Foxy

I don't know how schools will decide how to run themselves, but in my opinion if the school is doing it's job well to teach the children, and the school isn't harmful to the students, the staff, or to the community as a whole, then that school is doing fine at regulating itself. We don't need extra laws to tell schools to do what they already are doing well on their own. I don't want discrimination against teachers either, however there are other elements that go into it. One is that several religions actually are against active homosexuality. (Not just attraction but same sex with the same sex). If a religious school has the incentive to stand by their belief, they should stand by that, regardless if the laws say otherwise. Second point is that if there are jobs to teach at both a religious school and a non religious school, then it's not a restriction on a homosexual teacher to find a good a welcoming school. They shouldn't try to teach at a school that doesn't accept their choices, or try to force a school to change.

As for the link to agree or disagree poll, Thank you for trying to find middle ground on the subject. But I'll stick by what I've said. Brainwashing and indoctrination is either something that happens or it doesn't. An opinion poll isn't as good as an active example, nor does it relate to the what's really happened. I'll keep my eyes open for finding examples of abuse, but so far I really haven't found it for Christian indoctrination/brainwashing. At least not to the degree that it's argued where teaching religion is itself a form of indoctrination, brainwashing, or abuse.

NNS,

I understand what you are saying.

Thank You for maintaining a civil debate.

Foxy - welcome back.

Robin Banks is the former Tasmanian Anti-Discrimination Commissioner, a human rights lawyers and a PhD candidate in discrimination law at the University of Tasmania.

Anja Hilkemeijer is a lecturer in law at the University of Tasmania Law School, specialising in human rights and religious freedom.

Rodney Croome is the National Convenor of Australian Marriage Equality and was made a Member of the Order of Australia in 2003 for his gay rights advocacy. He is co-author of Why vs Why: Gay Marriage.

I wish to ask questions of the author's of this article, and seek a response from any person.

1.So there's no discrimination in religious beliefs - however a prominent Catholic person in Tas was taken to the tribunal on behalf of a person who complained that a Catholic priest/person was handing out pamphlets to his congregation regarding Catholic faith edicts during the gay marriage campaign.

2. Such person withdrew complaint. However, no one has reported any costs to the Catholic Church in defending this claim.

3. Catholic schools have NEVER kicked out a gay (or other type) of child from their school.....and wouldn't up to this day....so what's the problem?

4. Teachers when they are employed by Catholic Education sign an agreement as to teaching edits - end of story.

5. So -I ask - what is the problem?

//Catholic schools have NEVER kicked out a gay (or other type) of child from their school.....and wouldn't up to this day....so what's the problem?//

There are other denominations beyond Catholicism, and they ain't all as tolerant.

To the authors you say -

"But our biggest concern is that federal legislation designed to give equal protection to LGBTI people in faith-based organisations may actually water-down Tasmania's gold-standard legislation.

There have been worrying public statements from members of both major parties about entrenching a positive right for schools to discriminate against teachers on the grounds of religious "ethos". "

I say - Schools have EVERY right to have teachers adhere to their "ethos". It's not about "watering down" anyone's rights, it's simply the following -

1. If you wish to be a teacher in an Islamic School - you must adhere to their tenants/"ethos".

2. If you wish to be a teacher in a Jewish School - you must adhere to their tenants/"ethos"

3. If you wish to be a teacher in a Catholic School - you must adhere to their tenants/"ethos".

Simple analogy - as a democratic society, all persons whether you are LBGTI or the other 70 plus "options" do have a place in society, as such you have no "upper" right (as a group) than any other person/citizen in our society, who aren't LGBI plus 70 plus options.