Yuyutsu I think your'e over-reaching.
Funding is one thing, managing is another.
Unless the funds come with a caveat that the school must' accept everyone, then the school must abide by it's own code of conduct and ethos.
Sure if you start making foolish, untested or unreasonable laws, you will find yourself exactly where we are now.
It is not unreasonable for a religious institution which preaches a particular doctrine, to up-hold such teachings, otherwise it is a sham, just like society and the public in general.
This stupid act of legalising queers, was NEVER going to fly.
It is divisive, and it now seems that, that was the intention all along.
I wonder is someone attempting to 'divide and conquer'?
If people want to see an abolition of religion's and cult's, fine, but watch out, you won't like what will follow.
Religion is the stuff that keeps us safe and free of many bad things today and in the past.
In fact, religion is the 'law' we should take some cue's from.
Sure there are some pretty bad things in the Bible's, but if we are truly more intelligent than we were 2000 yrs ago, I would like to think we can weed out the bad bits.
Or maybe we're not smarter than our predecessors, in which case, let it be.
Personally I refute any acknowledgement of anyone or anything which smacks of personal ingratiation and immaturity, which this post overly smacks of.
The amount of leeway and preferential treatment given to minorities, everywhere, is unconscionable, and discriminating against the majority.
I'm all for accommodating people with dis-abilities such as 'ACROD', these clearly make sense, but as for these other queer based, weird laws, un-acceptable!
So if a religion preaches that being queer is a bad thing or should be condemned, so be it, it is NO business of govt or non-believers to have an opinion on the topic, and if you must comment, keep it amongst yourselves, in between the beers and the bullsh!t, it is religious business, so but out all of you ignorant, arrogant, do-goody nancys.

Foxy,

"All Australians are equal under the
law."

Are you still pushing that barrow?

Tell it to some Aboriginal girl who has just entered puberty and has been given to one of the "Old Men" of the tribe.

"People in this country are
free to try and advocate for whatever cause
they like - be it religious or any other"

But not without penalty if what they advocate is against the teachings of the group to which they belong.

How about a Salvation Army Officer who openly advocates Catholicism, would the Salvos be justified in kicking him/her out?

Would the Country Women's Assn be justified in kicking out a member who was found to be of the male gender?

Or the War Widow's Guild of Australia as they choose their members on gender and marital status.

Foxy, again you preach of the way things should/could be.
You know very well, things are not as you contend.
Just look around, and take note of what IS going on, not what you feel should be going on.
You keep pounding away at assumptions that the people's wishes are enacted into law via the parliament.
Some, very, very few are, and the ones that are, become law because of a very annoying, vocal and active group of lobbyists and cause pushers, which the majority of the population couldn't give a toss about, and are too busy working and believing that their vote will do the right thing, and so it doesn't as we are continually seeing.
Unfortunately, in the main, the laws being passed are not in the majority's interest.
Even though I give religious institutions 'carte blanche', I must admit being uncomfortable and torn over the idea that if we are to let religion go about it's business, what do we do with the ones that actively preach the killing of infidels, to name the most confounding one of all.
You see this is why state and religion can never be linked, and I know that if that were the case, what do we do with such preachings.
The answer unfortunately requires politicians with stones the size of footballs and titanium for skin.
As unthinkable as it may seem to some, the answer is to not allow people who, well in advance, tell you they have been 'groomed' by their religion to kill you.
Whether they do or not, is irrelevant, because to find out someone has to die.
I know it's extreme, but so is getting killed for no reason, extreme and senseless.
No I'm sorry but passing judgement on a few queers and selfish nancys is not the topic we should be commenting on, and yet here we are

Dear Foxy,

«All Australians are free to follow any religion they choose»
«All Australians are equal under the law»

By the time one graduates from kindy, one should be able to expose and refute such propaganda slogans.
Do you also still believe that "Coke adds life" (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yGCHY3o3O_g)?

---

Dear ALTRAV,

«Funding is one thing, managing is another.»

Yes, but they are connected: the patron(s) appoint the managers and the managers are reportable to the patron(s).

Patrons may place any caveats they like over the use of their money and even the most foolish caveats must be followed by those who accept it: it could perhaps be "every morning you must hop on one foot around the school-yard 3 times singing `I'm a rooster`" - if you accept the money then you must also accept the conditions. The honourable choice of course, is to refuse the money!

«It is not unreasonable for a religious institution which preaches a particular doctrine, to up-hold such teachings»

Definitely!

But it is unreasonable for a religious institution to accept tainted stolen money from the filthy secular state.

«It is divisive»

Socially perhaps, but I don't find there any religious concerns.

«If people want to see an abolition of religion's and cult's, fine, but...»

No, it is NOT fine. Religion is the sole purpose for which we wear human bodies and come to the world. We are here to reach God, not to form societies and such. Having a society may help this purpose, or hinder it, so we must struggle that it does only the former.

«Sure there are some pretty bad things in the Bible's»

Are you referring to "thou shalt not steal"? I believe it to be good and true as ever!

Government obtains money by taking it from people without asking for their permission. If you partake of such money, then that makes you a thief yourself. If a so-called "religious" institution accepts such money, then it is not truly religious because it has no respect for the bible or whatever other scriptures it presumably teaches.

Yuyutsu, whoa, calm down, I'm on your side, maybe I did not make myself clear enough, sorry.
Look I agree with you, but a suggestion, even though I understand your take on the money being tainted or 'stolen' as you contend, I would not push that one, at all because that same money goes towards doing a lot of good.
What I would highlight is the fact that people have strayed so far from knowing what is right and what is wrong, that there-in lies our demise.
Every book of religion promotes things which are fundamentally out of step with our times, the basics are still relevant.
The problem is that people want to cherry pick the good bits and ignore the bits they don't like.
This is where it gets messy.
I have always preached that we should base our laws and culture around the ten commandments, as they are rules, not religious in any way, just rules, in which case they can easily be adopted by anyone, christian or not.
What is oppressive is having to pray five times a day.
I think we all get my meaning.
As to whether religions have the right to judge on sexual orientation or gender identity?
HELL YES!
People have to learn to differentiate between state and religion, and realise that either the law, which is local, is wrong, or whether religion, which is universal, is wrong.
It's a no-brainer, obviously church wins every time.
Now if the church is asking for exemptions for such things as killing infidels because it is in their holy book and therefore just one of the many teachings of Mohamed, then obviously any thinking man can answer that, it is black and white.
On the other hand anything to do with being anything but man or woman is not even on the colour chart and should be relegated to the rubbish bin, not in parliament and certainly not in any teaching institutions.

With the treatment of kids by the major religions, why would anybody send their kids to a religious school?

If Australia, collectively, had any sense they would ban all religious schools, bus kids to various schools to mix up the ethnic mix, ban all religious symbolism at schools and in public except on whatever day of the week their diety demanded attendance. In twenty years the ethnic/religious hostility nonsense would be but a fading memory.