What a deplorable cunt.

http://www.theage.com.au/opinion/political-news/antigay-rights-to-stay-20130115-2crma.html

Prime Minister Julia Gillard has assured religious groups they will have the ''freedom'' under a new rights bill to discriminate against homosexuals and others they deem sinners, according to the head of the Australian Christian Lobby.

Under current law, faith-based organisations, including schools and hospitals, can refuse to hire those they view as sinners if they consider it ''is necessary to avoid injury to the religious sensitivities of adherents of that religion''.

Ms Gillard has met Australian Christian Lobby managing director Jim Wallace several times, and he says she assured him ''she has no intention of restricting freedom of religion'' when it comes to religious groups' legal rights to discriminate in hiring and firing.

The Prime Minister said through a spokesman: "We don't comment on discussions with stakeholders.''

Discrimination by religious organisations affects thousands of Australians. The faiths are big employers, and the Catholic Church in particular is one of Australia's largest private employers.

They rely on government funding but because of their religious status are allowed to vet the sexual practices of potential employees in ways that would be illegal for non-religious organisations.

Labor often claims to represent progressive values and is led by an atheist, but the government has gone out of its way to placate religious organisations on this issue.

The woman who will be steering the Human Rights and Anti-Discrimination Bill through the Senate, Finance Minister Penny Wong, is a committed Christian and a lesbian.

Senator Wong said this week that Labor was ''seeking to balance the existing law and the practice of religious exemptions with the principle of non-discrimination''.

It is believed that senior Labor ministers have been making similar promises to the Christian lobby since Kevin Rudd was prime minister.

Before she was elected in 2010, Ms Gillard promised Mr Wallace in a filmed interview that she would protect the school chaplains program and that under her government ''marriage will be defined as it is in our current Marriage Act as between a man and a woman''.
She said that ''we do not want to see the development of ceremonies that mimic marriage ceremonies''.

The Australian Catholic Bishops Conference is adamant that the church should retain its rights to discriminate, but Anglicans are divided.

The more conservative Sydney diocese claims its right to discriminate against gays and lesbians and others whose ''lifestyles'' offend religious beliefs, Bishop Robert Forsyth of South Sydney said.

But social welfare charity Anglicare practises the opposite, South Australian branch chief executive, the Reverend Peter Sandeman said.

''Jesus didn't discriminate in who he associated with and helped and neither should we,'' Mr Sandeman said. "At Anglicare South Australia, we introduced a formal policy welcoming and supporting inclusion and diversity nearly a decade ago.''

Jews ''don't have a position on this'', Executive Council of Australian Jewry executive director Peter Wertheim said.

The Australian Federation of Islamic Councils did not respond to questions.

Labor's Human Rights and Anti-Discrimination Bill was an attempt to consolidate the law, ''not completely re-invent the anti-discrimination system'', a spokeswoman for Attorney-General Nicola Roxon said.

''We are proud to be introducing important new protections from sexual orientation discrimination. While there are some exemptions, this doesn't detract from these important changes''.[/quote]


Edit: Title changed, yes it is extra time and yes the rules are somewhat relaxed but let's still keep a degree of civility. Thanks

Edited by Joffa: 16/1/2013 11:14:30 AM

Won't this open a can of worms if a homosexual gets fired from their workplace for being homosexual?

-PB

Hopefully.

What generally happens is that people aren't hired in the first place because they're a little bit "faggy", and then there's no recourse. Makes it easier to make noise when you get fired, not so much at the hiring point.

I think the yanks are going to beat us to federal equality for homosexuals. Sheesh.

Shows just how small minded and pathetic some people are. Religion as always, will be a vessel for prejudice and hate. I despise anyone who supports this notion and truely hope they live an unhappy life.

It sickens me to the core that people can be so selfish and so careless towards the well-being of others and yet still claim to have "morals." The elitism of religion is a thorn in the side of humanity.

I understand I am painting with a broad brush here. I must clarify (in case I offend) that these comments are directed at people who are homophobic and use their religion to justify their choices.

