A law to stop discrimination against religion?
Reading Time: 2 minutes
The proposal to enact a Religious Discrimination Act appeals to some members and leaders of our religious communities. On the face of it, the proposal appears to be worthy of support, yet as I will briefly illustrate it is fraught with some significant problems which render it far less worthy of support.
To begin with, there is a sound reason for why mainstream churches have not previously supported calls for constitutionally or even legislatively protected religious freedom – unless we distinguished religions that we like from those we don’t, legally protected religious rights would apply not only to mainstream churches but also to dangerous, exploitative, fringe religions led by madmen. Clearly, such a move would have little public support. Few of us would support the notion that we could not discriminate against evil cult leaders.
Also, unlike other legally protected rights of sectors of our community, legal protection of religious freedom would not be introduced to protect a sector whose right were previously neglected, but rather to protect the rights of a sector with a long history of denying the rights of those with whom it disagreed, including less powerful religions. There is no doubt that the religious lobby seeks a Religious Discrimination Act As a desperate response to its continuing loss of power and privileged position in society.
In our society, the only religious rights that have needed protection are those of minority religions from state laws reflecting the views of the dominant churches. For example, regardless of whether you approve of their beliefs, it is rarely mentioned that WA, SA and Vic outlawed Scientology for several years.
That what churches now seeking legal protection allege to be discrimination, is in fact their loss of privileged status, leads me to another point. In our secular country it is very problematic to suggest that religion should be singled out for protection. Why not freedom of conscience or the right to hold personal belief. The role that organised religion used to play in society is now performed by sectors of civil society which does not enjoy specific protection. This
In engaging in this debate, it is crucial that we consider this proposal from the point of view of the state and law which cannot and should not prefer some rights over others. As far as the state and law are concerned there is nothing special about religious freedom that would warrant it being protected ahead of other rights.
I submit that if we were to treat religious beliefs and freedom to put those beliefs into practice as being on par with other beliefs and conscience, we would quickly see how privileged and protected were religious freedoms and how unsupportable it is to enact a law protecting discrimination against religion while equivalent secular rights are not protected and as long as organised religion remains the main opponent of the recognition of the rights of oppressed sectors of our society.
(Visited 13 times, 1 visits today)