WILL TRADITIONAL TEACHINGS CONSTITUTE DISCRIMINATION?

"...John Howard's intervention in the same-sex debate was his most dramatic and passionate since he left the prime ministership in 2007.  He accused the Turnbull government of not taking religious freedom seriously and condemned it for not producing the bill it would put to parliament if the Yes vote wins.  He accused the government of trivialising religious freedom and demanded it clarify how it would protect "parental rights, freedom of speech and religious freedom" if the Yes vote passed.

Howard's intervention exposes the utter fatuousness of Liberal ministers who, until yesterday, had generally claimed a Yes vote would have no consequences for religious freedom beyond needing to ensure religious ministers did not have to officiate at gay weddings.  In response of Howard, Malcolm Turnbull and Bill Shorten were forced to acknowledge that there would need to be some extra protection for religious freedom.  But ministers still spoke as though the main issue was clerics officiating at weddings.

Let's be very clear.  That is about the least likely threat to religious freedom arising out of this process.  The threat to religious liberty is much more pervasive.

Legalising same-sex marriage will vastly increase the power and propensity of all forms of anti-discrimination legislation, and attendant government propaganda bodies, to harass religious institutions on the basis that their traditional teachings constitute discrimination.

This is already happening.  Much of it will happen under state laws.  It is absurd for the federal government to ignore the interaction of federal and state laws..."

Extract from Greg Sheridan's article in The Weekend Australian 16/17 September (LIBERALS FIND SCANT REFUGE IN A SURRENDER TO IDENTITY POLITICS)