I wrote this before I read the other posts.
Quote: The state does not determine what is good and what is evil.
I disagree.
That is exactly what it does.
And it makes laws to prevent the exercise of 'evil'.
By 'evil' we mean actions which seriously harm or disadvantage people?
For there is no naturally occurring good or evil.
There is no naturally occurring right or wrong.
Events are just that. Events.
How they affect us is how we catergorise them.
Something which happens might advantage one, but disadvantage another.
And the effect can change over time.
So it is not fixed.
And we have no rights.
We have needs which must be met if we are to survive.
Some will refer to these needs as 'rights'.
Long ago societies relied on Sun Gods and Stone Statues, and Witches and Spells.
All aimed at controlling the populace, and making use of superstition mixed with fear.
It worked.
And that was faith based living.
But we are wiser now.
Time to rid ourselves of those things.

I could have added that schools are places where children learn the skills necessary to live well in society.
Such as language, the ability to read, write, reason, interact with with others in a positive way, and so on.
They can explore their own strengths and weaknesses intellectually, and in sport too if they so wish.
Everything they are taught should be truthful, logical, and thought provoking.
I don't see it as a place to be fed a diet of religion.
Religion is, by its very nature, a dictatorship, and not open to reason.
That is at variance with the way children should be taught.
It seems to me that religious schools provide a means of indoctrinating young minds with religious ideas, whilst at the same time being paid to do so.
That is a win-win situation for them if ever there was one.
But it is not so good for society at large.

Terry's article claims that the proposed reforms will remove the "faith" from faith-based schools. But if you look at the proposed recommendations in the discussion paper, they actually say the opposite:

"In relation to selection, appointment, and promotion, religious educational institutions should be able to preference staff based on the staff member’s religious belief or activity, where this is justified."

What the recommendations do propose is to limit the capacity of schools to discriminate against staff, and more particularly students, if their lifestyles do not conform to the school’s interpretation of its religion’s moral code. So they cannot expel a student whose parents are in a same-sex relationship, or ban a trans student from being school captain. They cannot refuse to recruit a teacher because they are gay, but can require them to teach their interpretation of their religion’s take on homosexuality (with some caveats).

I don’t agree with all the recommendations, but in general I think they get the hierarchy of priorities right. The welfare and rights of students are paramount. Staff have almost the same protections against discrimination as employees in other organisations, with some concessions to the unique nature of faith-based schools. Schools can preference recruiting staff of their nominated faith where this is justified.

Where I disagree with the recommendations is that they should allow for some exemptions, but with this caveat. If a school really does want the right to refuse to hire a gay teacher, it should be able to. But it should not receive a skerrick of government funding or other concessions (e.g. grants and local government rates concessions) commonly given to private schools and not-for profit organisations. If it unwilling to conform to society’s basic standards of decency, it should not expect society to subsidise its activities.

If they want to get rid of religious brainwashing then they must also get rid of idealistic Leftist brainwashing.
Fair's fair !

I celebrate the removing of 'faith' from all education. The blind adherence to a mythological being created by man to control others. Let's celebrate and applaud the teaching of logic and science over 'faith'.

As for this little paragraph ...

"... The teachers and staff of faith-based schools embody the essence of their schools. They emulate the philosophy, beliefs and practices of their faith in their schools. They live by its teachings, they pass on the treasures of their faith in their words and by their lives. They are the living embodiment of the faith they teach..."

What an example 'faith' has set. All those wars, hatred, inhumanity to each other, discrimination. A wonderful example and a tradition to be continued indeed ... me definitely thinks not.

Go tell the wolf to stop eating lambs and eat grass instead...

How naive can the author be for asking,
«The Commonwealth should reject the ALRC’s deplorable attempt to destroy Australia’s faith-based schools. In terms of a “fair go”...»

States are there to serve their own interests, not mine, yours or God's.
They will by their very nature try to oppress and prevent any competition to their power. They don't want anyone else, including even God, to influence their subjects/victims.

It may well could be that the state attempts to remove faith from faith-based schools. Should that happen, then these schools will simply move underground, or an open war may ensue, for life or death. That would not be the first time in history when people of faith are tested harshly to prove their dedication to God above all.