Religious Discrimination Bill 2019: How worried should we be?

The media headlines on this ReligiousDiscrimination Bill 2019 were, and continue to be pretty hard to miss; and so they should be, because this Religious Discrimination Bill has the potential to impact every part of our lives.

On realising this, thought it was time to try and understand ‘The Bill’ – beyond the headlines, editorial and opinion pieces. The reading ended up including some pretty diverse material, (but is not limited to): Exposure Draft of The Religious Discrimination Bill 2019, including the, Explanatory Notes, and other documents helpfully provided through the Attorney General’s Department. 

Then process of comparing, Exposure Draft of The Religious Discrimination Bill 2019 against, Australian Human Rights Commission Submission to the Expert Panel (Feb, 2018), Law Council of Australia Religious Freedom Review (27/02/2018) and have also read the Anglican Church's submission to the AHRC review.

In addition to these, and media reporting, I have also looked at:

•          Australia’sConstitution (with Overview and Notes by the Australian Government Solicitor).

•          'Liberal assumptions in section 116 cases and implication for Religious Freedom' (Faculty of Law Queensland, University of Technology, Published Federal Law Review, Vol 46, pp. 113-136).

•          'Freedom of Religion as An Associational Right' (University of Queensland, Law Journal 2014 pp153-186).

•          Protecting Religious Freedom under Australian Law, by Dr Timothy Arnold-Moore (with contributions from the Anglican Diocese of Melbourne Social Responsibilities Committee), Zadock Papers, S229 & S230 Winter 2018.  

Talk about disappearing down a rabbit hole! I have also read material, distributed by Freedom of Faith, and Australian Christian Lobby (ACL), organisations and unfortunately the sticky fingers of the ACL appear to be all over the bill itself – yet still the ACL are screaming it doesn’t go far enough.

Now I am not a lawyer, just a person of curious inclination and the more I read - the more the Religious Discrimination Bill 2019, created concern and convinced me, The Bill isn’t needed at all.

Most religious rights and freedoms, being already adequately covered under a variety of International, Commonwealth and  (most) State, anti-discrimination laws (and Human Rights). What worries me most at this juncture; is any potential for a Religious Discrimination Bill, to void or override existing State laws.

                                       

In essence the Religious Discrimination Bill is an attempt for solution, to a problem, which simply just does not exist. It seems more likely this Bill is a reaction to a perceived, political problem, (or culture wars). A point reinforced on reading,

“ 13. The review was announced in response to the proposals for legislative reform to protect freedom of religion during the debate on marriage equality…” (p3 Explanatory Notes)

It is also obvious that clause 8(3) is a reaction to the Israel Folau case. The inclusion such of such clauses, are questionable. Particularly, as this case has yet to been played out in court of law. Which is the appropriate place, not a Religious Discrimination Bill.

The entire concept and proposed Religious Discrimination Bill 2019 itself seems to be part of a growing trend which sees Australian Parliamentarians tripping over themselves in a rush to enact laws which they (and often we) don’t fully understanding the future implications and repercussions of. Enacting laws without testing them, simply leads to the erosion of freedoms, and not their protection.

Human Rights are inherent rights are not granted, by the state, but must be protected from the state.

These human rights include women’s right to reproductive healthcare (and safe medical abortion). It is simply not acceptable, nor ethical in any circumstances for a medical practitioner to place his/her own religious beliefs above the healthcare requirements of a patient. 

At the very least, that healthcare provider must supply a referral to an alternate provider, particularly where they are in receipt of public monies (e.g. Medicare).  All of this also applies to and has potential consequences for couples seeking IVF treatment, women seeking contraception, or men seeking vasectomy etc.or even blood transfusion or use of blood based treatments - not just women seeking safe medical abortions !

Any legislation which, negates a patient’s medical care in such a manner, must never be enacted. Nor any law, which creates even the perception of licence to offensive views, marginalise or discriminate on grounds such as: gender, sex, sexual orientation, race, religion, non-religion, disability etc.

