Cornflower - what does that tired, old and thoroughly discredited rant from the odious Andrew Bolt have to do with a discussion about discrimination by religious organisations against homosexuals?

I'm genuinely interested in how you might seek to make what appears to be a very tenuous connection, but I won't hold my breath waiting for a reply.

C J Morgan

What I wrote made sense enough. You distract yourself not others by playing the man, not the ball.

"What I wrote made sense enough." Well, yes, in the sense that it goes to both the aims and the problems with anti-discrimination legislation.

The Victorian Equal Opportunity Act (1995) states as its objectives:
(a) to promote recognition and acceptance of everyone's right to equality of opportunity;
(b) to eliminate, as far as possible, discrimination against people;
(c) to eliminate, as far as possible, sexual harassment;
(d) to provide redress for people who have been discriminated against or sexually harassed.
http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/vic/consol_act/eoa1995250/s3.html

For most people living in this land of the fair go, these objectives are completely uncontroversial. The overwhelming majority of Australians supports the view that where equal rights prove difficult to guarantee, the law must step in: http://news.smh.com.au/breaking-news-national/aussies-support-human-rights-act-survey-20090312-8vr7.html We have the good fortune to live in an essentially tolerant and inclusive society, and we want our laws to back this up.

However for some people the in-principle support tends to weaken if a particular minority is seen as receiving "special rights", or a hitherto unaffected group feels that they are losing some: "it is a case of "rights for me, but not for thee" http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?article=8656#137204

"In a society in which many practices are discriminatory in effect (if not in intent), anti-discrimination legislation can be expected to challenge many things that are taken for granted, the discriminatory effects of which are rarely noticed by those whom it does not impede." Beth Gaze: http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/journals/MULR/2002/18.html

Privilege is inequality too, even if you don’t perceive it as privilege. While the vast majority of Australians are happy to address the inequalities that disadvantage some in our society, many are unwilling to even talk about, let alone remove, conditions that privilege some groups. As I mentioned in the article, we’re seeing this in the South Australian debate, where the churches are trying to stifle discussion about how they use the anti-discrimination exemptions. This particular privilege is indefensible, and they know it.

So thanks for the link, Cornflower. Even though Bolt's polemic is particularly unilluminating, the title he chose for his piece describes exactly the exemptions to anti-discrimination laws used by religious bodies.

Thanks Jim - I see it now. However, I suspect the "sense" you've made of Cornflower's link between Bolt's rant and your article is not quite the connection s/he had in mind.

Cornflower,until you use reference to an objective source, your comments have no validity.

woulfe

In my business I select solely according to merit. Selection criteria and job descriptions that have been massaged with affirmative action in mind or in this case to discriminate against a particular group are an abomination.

The greatest majority of the 'white men' you would support discrimination against are not in positions of power and never will be. Nor do they gain any benefit from their 'whiteness' or gender.

Further, many of the 'white men' you would discriminate against don't even have jobs yet and those you would prefer ahead of them through 'positive' discrimination haven't even arrived in the country as yet.

How is any of that a 'fair go'? "Fair' can mean many things it seems, depending on whether one is a goose or a gander and white ganders are definitely on the 'out' list.

Many of the women you would like to see in higher management jobs do not want to pursue a career. They are perfectly happy with raising a family and taking up part-time work when and where they please. Where done, cohort analysis of women entering the Commonwealth Public Service indicates that contrary to what some might believe, women progress into higher temporary and permanent jobs more quickly than men. It is not discrimination that keeps the numbers lower in the highest positions but choice.