More on Scott's proposed religious discrimination bill

I posted a copy of my submission on the so-called "religious discrimination" bill back in January, 2020 at https://politicalmusingsofkayleen.blogspot.com/2020/01/my-draft-submission-on-morrison.html. 

I found out today (from here) that there is a survey about the resubmitted bill. My submission to the survey is below. 

*** 

From https://www.surveymonkey.com/r/ReligiousDiscrimination

1. Do you believe there should be legislation to protect people from religious discrimination in certain areas of public life on the grounds of their religious belief or activity? This will include protecting people who don’t hold a religious belief as well.

Yes.

Why? 

Because I am a member of a religion that SUPPORTS LGBTIQ+ people.

However, mediaeval religious bigots who are LGBTIQ-phobic should NOT have their unspiritual, anti-religious hate protected.

Why did you chose to make this question a yes / no response? It is very obvious that the matter is not. Are those involved in this survey bigots?

2. We currently have a Sex Discrimination Act, Age Discrimination Act and Racial Discrimination Act, do you believe it is important to also have a Religious Discrimination Act as well?

No.

Why?  

Because the discrimination is less significant than the other forms of discrimination.

3. Do you support the religious discrimination legislative package that is currently before the Parliament?

No.

Why?  

Because it is a sword, NOT a shield.

4. Do you believe that parents should be able to choose to send their children to a school of their choice which aligns with their religious values?

No.

Why?  

Because some religious schools potentially teach or contribute to law breaking - such as discrimination.

If they want to teach their religions they should do that at home and in their religious places.

Also, NO public money should be involved in religious schools because of their promotion of illegal behaviour.

5. Do you consider that religious schools should be able to require all students to practice the religion affiliated with that school, if this requirement is necessary to avoid injury to the religious susceptibilities of people of that religion?

No.

Why?  

They have to live in a society where people of different faiths co-exist.

Schools are a place to learn - including learning how to live in society.

If the schools cannot manage to teach co-existence on this issue (and the disturbing occurrence of sexist behaviour from all-male elitist schools suggests very strongly that this will be a problem), then the schools are incompetent.

6. Do you believe religious schools, hospitals, aged care facilities, accommodation providers and disability service providers should be able to preference the hiring of staff of the same religious belief, as long as this is in accordance with a publicly available written policy?

No.

Why?  

Because staff should be hired on the basis of their ability, and not discriminated against on the basis of sex, gender, race, political affiliation, or any other characteristic.

I would be gravely concerned about the competence of any institution that did not do so.

7. Do you consider that religious charities (not covered by question 6) should be able to preference persons who share their religious beliefs when making employment decisions or offering services?

No.

Why?  

Again, this is a question that should not have been reduced to a clueless yes / no response.

In some circumstances, it can be difficult for volunteers (e.g., in my religious faith) to have to put up with anti-LGBTIQ+ bigots, but service provisions MUST be based on competence.

8. Do you believe religious people would be comfortable to share their beliefs in public life without the Religious Discrimination Bill 2021?

Yes.

Why?  

Because they have - and with extreme viciousness and vitriol during the Equal Marriage "postal vote" and on many other occasions.

9. Do you think it should be lawful for a person to be able to make a statement of belief so long as it is made in good faith and is not malicious, threatening, intimidating, or harassing and does not vilify a person or group or advocate the commission of a serious offence?

Yes.

Why?  

Because the conditions listed exclude all LGBTIQ-phobic statements of hate.

10. Should the committee choose to publish an anonymised representative sample of responses, do you agree to all or parts of your response being published?

No.