Australia's Religious Discrimination Act.

by fulltimestudent 9 Replies latest jw friends

• 

  fulltimestudent

  This is an interesting and intriguing new Law (or, it will be if enacted in its present form).

  Quote: "The proposed new Religious Discrimination Act is intended to prevent a person from being discriminated against on the basis of their religion."

  Well. fair enough, but to get it through the House of Representatives last night, the government accepted some changes.

  The first draft (discussed last night) had a clause that may have impacted the rights of some gay and/or trans-sexual students at religious schools by allowing a religious school to expel such a student

  Last night the government was forced to accept changes that removed that possibility. (actually while that's how some news sources announced the changes, it is not quite clear that that was the case - the Bill now goes to the Senate, where more legal argument are certain.

  But, my mind jumped to the future. Suppose this law actually does prevent gay/trans-sexual staff and students being expelled from a school, how long do you think it may be before some strong-minded young gay/trans-sexual raised as JW and disfellowshiped for being gay or trans-sexual, decides to challenge the JWs right to disfellowship on those ground? The Act is not covering that situation (as far as I know) but as a general principle it may set a precedent, and one way to find that out is to get a smart lawyer to help test it in a series of courts up to the High Court of Australia.

  Should be interesting. And there will not be too many Australians interested in defending the JWs right to disfellowship on those grounds.

  My quote was from an article this morning on the ABC web-site. The ABC is an Aust. government owned media/news service. And while government owned it is not government controlled.

  https://www.abc.net.au/news/2022-02-09/liberal-ministers-discrimination-transgender-exclusion-problem/100815346

  \
• 

  shepherdless

  Unfortunately, we will probably never know, now. Shortly after Fulltimestudent’s post, the bill was defeated and shelved.

  https://www.abc.net.au/news/2022-02-10/government-consults-religious-groups-discrimination-bill/100818568
  
• 

  smiddy3

  In my mind if that law had passed,it would have discriminated against any organization Christian or otherwise to enforce rules for entry into their establishments.

  It would have set a bad precedent that any organization Christian or otherwise had rules of entry and some smart ass would object to.

  I`m not religious now by any means but I agree that a Christian institution has the right to say who can and who cannot be a part of it.

  There are plenty of other options they can choose to go to rather than force your will on an institution to change its policy. IMHO

  What`s your view? I`d be interested ?
• 

  road to nowhere

  This part of the woke crap. You will be told what to believe, have an assigned religion (government approvedz) and be forced to admit womrn are trapped in male bodies and men can get pregnant.
• 

  Simon

  Why can't government just piss off and let people live in any group based on any membership they want free from harassment for it? Why should other people have government backed power over them? For what purpose?

  If someone wants to believe that homosexuality is wrong, then why does anyone gay want to join in the first place? What's the point? It's just idiotic laws backed by aggressive activist groups who simply want to annoy others.

  Any group should be allowed to hold whatever views they want, and control the membership they want. Even if those rules are morally wrong, as long as they are not committing criminal acts against anyone, they are not being harmed.

  Not being admitted into a club is not damaging to anyone. If anything, being in a club that doesn't want you as a member seems like a worse situation to be in. The only clubs the government should be concerning itself with is are the ones it runs itself.
• 

  StephaneLaliberte

  I agree with Simon. Government shouldn't interfere there.

  Where I disagree with Simon is that the Government should try to do something about the fact that groups preach people to shun the disfellowshipped ones and threaten their members with the same treatment if they don't do as they're told.

  In any case, I don't believe this ruling would have any impact on the JWs. They don't allow heterosexuals to engage in sexual activities outside of marriage. Many heterosexuals in that religion are unable to find a mate and , as a result, end up spending the majority of their lives, if not its entirety, sexually repressed. Same goes with homosexuals. They are, by their teachings, condemned to the same lives as the heterosexuals who are unable to find a mate.

  Sure, we all know this results in homophobia in the group and all, but their official teaching as it stands would likely hold in court.
• 

  fulltimestudent

  
  

  Smiddy3 posted: "In my mind if that law had passed,it would have discriminated against any organization Christian or otherwise to enforce rules for entry into their establishments."

  To understand precisely what was discussed would require a reading of the draft bill and the Hansard (parliamentary record) of the debate.

  As I understood it, the debated point referred to students at an educational facility run by some religious group. I doubt that anyone old enough to be thinking about their sexuality would want to start to go to such a school. I understood the issue concerned children, enrolled in a religious school from an early age, reaching (puberty??) and finding they were same sex attracted or transexual and doing or saying something that would lead the school authorities to believe they were gay or transexual, who then expelled them from the school

  NB. That may not always happen of course. I've spoken (you may recall I have a XJW friend who was DF'd for being gay. He got pissed of with this site ages ago and wont post) to some younger gay guys who attended Catholic schools and were treated compassionately by their teachers, even being able to joke about their situation. Of course, also some others told a different story.

  It was that issue, rather than that of a gay adult wishing to join a homophobic religion that was part of the debate, and that caused many members of the rightwing political parties, that form the current Australian government, to vote against their own Govt's bill.

  The present PM is aN 'active' member of a Pentecostal type church. He had promised the leaders of some churches that he would introduce this bill and enact it before the next Federal election, which is due soon. His party holds office with a small majority and he failed to consider whether all members of his party would support the Bill.

  In my initial post, I explored the possibilities that gay XJWs could explore if wishing to take some action over being DF'd.

  To my surprise some posters on this site seem to think that the JWs have a right to disfellowship non-conforming members.
• 

  Simon

  Where I disagree with Simon is that the Government should try to do something about the fact that groups preach people to shun the disfellowshipped ones and threaten their members with the same treatment if they don't do as they're told.

  I'm forever amazed that people don't think through the practicalities or consequences of government enforced association. I don't want to live in such a dystopian world.

  Don't look at what you think the law provides as a benefit, to us. Look at how such a rule could be used, and misused, in its entirety.

  Yes, they can shun us ... but maybe we want to shun them. Laws work both ways. What is the plan when uncle government is there with guns to make sure mommy and poppy cray-cray can have some me-time with the kids to tell them about the "one true religion"?

  Be careful what you wish for, you might just get it.
  
• 

  Foolednomore

  As been said, if a club does not want me in because of me or my actions, I don't need no government to enforce that. Like the Jw's, I was in their club, now I'm out. Why would I want to be upset that I'm out? Only an idiot would still be in.
• 

  smiddy3

  FTS

  I understood the issue concerned children, enrolled in a religious school from an early age, reaching (puberty??) and finding they were same sex attracted or transexual and doing or saying something that would lead the school authorities to believe they were gay or transexual, who then expelled them from the school.

  I concur with what you are saying ,FTS and I think rather than a government getting involved in this issue ,the religious institution in question should be able to have a frank discussion with the child and his/her parents and come to an amiable solution for both sides pointing out their core values.

  Personally I have no issue with gay / transexual people .I have a gay BIL and nephew who are both gay and we get along just fine no problems ,I enjoy their company just as much as I enjoy anybody else`s company.

  Just to set the record straight.