Like what you've read?

On Line Opinion is the only Australian site where you get all sides of the story. We don't
charge, but we need your support. Here�s how you can help.

  • Advertise

    We have a monthly audience of 70,000 and advertising packages from $200 a month.

  • Volunteer

    We always need commissioning editors and sub-editors.

  • Contribute

    Got something to say? Submit an essay.


 The National Forum   Donate   Your Account   On Line Opinion   Forum   Blogs   Polling   About   
On Line Opinion logo ON LINE OPINION - Australia's e-journal of social and political debate

Subscribe!
Subscribe





On Line Opinion is a not-for-profit publication and relies on the generosity of its sponsors, editors and contributors. If you would like to help, contact us.
___________

Syndicate
RSS/XML


RSS 2.0

Same-sex marriage push threatens religious freedoms

By Adam Ch'ng - posted Wednesday, 10 June 2015


The same-sex marriage debate is being wielded by the gay rights lobby and our public broadcasters to undermine our fundamental freedom of thought, conscience and religion – a freedom protected by no less than the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights.

In contrast, the European Court of Human Rights has expressly ruled that same-sex marriage is not a human right, as so-called ‘marriage equality’ advocates would have us believe.

It is therefore concerning that sectional interests are riding roughshod over inalienable rights protected at international law.

Advertisement

This is where the Shorten-Plibersek bill falls so short.  It fails to provide sufficient protections for private service providers who have a genuine religious objection to facilitating a same-sex marriage.  

Sure, it provides that ministers of religion will not be forced to officiate same-sex weddings.  This is the very least it could do.

But what about the Muslim wedding planner who has a genuine faith objection to plan a lesbian wedding?  Or the Jewish marriage counsellor who cannot in good conscience provide sex therapy to an engaged homosexual couple?

And this is no mere rhetorical question.

In 2009, a Christian relationships counsellor in the United Kingdom was sacked for standing by his religious conviction to not provide sex therapy to a gay couple.  His employer could have easily reallocated his caseload.  Instead, it fired him.  The UK Employment Appeals Tribunal upheld his dismissal as lawful.

If the Shorten-Plibersek bill is passed in its current form, there will be no protection at law that would prevent the UK experience from being mirrored right here in Australia.

Advertisement

The bill fails to appreciate the significant consequences of legalising same-sex marriage for Australia’s faith communities.  Instead, it buys into the flimsy rhetoric of the gay rights lobby that any opposition to same-sex marriage is bigoted discrimination that should be censored, silenced and outlawed.

The gay rights lobby will do whatever it takes to legislate same-sex marriage, even if it means stripping our faith communities of their fundamental right to religious freedom.

  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. Page 2
  4. All


Discuss in our Forums

See what other readers are saying about this article!

Click here to read & post comments.

113 posts so far.

Share this:
reddit this reddit thisbookmark with del.icio.us Del.icio.usdigg thisseed newsvineSeed NewsvineStumbleUpon StumbleUponsubmit to propellerkwoff it

About the Author

Adam Ch’ng is studying theology at Ridley College, Melbourne and is a former adviser to the Leader of the Government in the Senate, Senator the Hon Eric Abetz.

Other articles by this Author

All articles by Adam Ch'ng

Creative Commons LicenseThis work is licensed under a Creative Commons License.

Article Tools
Comment 113 comments
Print Printable version
Subscribe Subscribe
Email Email a friend
Advertisement

About Us Search Discuss Feedback Legals Privacy