One of the most peculiar characteristics of contemporary Australia is that opponents of religious expression often assume that Christian beliefs are irremediably divisive, bigoted, and irrational. As a result, Christian people and organisations can now be sued for merely living by their traditional religious beliefs.
Even Christian schools may not be allowed to teach students according to traditional values on matters of gender and sexuality.
The choice of the nation's ruling elites to supposedly defend self-identifying "victim" groups has produced an undesirable confrontation between existing groups, where each group tends to deny having any obligation to the values of other groups.
This is certainly not about real "diversity," but rather about government control and regulation through division and separation along the lines of religion, ethnicity and so forth.
It is simply the re-application of the Ancient Roman strategy of "divide-and-conquer" to destabilise rival civilisations by turning people against one another and, ultimately, turning everyone towards an "all-encompassing, all-inclusive" government.
As for Christianity, hostility towards its beliefs has been on a steady upward trajectory over the years. As noted by Michael Quinlan, professor and dean of law at the University of Notre Dame, Australia, "Some consider that even discussing the traditional Christian position on, for example, sexual morality, abortion, euthanasia or marriage, is hateful, bigoted and offensive."
According to Michael Sexton SC, the Solicitor-General of New South Wales since 1998, the nation's political establishment and intellectual elites are effectively "waging a war" on everything that might be considered even remotely based on the traditional tenets of Christianity.
"These zealots", writes Sexton, "have a hostility to all forms of the Christian religion but especially the Catholic Church."
In this context, the idea of "rights" can be weaponised by anti-discrimination laws that are increasingly hostile to the expression of religious opinions rather than to challenge bad behaviour. For example, when same-sex marriage activists push for the removal of anti-discrimination exemptions for religious groups who are committed to traditional forms of marriage, they effectively seek to impose their views and beliefs on those with whom they disagree.
It is often argued that an unyielding attachment to Christian values inhibits the society's "evolution." This sentiment has itself evolved and is now used to deny the participation of Christians in public life. As an example, I would cite the most recent state election result in Western Australia (WA).
The "conservative" party, the Liberal Party, was then led by 33-year-old Zak Kirkup, who supported an LGBTQI+ agenda, euthanasia, and extreme climate action. However, soon after suffering its worst-ever election wipe-out in March 2021, one of the few remaining members of the Liberal Party in WA's Parliament, David Honey (who is now leader), reportedly blamed the "Christian Right" for the party's loss.
Apparently, now one can be even denied membership to the Liberal Party for simply daring to express Christian values and principles. As reported by Sky News contributor Caleb Bond, the South Australian Liberal Party has denied the membership of about 150 Christians who applied to join the party.
Discuss in our Forums
See what other readers are saying about this article!
Click here to read & post comments.
13 posts so far.