.
(Continued …)

.

2. « That in a previous post you flippantly claimed that there is no religious discrimination in Aus thus no need to enshrine the right is both intellectually lazy (as that would indicate that the bill should have no resistance) but also substantially incorrect, as there have been several actions taken against those that state their religiously based opinion. Israel Folau and a cleric in Tasmania are well-known examples. »
.

What I wrote was :

« Happily, Australia does not have a history of religious persecution. Christians in this country have the freedom to gather and worship freely, to meet in public places, to join the army, to teach, to vote, and to be prime ministers. Christians own and run vast institutions. They are still the largest religious affiliation in Australia.

Of course, there may be the odd exception, but it would be a gross exaggeration to suggest that Christians are a persecuted group in Australia. »
.

I could have added that the Australian Christian Lobby organisation is very active on the political scene both in Canberra and in the states where it exercises its influence freely and effectively.
.

But, as I am sure you are aware, The Australian Christian Lobby has now withdrawn its support for the Religious Discrimination Bill package and called on the Morrison Government to withdraw the Bills from the Senate, explaining :

« Taking away protections for Christian schools is a price too high to pay for the passage of the Religious Discrimination Bill. The amendments voted on by Labor, independents and these Liberal MPs unnecessarily interfere with the operation of faith-based schools »
.

We can now all breathe a sigh of relief.

As you said yourself, shadowminister, this whole thing was just “a political wedge issue” anyway.

Seems like a happy ending.

.

Banjo,

<<We can now all breathe a sigh of relief. As you said yourself, shadowminister, this whole thing was just “a political wedge issue” anyway. Seems like a happy ending.>>

That might be a "sigh of relief" for you but it's reverse discrimination to Christians and others whose values are being stomped on by the delay of this Religious Discrimination Bill.

.

Dear OzSpen,

.

You wrote :

« … discrimination to Christians and others whose values are being stomped on by the delay of this Religious Discrimination Bill … »
.

That is a sweeping statement that is inexact, Ozpen. Values of only some are being "stomped on". The palette of Christian values is by no means homogenous – quite the contrary – it is a vast and complex mosaic !
.

The Prime Minister withdraw the proposed legislation from the senate when five Liberal senators rebelled to repeal section 38(3) of the Sex Discrimination Act that allows religious schools to discriminate against students and teachers on the basis of sexual orientation, gender identity, marital or relationship status or pregnancy.

Here is the testimony of Trent Zimmerman, one of the Liberal senators :

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3_ll5eMKajc&ab_channel=GuardianAustralia
.

The promotors of the Bill wanted to make it legal for religious schools to discriminate against LGBT students and teachers.

These are the “values” you regret are being “stomped on” by the delay of this Religious Discrimination Bill, Ozpen.

You affirm that they are the values of “Christians and others”.
However, I note that this is not the case of the Catholic Church whose Catechism states as follows in the section dealing with “Chastity and homosexuality” :

« 2358 – The number of men and women who have deep-seated homosexual tendencies is not negligible. This inclination, which is objectively disordered, constitutes for most of them a trial. They must be accepted with respect, compassion, and sensitivity. Every sign of unjust discrimination in their regard should be avoided. These persons are called to fulfill God's will in their lives and, if they are Christians, to unite to the sacrifice of the Lord's Cross the difficulties they may encounter from their condition ».

Many other Christian denominations do not view monogamous same-sex relationships as sinful or immoral. Even the positions of the evangelical churches are varied. They range from liberal to fundamentalist or moderate Conservative and neutral.

Some evangelical denominations have adopted neutral positions, leaving the choice to local churches to decide for same-sex marriage (Wikipedia).

.