Where do we draw the line between religious freedom and the law of the land?Here are my thoughts:
Between respecting diversity and double standards?
Between maintaining your culture and becoming Australian?
Come and meet migrants from the little known Modeerf religion.
They know that their practices of men going shirtless, having the holy month off work, annual cannabis burning and feeding children fermented mead are pretty unusual in an Australian context but they want similar legal exemptions and discrimination protection to other Aussie religions.
I'm against the Modeerf religion, just like I'm against every religion. Religions spread superstition, and we have enough of that already. I do not want to see them getting the okay to break the law for religious reasons. I don't want to pay their taxes for them. I don't want them meddling in civil rights issues like gay marriage. If they want to do their religious thing, they can. But the government has no business promoting them. Ideally, the government would be neutral towards religion.
But -- and this is a big 'but' -- we don't have that kind of government. We live in a country where the government is helping to establish and promote religion, contrary to Section 116 of the Australian Constitution.
- Thanks to John Howard and now Julia Gillard, the Australian government gives a lot of money to give Christian chaplains exclusive access to evangelise high school students.
- The government allows religions to break laws pertaining to anti-discrimination -- they get to deny social services and employment to gay and transgendered people.
- And of course, the government allows religions not to pay taxes, which forces us to carry their tax burden.
I think this second-best solution would still be terrible. You'd have more discrimination, and less reason. But it would at least have the advantage of being fair. (And if some religions are unwilling to accord others the privileges that they receive, it shows their paper-thin commitment to equality.) The Modeerf example doesn't show why it's important that every religion get the same perks. It shows why no religion should.
In doing research for this event, I ran across this statement on a web page from the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade:
People are free to practise any religion as long as they obey the law.Isn't that a great ideal? I hope one day we get there.
"You'd have more discrimination, and less reason. But it would at least have the advantage of being fair."
ReplyDeleteIt would be fair among the various religious organizations, but it wouldn't be fair to the entire population, which would still be expected to carry the tax burden, etc.