Home | Contact Us | Newsletters

Those Australians who believe in political correctness and their right to stifle philosophies which conflict with it may well consider that in the first decade of the 2lst century their golden era has begun. 

A number of Australian States have enacted religious vilification legislation and the South  Australian Attorney General has   proposed an Amendment to the state's Equal Opportunity Act to prevent any "victimisation" of a person  on the basis, inter alia, of marital status, pregnancy  choices or homosexual behaviour.  In the light of the Victorian  Court of Appeal decision in  Islamic Council of Victoria v Catch the Fire Ministries it is clear that in the discussion of such issues truth is not necessarily a defence. 

The proposed South Australian  legislation may, it seems to me, create serious inhibitions in relation to the teaching of some of those eternal Christian truths originally proclaimed by the Church in the First Century AD. Those truths were later crystallized in the first Vulgate Bible  translated by St Jerome at the beginning of the fifth century and which, after his death in 420 AD, was accepted by the Christian Church as the inspired Book of Scripture. 

There have been other subsequent great translations of the Bible, in particular the King James  version  in 1611, but these fundamental truths have never changed. They have, for example, been recently repeated in 1994 in the Australian and New Zealand edition of the Roman Catholic Catechism. 

Amongst these truths I cite the following:

(i) that adultery is wrong and sinful,

(ii) that sexual intercourse outside marriage as, for example, in a de facto relationship, is wrong and sinful, and

(iii) that homosexual acts are wrong and sinful. 

It seems to me that prima facie the making of any of these three statements (or like statements) could constitute victimization under the proposed South Australian Equal Opportunity (Miscellaneous) Amendment Bill 2006. It is not sufficient to say that the maker of the statement could claim to fall within certain exclusions or exemptions within the Bill and could so escape liability.  Anyone who thinks he is adequately protected by exemptions or exclusions is deceiving himself. 

Unmeritorious proceedings can involve an innocent person in long, costly and stressful  litigation. He may be brought up before a Commissioner whose philosophy is entirely different  from his own and who might, for example, find (quite unjustly) that what was done was not  done in good faith, was not reasonable and was not done in the public interest. An ultimate victory,  if achieved, could be achieved at enormous cost. 

Any ministers, priests or religious bodies minded to lend their support to this legislation would  do well to study carefully the history of the case of the Islamic Council of Victoria v Catch the Fire Ministries. 

The Victorian legislation, which enabled two Christian pastors to be subjected to what amounted to gross persecution for expressing what was in essence a Christian viewpoint, was legislation which was originally supported by a number of Christian churches, ministers and priests, most of whom have subsequently realised their folly. 

The general public assumes that the law is just, but we are moving into a new era where grave injustices are being sought to be rendered lawful by Acts of Parliament. These injustices may be  further heightened by the appointment of Chairmen of Tribunals who are neither learned nor  independent, but are chosen to enforce a particular philosophy. 

Freedom of speech is a priceless asset within a democracy, but we are now being governed by people who no longer value that freedom and who want their own philosophies to govern our  lives. No matter how many exclusions or exemptions are contained within the proposed Bill, it  is bad law and should be opposed. Judges and administrative tribunals are not qualified to  determine religious or theological matters and the State has no business encroaching into matters of religious belief and values. 

We, in Australia, have now lived with Equal Opportunity legislation for three decades. Much  injustice has occurred in the name of equal opportunity and on balance we may have been far better off without any such legislation at all.