Go Back   AFA Forums > Atheism > Call to action

Call to action Call out to atheist activism on polls, news articles, petitions or other injustice. Let everyone know we have a voice.

Reply
 
Thread Tools
  #61  
Old 8th January 2018, 01:04 AM
DanDare's Avatar
DanDare DanDare is offline
Religion or Reality, choose...
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Brisbane, Queensland, Australia
Posts: 7,471
Default Re: Religious Freedom review

Common law must trump religion where the common law is determined for secular purposes. That law should not support religious purposes except as a coincidence. That being said common law should out go out of its way to suppress religions either.
__________________
"History, I believe, furnishes no example of a priest-ridden people maintaining a free civil government".
-Thomas Jefferson

Burden of proof is the obligation on somebody presenting a claim to provide evidence to support its truth (a warrant). Once evidence has been presented, it is up to any opposing "side" to show the evidence presented is not adequate. If claims were accepted without warrants, then every claim could simultaneously be claimed to be true.

History isn't written by the victors. It's written by the people with the time machines.
Reply With Quote
Thank The Irreverent Mr Black thanked this post
  #62  
Old 8th January 2018, 10:11 AM
The Irreverent Mr Black's Avatar
The Irreverent Mr Black The Irreverent Mr Black is offline
Arse-pocalyptic
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Toontown
Posts: 5,806
Default Re: Religious Freedom review

Fairfax - Comment piece by Tosca Lloyd

Quote:
... But the religious right continues to try to disguise their ongoing desire for undue influence in the lives of Australians through some righteous defence of their own privilege and prejudice. We cannot let this fly.

As it stands, then, the integrity of this review rests on its commitment to all Australians, and not the religious right. Despite the euphemistic title of the inquiry, it is not religious "freedom" that is under threat here. The right to freedom of religion and belief has never been unconditional; by its very nature it demands restrictions just by belonging to a larger body of human rights. Any conversation concerning an individual's right to religious freedom or belief must necessarily examine justifiable limits on its manifestation in so far as it negatively impacts others. And here in Australia we have already crossed that line.

Legal exemptions currently exist in faith-based schools, hospitals, welfare and housing services to discriminate against people based on either their sexual orientation, gender identity, intersex status or even their marital status. Students can be expelled, staff can be fired, and services – which by definition are for those already at risk – can be refused to someone because of who they love.

Such exemptions do not simply cause offence; they lead to real harm.
Go, read the whole thing.
__________________

Everything before the "but" is bullshit. - Black's Grandad.

Reply With Quote
Like Blue Lightning liked this post
Thank Strato, DanDare, Blue Lightning thanked this post
  #63  
Old 8th January 2018, 10:16 AM
The Irreverent Mr Black's Avatar
The Irreverent Mr Black The Irreverent Mr Black is offline
Arse-pocalyptic
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Toontown
Posts: 5,806
Default Re: Religious Freedom review

Speaking of rights and Frank Brennan, remember the 2009 Human Rights Bill, after which it was conveniently decided we didn't need rights enshrined in law?

Refresh your memories
__________________

Everything before the "but" is bullshit. - Black's Grandad.

Reply With Quote
Thank Strato, DanDare, Blue Lightning thanked this post
  #64  
Old 8th January 2018, 11:00 AM
stevebrooks stevebrooks is offline
AFA Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 5,088
Default Re: Religious Freedom review

This thing with secrecy is.....just a sideshow. There's nothing in law that actually requires the submissions be kept secret, and there's nothing in law that actually requires members of the public making submissions to keep those submissions secret.


If I was to make a submission and then post that entire submission here it would no longer be secret from anyone, things can only be kept secret if both parties intend to keep them secret, and even then it's tricky. It may be illegal to hack the commissions computers and extract the submissions and post them, but it's not illegal for anyone making a submission to also post them in a public place for all to read.