The potential impact of this bill is also not compatible with a harmonious work place and the ramifications for both employees and employees may well be a reduction of rights – not an increase.

Ultimately the proposed Religious Discrimination Bill 2019, fails to balance competing rights. There must be no room for Human Rights abuses in any legislation. Far better to ‘tweak’ existing Commonwealth and State anti-discrimination laws, along with introducing a ‘Charter of Rights’ into Commonwealth Law.

The conclusion - the proposed Religious Discrimination Bill 2019, is quite simply an insult to modern, plural Australian society and an attack on existing anti discrimination laws – state, Commonwealth and International (UN).

At the end of the day, tolerance and compassion must always be more important than religious opinion.  

How worried should we be? VERY ! 

Intolerance, Bigotry and Religious Freedom

What are religious texts really? Well, essentially they are nothing more than guidebooks for life, of which religious leaders have always retained absolute control of the text in so doing making, religious leaders the influential, powerful force providing direction. However, what an individual does with that information is another matter. 

Religion must always teach kindness, respect and tolerance; it must never condone greed, violence and war. Those of faith should always be seeking common features amongst religions (and groups within their own faith), common features which, bring them together rather than pushing them apart.

Unfortunately in the current global political climate, it appears bigotry and intolerance are increasing and appears to making conservative, fundamentalist and radical Christians more vocal in their bigotry.

Bigotry pushes for the freedom to deny others the identical rights of everyone else – and be thanked, free of the consequences their actions bring.

In this environment, Progressives have a moral obligation and duty to stand up to this, to clearly and irrevocably state, ‘this is not OK’.

In refusing to accept their bigotry we are not rescinding their rights to be the obnoxious petty myopic minded bigot wish to be – such individuals are still free to wallow in their bigotry, but they cannot and should never be permitted to avoid the consequences as their bigotry forces their beliefs onto others, without the permission of those others. Therefore bigots do not have the right to insulate themselves from the consequences of their actions, prejudices etc.

Religion must always provide benevolent guidance and influence. Obviously all religions attempt to lead their followers down a path of care and respect for others* which means religious leaders must bear the responsibility of direction. It is their responsibility to teach kindness, tolerance and respect. To spread a message of peace, not condone: bigotry, violence, greed or war. Discrimination is not genetic; it is, learned and fostered.

Is it ever okay to be intolerant? Yes it is.

It is okay to be intolerant of:

• ·      Politics which attempt to create and ensure a climate safe for bigotry to flourish and disguise it as ‘respectability’.
• ·      Legislation, which limits access to basic human rights, due to an individual’s: gender, race, sexual orientation, religion, gender expression etc. Or any legal system which is unbalanced (against) these groups:
• ·      Mechanisms and environments, which protect those who bully LGBTQI youngsters under the façade of ‘protecting religious freedom’.
• ·      The marginalisation of other religions or denominations.
• ·      Killing civilians, just because they have the misfortune to live in a nation, our politicians don’t like.
• ·      The politics of fear, which keeps refugees from finding a home amongst us and views such migrants as leeches, terrorists etc. rather than assets to nation and economy.
• ·      Rape culture.
• ·      Any system, which favors the wealthy over the poor.
• ·      Those damaging the environment, by denying human responsibility for it / impact on it.

Bigotry is a choice and if it is your choice – fine, but you also have to live with and take responsibility for the consequences. Also don’t expect the rest of us to standby and not speak out. 

Particularly whilst the Australian Govt conducts the 'Religious Freedom Review'. One can only hope the voice of both Australian Secular Society, Moderate / Progressive Christians, The Australian Constitution and common sense prevail.  

Religion has no place in politics and bigotry has no place in Christianity (any religion or puplic policy).   

Last but no least, please remember, fundamentalism of any flavor is dangerous - it is not religion specific.

*I loath the word 'righteousness' as it always seems to me those using it, are often using it in an attempt to justify some crappy or nasty conduct.