Thread by @alawriedejesus

Even if the so-called 'Folau clause' has been dropped, the #ReligiousDiscriminationBill will likely still be extraordinary and extreme, entrenching the rights of religious individuals and orgs to discriminate against others.

Let me explain why. #auspol 1/ theguardian.com/world/2021/nov…

As I have explained previously on this site, the 'Folau clause', while awful in and of itself, was actually the least terrible of the 4 major problems of the #ReligiousDiscriminationBill.

Based on media reports, it seems the 2 worst aspects of the 2nd Exposure Draft remain. 2/

This includes the 'statement of belief' provision (clause 42), which overrides all other Cth, state & territory anti-discrim laws (incl the Fair Work Act), protecting comments that 'offend, humiliate, intimidate, insult or ridicule' others where motivated by religious belief. 3/

The intended purpose of the 'statement of belief' provision is to make it easier for people of faith to say harmful things about women, LGBTI ppl, people with disability, divorced ppl, single parents and even people of other faiths.

And it applies to all areas of public life. 4/

The actual outcome of the 'statement of belief' provision would also be to make state and territory anti-discrimination laws essentially unworkable, because state tribunals would be unable to hear discrimination complaints where this defence is raised. 5/
smh.com.au/national/key-p…

The 'statement of belief' provision is entirely unprecedented.

No other Cth anti-discrimination law has sought to fundamentally undermine the ability of vulnerable groups to be protected from discrimination in their everyday lives.

It alone means the RDB should be rejected. 6/

The second major problem of the #ReligiousDiscriminationBill which apparently remains in the final version of the Bill are the 'religious exceptions', which allow religious orgs to discriminate against others, including people of other faiths. 7/

While 'religious exceptions' have been a feature of anti-discrimination law in Australia for decades, there have never been exceptions drafted so broadly as those contained in the 2nd Exposure Draft #ReligiousDiscriminationBill.

These special privileges are super-charged. 8/

The 'religious exceptions' apply to a broader category of orgs than in other Acts, covering a wider range of 'charities', even some groups engaged in commercial activities.

The org also does not need to have been established for a 'religious purpose' (the test in the SDA). 9/

The 'religious exceptions' in the 2nd Exposure Draft also include 2 tests for when orgs can use them, both of which are far, *far* easier to satisfy than the test set out in the Sex Discrim Act.

It will be almost impossible for religious orgs *not* to satisfy these clauses. 10/

The 'religious exceptions' in the 2nd Exposure Draft also allowed hospitals and aged care services to discriminate in employment based on faith.

Imagine, during the COVID-19 pandemic, having doctors or aged care workers hired on the basis of their beliefs, not their ability. 11/

These 'religious exceptions' also allowed religious schools to discriminate against students on the basis of religious belief beyond the point of admission.

That means legally being able to suspend or expel a student in the middle of year 12 just for questioning their faith. 12/

If introduced, and if the Govt ever implements its 2018 promise to protect LGBT kids in religious schools against discrimination (unlikely, I know), it could also allow an alternative route for discrimination against them (by allowing discrim on the basis of specific tenets). 13/

That's part of the reason why all 4 jurisdictions which have already legislated to protect LGBT kids in religious schools - Tas, Qld, NT and ACT - only allow discrimination on the basis of religious belief at the point of admission, and not beyond. 14/

Oh, and in case that's not enough, the RDB drastically rewrites 'religious exceptions' in Cth law *before* it will allow the Australian Law Reform Commission to undertake its review into this very same issue, thus pre-empting any outcome from that review. 15/

Indeed, it is possible the Govt is seeking to steer the ALRC towards endorsing these expansive types of 'religious exceptions', and then retrofitting them to existing laws like the Sex Discrimination Act, which would have a devastating effect on the lives of LGBT Australians. 16/

Just like the 'statement of belief' provision above, if the excessive and extreme 'religious exceptions' contained in the 2nd Exposure Draft #ReligiousDiscriminationBill remain in the final version introduced next week, they alone mean the RDB should be rejected. #auspol 17/

At the very least, once the final version of the Bill is introduced, we need a Senate Inquiry to investigate both the 'statement of belief' & 'religious exceptions' clauses, to understand their impact and to hear from those who would lose their rights. 18/
alastairlawrie.net/2021/11/01/why…

Hopefully, I have explained why, even if the removal of the so-called 'Folau clause' might feel like a small step forward (along with the rumoured removal of 'conscientious objection' clauses), if these other problems remain the RDB will nevertheless be a great leap backward. 19/

One last favour: if you have read this far, and now understand the grave threat still posed by the #ReligiousDiscriminationBill, please go back to the top of the thread and retweet, so that more people realise the fight for our rights is only just beginning. #auspol 20/