The funny thing is this would act against the desires of the religious to maintain their privileged status, if the only public submissions released publicly were submissions opposing the continued religious privilege then those groups may feel pressured into releasing their own submissions to demonstrate that not all submissions were opposed. The commission might even decide to rescind their veil of secrecy if most public submissions were already freely available. So, can we set up our own website where people can post their submissions?


I am willing to donate money to run it if need be.
__________________
From the mouth of a seven year old: "When you're you're dead, you don't go anywhere!"
Reply With Quote
  #65  
Old 8th January 2018, 12:16 PM
TokenSkeptic's Avatar
TokenSkeptic TokenSkeptic is offline
AFA Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Posts: 854
Default Re: Religious Freedom review

Another blogpost on the matter: http://www.thestirrer.com.au/40-year...g-has-changed/
Reply With Quote
  #66  
Old 8th January 2018, 12:38 PM
The Irreverent Mr Black's Avatar
The Irreverent Mr Black The Irreverent Mr Black is offline
Arse-pocalyptic
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Toontown
Posts: 5,806
Default Re: Religious Freedom review

@SteveB: The Stirrer has offered to post submissions. See linky in quote.

Quote:
TokenSkeptic said View Post
__________________

Everything before the "but" is bullshit. - Black's Grandad.

Reply With Quote
  #67  
Old 9th January 2018, 10:41 PM
Strato's Avatar
Strato Strato is offline
What Me Deluded?
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: The Bellarine, Geelong.
Posts: 5,725
Default Re: Religious Freedom review

Quote:
As described by The Human Rights and Equal Opportunity Commission Act 1986 (Cth): its application to religious freedom and the right to non-discrimination in employment; It permits “a distinction, exclusion or preference in connection with employment as a member of the staff of an institution that is conducted in accordance with the doctrines, tenets, beliefs or teachings of a particular religion or creed, being a distinction, exclusion or preference made in good faith in order to avoid injury to the religious susceptibilities of adherents of that religion or that creed”.

I ask the question, ‘Which is the greater harm?’ ‘injury to the religious susceptibilities of adherents of that religion or that creed’ or the ongoing unnecessary loss of young and innocent lives as a result of religiously motivated discrimination.

There is only one correct answer to this question. Adherents of religions or creeds rarely commit suicide as a result of ‘injury to their religious susceptibilities’, the greater harm is clearly the continued protection of religiously motivated discrimination as a ‘religious freedom’ under Australian Law.
(Graeme Hanigan, in The Stirrer Jan 8 2018.)
http://www.thestirrer.com.au/40-year...g-has-changed/

The expression 'religious susceptibilities' is apposite and rather telling.

The old and tattered 60s Penguin Thesaurus under the entry Sensibility lists 'impressibility, affectability, susceptibility'.

One faces susceptibility to disease if the immune system is down. A close synonym is vulnerablility.

Clearly this is self imposed weakness, low tolerance, which it is discreditable in an adult, though not one of tender years. It is pathetic.

Because the preventive to such susceptibility is reason, education and critical thinking. Get a valid, humanist ethics. Grow up.
__________________
We can know something only if it is both true and knowable, Thinking Fast and Slow, Daniel Kahneman, 2011.

Last edited by Strato; 9th January 2018 at 10:43 PM.
Reply With Quote
Like pipbarber, SEG, Darwinsbulldog, DanDare liked this post
  #68  
Old 12th January 2018, 07:39 AM
The Irreverent Mr Black's Avatar
The Irreverent Mr Black The Irreverent Mr Black is offline
Arse-pocalyptic
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Toontown
Posts: 5,806
Default Re: Religious Freedom review

Under Courier-Mail Sooper Seekrit Paywall, so I cannot even give a linky, but -
Quote:
PHILIP Ruddock says he will not allow a review of Australia's religious freedom laws to be conducted in secret and has vowed to make submissions to the panel public. It comes after the Prime Minister's department initially said none of the submissions to the review would be made public online in their...
EDIT - Aha, good old QNews!
Quote:
Philip Ruddock has said that public submissions to the religious freedom review will be published online and the deadline to submit them has been extended.