Religion is supposed to be about love, understanding and forgiveness not hate marginalization and discrimination...pathetic.

The third word in that sentence is quite humerous.

It seems these organisations on the whole have lost their way at some stage. Tolerance was never the Christian strength though.

why does this provoke you guys so much?
It isn't that surprising and many other companies would do similiar things if they were allowed to.

So you'll never have gay weddings? :lol:

It's generally the loudest and most infuential that are the hardcore fundamentalists who look like a bunch of dark aged loonies.

Some discrimination can be valid, in some circumstances there can be very valid reasons why this would be appropriate.

Then I hope your church will be as vocal as when speaking out against this outrageous legislation.

What circumstances would make this appropriate, Joffa?

I have no problem with religions or religious people discriminating based on what they believe in (well I do, but I believe that they have a right to believe whatever they want), but for the government to come out and support this discrimination is abhorrent. Just like I believe no church has to support gay marriage, but the government absolutely has to.

I can see where it could be appropriate for a counselling service to require a female to perform a role as a domestic violence counsellor for battered women, or perhaps a female as a rape counsellor...now this can also work in reverse where a male may be appropriate for those roles because the clients are male.

I am not condoning discrimination as my first post indicates, but I do see where there may be circumstances where special needs requirements can play a role.

Fair enough, I misread your position. I thought you were saying that sometimes religious discrimination against homosexuals was appropriate.

Except they're not allowed to (and they have to pay tax). Why the religious exemption?

Mormons believe that Black people are Black because of their sins. Would it be OK if the LDS Church refused to employ people with dark skin because it's their religious belief?

No, that's where the government needs to step in. The religion can believe whatever the hell they like, but when it leads to discrimination that is legislated against everywhere else, then the religion should have no right to be treated differently.

Would a person with dark skin really want a job with such an organisation? (not trying to say they're in the wrong in any way)

As someone wise once said "Ma'am, If there's a steady paycheck in it, I'll believe anything you say."

Edited by notorganic: 16/1/2013 01:03:31 PM

Didn't Italy within the last week do something to support the rights of gay marriage?

That's amazing, considering the major religion in Italy is against anyone homosexual.

Good on Italy, for what should be, a start to other countries doing the right thing.

Actually, The Netherlands was the first modern country to start over 12 years ago. Since then Belgium, Spain, Canada, South Africa, Norway, Sweden, Portugal, Iceland, Argentina, Mexico and Nepal have all followed suit.

Australia is falling behind.

I thought it had been a while since we had one of these threads on here! Don't know why anyone else bothers posting though, as only one poster's opinion will be accepted, everyone else will be wrong.

Seriously though, the christian lobby are stupid and do themselves no favours with this kind of shit, and Gillard has absolutely no right what so ever to be supporting them or to be against gay marriage, the fact she is just goes to show just how much of a puppet she is rather then a principaled Prime Minister.

This surprises you?
Labor: Whatever it takes to stay in power.

I wonder whether I would be able to discriminate against a Creationist on the grounds that I find their mental condition to be deeply disturbing?

I have nothing against religious people, just religious extremists. Same goes for atheist extremists.

I'm surprised discrimination is still such a strong presence in society. If you're nice to me I'm nice to you, regardless of gender, race, or sexual orientation. I wish more people shared this view.

This. I see we're getting our "all religion is evil, roll out the hate speeches" on again. ](*,)

No, it won't. It protects an organisation's right to retain their beliefs in combination with discrimination laws.

The idea is that it protects homosexuals from being fired from their jobs while allowing religious organisations to protect their beliefs. Just like notorganic (not to mention the rest of you) wants his beliefs to be protected, the same right should be afforded to them.

What's an "Atheist Extremist"?

People like this

I for one don't give a damn about religion until it treads on the toes of society without merit. They seem to do a lot of it.

I see the theory behind this but think it will not be effective where intended and will only help marginalize homosexuals further.

Religion often brings it upon itself with draconian laws and a army of loud mouthed fundamentalists.