![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
crazyjaneA quick-and-dirty Shit List because I'm so damn angry right now.
So the Victorian Attorney-General thinks it's a good idea to appease religious groups by allowing them 'some' discriminatory practices.
Specifically, Rob Hulls has approved of a plan that will give religious groups a get-out-of-jail-free card when it comes to bigotry and prejudice against people on the grounds of gender, sexual orientation, marital status and parental status. It's going to be just fine for these groups - or any business administered by these groups to refuse to employ anyone who falls under these categories. Why? Because apparently Mr Hulls thinks it's not fair to ask them to employ anyone who 'undermines their religious beliefs'.
That's right, folks. Being, say, a woman, or gay, or a single parent is so damned threatening that these groups can get government protection from allowing these dangerous individuals to step inside their hallowed halls. Being a divorcee or a man might be enough to bring down the very foundations of religion - so of course they need to be exempt from laws that are designed to ensure equal treatment for all.
The alleged 'stick' to this incredibly juicy 'carrot' is that said groups will no longer be allowed to discriminate against race, age, disability, political beliefs, breastfeeding and physical features. Yeah, you read that right. Up to now, they've been allowed to refuse you employment if they don't like the way you look. But happy day, they can't do that anymore - because those things, apparently, don't undermine their beliefs.
Let's not forget that such groups can already discriminate on the basis of religious belief when it comes to employment in institutions run for religious purpose. You aren't likely to get a job in a Catholic school if you're a Muslim, for example. But this plan of Hull's goes even further - now, any organisation that is run by a religious group will be given these exemptions. That covers everything from Op Shops to shelters to 'gift' shops to the tax firm down the road that doesn't even advertise it's run by a religious group.
And let's not kid ourselves. The government's hastened to reassure us that groups will have to demonstrate how any given person might threaten their beliefs, but it's just a bit bloody one-sided. It's going to be relatively easy to make the argument that employing a bisexual person in a Christian organisation is threatening - society is conditioned that way to a certain extent, and hey, the organisation has a Bible to 'prove' it. We're not going to see any gay pagan business successfully claiming that employing a straight person threatens their religious belief, though. Someone might try, but who's going to believe it? How on earth, it will be argued, could a straight person threaten anyone? Besides, where is your religious text or weight of centuries of tradition and hierarchy?
Mind you, even this flimsy excuse for a procedure falls down under scrutiny. The organisation will only have to prove this if someone is refused employment, and complains.
By doing this, the Victorian Government is going to send a clear message that some forms of discrimination are permissible. It's going to make it obvious that religion trumps equality, and send a message to anyone who follows those religions that there's something 'wrong' and 'threatening' about being anything other than the narrow definition of 'correct' that happens to permeat any particular belief. Now, it's one thing for a religion to make pronouncements like that. Whether or not I happen to agree with it, it's not up to me to force someone's personal belief to change. So yeah, on a personal level, I find it disgusting that the Catholic Church will refuse communion to gays, or that many pagans think it's okay to spread lies about Christianity.
But this is different. This is an apparently secular state openly sanctioning discriminatory behaviour simply because it's bound up in the tenets of religion. This is an elected government saying that being a member of a religion allows you to treat others as less than human, and to get away with it.
It's a wedge. Now that the government has shown that it will cave in on these issues, how long before the lobbying starts to get even more discriminatory?
And - by tacitly agreeing with religious groups that being who you are might in itself be threatening - the government has also opened a door for more extreme behaviours.
I consider myself a vaguely religious person - but I've also studied history. When the State starts to enshrine religious intolerance in law, and back it up with action, people start to suffer.
This is absolutely unacceptable. I'll be writing to Attorney-General Rob Hulls, and I encourage anyone who feels as I do to do the same. Here's his ministerial address:
Level 3, 1 Treasury Place
East Melbourne VIC 3002
Ph: 9651 1222
Fax: 9651 1188
So the Victorian Attorney-General thinks it's a good idea to appease religious groups by allowing them 'some' discriminatory practices.
Specifically, Rob Hulls has approved of a plan that will give religious groups a get-out-of-jail-free card when it comes to bigotry and prejudice against people on the grounds of gender, sexual orientation, marital status and parental status. It's going to be just fine for these groups - or any business administered by these groups to refuse to employ anyone who falls under these categories. Why? Because apparently Mr Hulls thinks it's not fair to ask them to employ anyone who 'undermines their religious beliefs'.
That's right, folks. Being, say, a woman, or gay, or a single parent is so damned threatening that these groups can get government protection from allowing these dangerous individuals to step inside their hallowed halls. Being a divorcee or a man might be enough to bring down the very foundations of religion - so of course they need to be exempt from laws that are designed to ensure equal treatment for all.
The alleged 'stick' to this incredibly juicy 'carrot' is that said groups will no longer be allowed to discriminate against race, age, disability, political beliefs, breastfeeding and physical features. Yeah, you read that right. Up to now, they've been allowed to refuse you employment if they don't like the way you look. But happy day, they can't do that anymore - because those things, apparently, don't undermine their beliefs.
Let's not forget that such groups can already discriminate on the basis of religious belief when it comes to employment in institutions run for religious purpose. You aren't likely to get a job in a Catholic school if you're a Muslim, for example. But this plan of Hull's goes even further - now, any organisation that is run by a religious group will be given these exemptions. That covers everything from Op Shops to shelters to 'gift' shops to the tax firm down the road that doesn't even advertise it's run by a religious group.
And let's not kid ourselves. The government's hastened to reassure us that groups will have to demonstrate how any given person might threaten their beliefs, but it's just a bit bloody one-sided. It's going to be relatively easy to make the argument that employing a bisexual person in a Christian organisation is threatening - society is conditioned that way to a certain extent, and hey, the organisation has a Bible to 'prove' it. We're not going to see any gay pagan business successfully claiming that employing a straight person threatens their religious belief, though. Someone might try, but who's going to believe it? How on earth, it will be argued, could a straight person threaten anyone? Besides, where is your religious text or weight of centuries of tradition and hierarchy?
Mind you, even this flimsy excuse for a procedure falls down under scrutiny. The organisation will only have to prove this if someone is refused employment, and complains.
By doing this, the Victorian Government is going to send a clear message that some forms of discrimination are permissible. It's going to make it obvious that religion trumps equality, and send a message to anyone who follows those religions that there's something 'wrong' and 'threatening' about being anything other than the narrow definition of 'correct' that happens to permeat any particular belief. Now, it's one thing for a religion to make pronouncements like that. Whether or not I happen to agree with it, it's not up to me to force someone's personal belief to change. So yeah, on a personal level, I find it disgusting that the Catholic Church will refuse communion to gays, or that many pagans think it's okay to spread lies about Christianity.
But this is different. This is an apparently secular state openly sanctioning discriminatory behaviour simply because it's bound up in the tenets of religion. This is an elected government saying that being a member of a religion allows you to treat others as less than human, and to get away with it.
It's a wedge. Now that the government has shown that it will cave in on these issues, how long before the lobbying starts to get even more discriminatory?
And - by tacitly agreeing with religious groups that being who you are might in itself be threatening - the government has also opened a door for more extreme behaviours.
I consider myself a vaguely religious person - but I've also studied history. When the State starts to enshrine religious intolerance in law, and back it up with action, people start to suffer.
This is absolutely unacceptable. I'll be writing to Attorney-General Rob Hulls, and I encourage anyone who feels as I do to do the same. Here's his ministerial address:
Level 3, 1 Treasury Place
East Melbourne VIC 3002
Ph: 9651 1222
Fax: 9651 1188
