusing to buy the magazine any more. In this post I want to comment on the legal issues around this incident, and another episode highlighted in the press today.

A report in The Australian today notes the close of White magazine, and also the other episode involving someone in the ‘wedding industry’:

Christian wedding photographer Jason Tey was taken to the West Australian Equal Opportunity Commission after he agreed to photograph the children of a same-sex couple but disclosed a conflict of belief, in case they felt more comfortable hiring someone else. …”

– Associate Professor Neil Foster comments on a story in today’s The Weekend Australian.

Religious freedom lost as White magazine shuts

“Christians are being run out of business, hounded by boycotts and bullied by activists, for adhering to their faith a year after the celebrated same-sex-marriage vote.

In a sign Australia faces a ‘crisis of freedom’, The Weekend Australian can reveal a successful international wedding magazine that chose not to feature gay couples will today announce its decision to shut down after becoming the target of an intimidation campaign.

The founders of White magazine, Christians Luke and Carla Burrell, said they were the targets of an activist campaign that deterred their advertisers, frightened their staff and included threats of physical harm because of their stand on same-sex weddings. …”

– Read the full story in The Weekend Australian (subscription).

See also:

Farewell – Official Statement from White magazine.

“Recently we’ve experienced a flood of judgement. We know much of that comes hand-in-hand with running a public magazine. But we are also just two humans fumbling our way through these big questions and like anyone else, and we don’t have all the answers.

Instead of allowing us the space to work through our thoughts and feelings, or being willing to engage in brave conversations to really hear each other’s stories, some have just blindly demanded that we pick a side. We’re not about sides, we’re about love, patience and kindness. A campaign was launched targeting the magazine, our team and our advertisers. Couples who have featured in our magazine have also been the subject of online abuse despite their individual beliefs. We’re really saddened by this. …”

(Note also some of the comments below that article.)

Urgent action needed on religious freedom – The Australian Christian Lobby media release:

“Revelations today that Australians are being persecuted for their beliefs shine a light on the need for urgent religious freedom protections, the Australian Christian Lobby says.

The call comes after The Weekend Australian has revealed that photographer Jason Tey, is before a State Administrative Tribunal not for declining service, but for simply stating his Christian beliefs. …”

Photo: White magazine.

Kings Headmaster Tony George speaks about Religious Freedom

In a Kingscast Special, produced for the Kings School community, Headmaster Tony George answers questions about the Open Letter to All Members of Parliament sent on behalf of Anglican schools.

Watch the ten minute interview  – and do take the time to read the letter – it seems many haven’t. (3.4MB PDF file.)

ACT bill removing religious freedom from religious schools introduced

“As foreshadowed in the press reports noted in my previous post, the ACT Government has now introduced a Bill designed to curtail the current religious freedom enjoyed by religious schools in the Territory to operate in accordance with their beliefs.

The Discrimination Amendment Bill 2018 (ACT) is an unwise proposal and it is likely that it would be invalid as contrary to Commonwealth law. …”

– Associate Professor in Law Neil Foster argues that the proposed ACT law should not be adopted.

Anglican Educators write Open Letter to MPs

“The heads of the 34 Sydney Anglican schools have written an Open Letter to MPs, calling on Parliament to continue anti-discrimination exemptions which allow schools to main their Christian ethos and mission.

‘As Principals and Heads of Anglican Schools in Greater Sydney and the Illawarra we write this public letter to all members of the Parliament of Australia.’ the letter begins. ‘There has been quite some discussion recently about the rights of faith-based schools and their current exemptions under federal anti-discrimination legislation. The debate has been polemicised as the right to expel gay students, with little evidence that this occurs, and the right to dismiss gay staff members, again with little evidence that this occurs.’…”

– Story from SydneyAnglicans.net.

ACT proposal to remove religious freedom provisions for schools

“Reports in the press note that that the ACT Government has announced its intention to ‘close a loophole’ in discrimination laws by removing the capacity of religious schools to apply their religious beliefs in staffing decisions.

The law being referred to is not a ‘loophole’, it is part of the fundamental architecture of discrimination law around Australia, with rare exceptions, and removing these provisions would not be a good idea. …”

– Neil Foster looks at the latest news – at Law and Religion Australia.

National Apology to Victims and Survivors of Institutional Child Sexual Abuse — Public Statement

Anglican Church Diocese of Sydney
Public Statement

National Apology to Victims and Survivors of Institutional Child Sexual Abuse

The Anglican Church in the Diocese of Sydney welcomes the decision of the Federal Government to issue a National Apology to the survivors of child sexual abuse. While this apology comes in the wake of the Royal Commission into Institutional Responses to Child Sexual Abuse, it is an important step for the healing of survivors, though nothing will ever rid them of the memories of past abuses.

As Archbishop, I recognise and respect the wishes of the survivors to have no leaders of institutions present in Parliament House when the Prime Minister, the Hon. Scott Morrison, delivers the National Apology, nor in the livestreaming of this important event in the Opera House, hosted by the Premier of NSW, the Hon. Gladys Berejiklian.

In respecting survivors’ wishes, I take the opportunity again to offer an apology on behalf of the Anglican Church in Sydney, where such abuses have happened in the past. That our Church was complicit in any way in these events, by ignoring them, disbelieving the testimony of survivors, or allowing sex offenders to continue their horrendous conduct in what should have been the safe environs of a church, is itself a matter of deep shame. While I and my immediate two predecessors have issued apologies in the past, let me reiterate my apology to the survivors of child sexual abuse, for our failure to protect them as children. While we have adopted rigorous processes to ensure the safety of children in the present, I recognise that this will not overcome the trauma that accompanies the sins of the past.

My fervent prayer is that today’s National Apology will in some measure provide healing for these wounds, raise the national consciousness of the seriousness of child sexual abuse, and enable us as a nation, and individually as citizens, to play our part in protecting and giving voice to the most vulnerable among us, for the benefit of future generations of Australians.

Archbishop Glenn Davies
22 October 2018.

– Source: SydneyAnglicans.net media release.

Conscientious Objection in the Termination of Pregnancy Bill 2018 (Qld)

“On 17th October 2018 the Queensland Parliament passed the Termination of Pregnancy Bill 2018 (Qld).

This law will, among other things, allow abortion on demand up to 22 weeks’ gestation, and abortion up to full term if approved by two independent doctors who agree it is appropriate taking into account all the circumstances.

Setting aside for one moment the significant objections to the primary function of this legislation in general, a major point of contention with the bill was the extent to which health practitioners are able to refrain from providing abortion services because they have a conscientious objection. …”

– In a guest post at Law and Religion Australia, Dr. Alex Deagon, Senior Lecturer, Faculty of Law, Queensland University of Technology, looks at the implications of the new bill for health practitioners.

Ruddock Report: religious schools and same sex attracted students

“A media outlet here in Australia has released what it says are the 20 recommendations made by the Expert Panel on Religious Freedom chaired by the Hon Philip Ruddock. The Report itself was delivered to the Government in May 2018, but has not officially been released. Apparently the Government is planning to release the Report at the same time as announcing its official response.

The main issue which has generated controversy during the last week, in which there was a selective leaking of some of the recommendations, were proposals dealing with the rights of religious schools to take into account the sexual orientation of students in certain areas. The changes proposed were not radical changes to the existing law, but were presented as such when first publicised.

In this post I want to briefly set these recommendations in context and offer my preliminary response. …”

– At Law and Religion Australia, Assoc. Prof. Neil Foster provides some helpful background to the media reports.

← Previous Page — Next Page →