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

Marriage and freedom: promises ring hollow until the states act

By Bernard Gaynor - posted Friday, 29 September 2017


This atrocious behaviour, in my opinion, should best be dealt with by existing criminal provisions relating to stalking, intimidation and destruction of property. However, there is a case that anti-vilification laws should deal with such matters.

Unfortunately, 18 years later and these same laws are being used to complain about political communication made by residents in another state altogether relating to discussions about faith, morals, marriage and LGBT political activism.

The legal definition of what constitutes incitement to hatred, serious contempt, severe ridicule or even offence has changed radically as the legal system has recognised homosexual relationships.

Advertisement

It is not a guess, but the hard-nosed reality: if same-sex marriage is recognised in Commonwealth law, state tribunals will once again redefine what kind of speech can be made about homosexual behaviour.

In a post-same sex marriage world, no one knows where the line will be drawn in the state tribunals.

But if the Archbishop of Hobart can already be dragged before a tribunal for issuing a letter that described homosexual relationships as ‘friendships’, and if I can be hauled into another state for criticising uniformed military participation in the Mardi Gras, then it is clear that what most people would describe as ‘freedom of speech’ is about to be reduced even further by law.

And it will all be done under state laws that the federal parliament has no control over.

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


Discuss in our Forums

See what other readers are saying about this article!

Click here to read & post comments.

13 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

Bernard Gaynor is a married father of seven children and formerly served as an officer in the Australian Regular Army, deploying to the Middle East on three occasions. He was recognised with the United Stated Meritorious Service Medal for his service in Iraq. He strongly defends conservative family values at his blog, www.bernardgaynor.com.au. Bernard is the founder of the Defence Force Conservative Action Network and a member of the Cherish Life Qld Inc. Executive Committee.

Other articles by this Author

All articles by Bernard Gaynor

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

Photo of Bernard Gaynor
Article Tools
Comment 13 comments
Print Printable version
Subscribe Subscribe
Email Email a friend
Advertisement

About Us Search Discuss Feedback Legals Privacy