Misleading commentary by Jacinta Collins (of the National Catholic Education Commission) in today's SMH.
The problem with the Religious Discrimination Bill is that it does NOT protect religious belief 'in the same way' as existing attributes. Far from it. #auslaw#auspol 1/
The statement of belief provisions - which protect comments that offend, humiliate, insult & ridicule women, LGBTI people, people with disability & people of minority faiths, in all areas of public life - are radical & unprecedented.
They are not enjoyed by other groups. 2/
While the religious exceptions in the Bill are much, much broader than in any other Cth, state or territory anti-discrimination law, including the broad scope of orgs covered, and the extremely low bar which these orgs need to satisfy in order to discriminate against others. 3/
Indeed, if the Religious Discrimination Bill protected religious belief on the same basis as it is covered under many state and territory anti-discrimination laws - including Tasmania and the ACT - then ex-Senator Collins might find opposition to the Bill would fade away. 4/
However, if it continues to include radical & unprecedented provisions, protecting demeaning & derogatory comments against others, and granting extraordinary & extreme special privileges to religious orgs to discriminate, then she can count on us to fight hard to stop it. 5/
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
While there has been plenty of discussion about some of the major problems it will cause, I want to focus today on 4 issues which have received comparatively less focus. #auslaw#auspol 1/
1. It will protect at least some religiously-motivated racist comments.
This is because of how broadly the radical and unprecedented 'statement of belief' provisions have been drafted. 2/
Proposed section 12 overrides all other Cth, state & territory anti-discrimination laws.
Including specifically targeting section 17(1) of Tasmania's Anti-Discrimination Act, which prohibits comments that offend, humiliate, insult and ridicule, including on the basis of race. 3/
"Simon Rice, professor of law at USyd says the bill is “bizarrely complicated” because it is “trying to dress up freedom as discrimination” – a sword as a shield, in other words." #auslaw#auspol 1/ smh.com.au/politics/feder…
"He warns that by allowing people to make discriminatory statements with impunity, it “emboldens” those inclined to discrimination." 2/
"The overriding of state laws is also likely to reduce the authority of state tribunals, which hear the vast majority of the country’s discrimination claims." 3/
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.
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/
I began writing my LGBTI rights blog 9 years ago today: alastairlawrie.net
It's fair to say I really didn't know what I was doing in the beginning.
But through perseverance, I think it's slowly improved, each year since then.
And I'm proud of this growing body of work. 1/
To mark the anniversary, I thought I'd share 9 posts which are important to me, often for quite different reasons. 2/
The first post is about Mark Latham's anti-trans kids Bill, which in my view is the worst legislative attack on LGBTI rights in Australia this century.
I'm proud more than 10,000 people have read this, & hopefully better understand the threat it poses. 3/ alastairlawrie.net/2020/08/09/i-s…