The former Howard Government minister is heading an expert panel to review “whether Australian law adequately protects the human right to religious freedom” following the passage of same-sex marriage legislation last month.

The panel met for the first time in Sydney on Wednesday.

Ruddock told ABC Radio on Thursday the panel had received over 100 submissions and agreed to extend the deadline until February 14.

“We want to be as open as possible in relation to the approach that we take,” he said.

“This is a matter that the panel agreed on and we’ve certainly taken the view that all the submissions we’ve received will be published, provided there aren’t any issues that might be of concern.

“There can be some legal issues, personal comments and matters of that sort that you have to deal with.

“But we would want to be as open as possible in relation to the material that is before us.”

The panel was due to deliver its findings by March 31, but Ruddock said on Thursday it may need more time.
More@Source - Go read 'em and support.
__________________

Everything before the "but" is bullshit. - Black's Grandad.


Last edited by The Irreverent Mr Black; 12th January 2018 at 07:44 AM.
Reply With Quote
Like Blue Lightning liked this post
  #69  
Old 12th January 2018, 11:01 AM
TokenSkeptic's Avatar
TokenSkeptic TokenSkeptic is offline
AFA Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Posts: 854
Default Re: Religious Freedom review

Thanks everyone for feedback and ideas; our VP has drafted something, I've tinkered with it further and hope to get more feedback on it over the weekend. I have read through the links (in fact, Tosca from the Rationalists got in touch!) and I really appreciate the interest in this.

Up next - We're in the process of submitting to this call-out; here's a useful summary via Buzzfeed: https://www.buzzfeed.com/ginarushton...ether-abortion
Reply With Quote
Like Blue Lightning liked this post
  #70  
Old 17th January 2018, 08:22 AM
The Irreverent Mr Black's Avatar
The Irreverent Mr Black The Irreverent Mr Black is offline
Arse-pocalyptic
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Toontown
Posts: 5,806
Default Re: Religious Freedom review

Rodney Croome in the Star Observer:
Quote:
There has been a lot of debate about where the LGBTI community should focus its attention now we have marriage equality.

For me, the answer is simple.

We need to immediately prepare to campaign hard against the dismantling of anti-discrimination protections in the name of ‘religious freedom’.
To fight that battle we need to democratise ownership of the networks, resources, and skills acquired during the marriage equality campaign.

“The ‘religious freedom’ idea threatens to pull down all the gains the gay community has made”: they are the words of an Anglican Minister I spoke to on Thursday who supports equality and who knows the game plan of conservative religious leaders and their political allies.

Their next move is the Ruddock Inquiry. It was a political solution to getting marriage equality through and it will have a political outcome as well.

I fear it will recommend ‘religious freedom protections’ that will be used by the Turnbull Government to drive a wedge between progressive and conservative Labor members in the lead up to the next federal election, in exactly the same way marriage equality was used by the Howard Government as a wedge to divide Labor in 2004.

Back then Labor responded to the wedge by falling in behind Howard. We have a lot of work ahead to ensure history doesn’t repeat, Labor stays strong, and the Senate defeats whatever moves the Government takes towards weakening existing anti-discrimination laws.

Now, as then, LGBTI people and our human rights will be collateral damage.

What raises my suspicion about the Ruddock Inquiry being a set up is hearing how Catholic photographers and Baptist bakers are right now quietly shutting down their businesses out of “fear of being prosecuted” if they turn away marrying same-sex couples.

These people will stride the Ruddock stage as examples of the “unintended consequences” of marriage equality and the need to roll back discrimination laws that protect LGBTI people.
Worth reading in full @ source.
__________________

Everything before the "but" is bullshit. - Black's Grandad.

Reply With Quote
Like Blue Lightning liked this post
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT +11. The time now is 01:46 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
Feedback Buttons provided by Advanced Post Thanks / Like (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2018 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.