Freedom of religion is a close ally and friend of the absolute freedoms of thought and of our conscience. Equally, it is closely allied to freedom of expression. For many people religious liberty and freedom is also essential for them to flourish.

The exclusion of religious perspectives through those involved in aggressive secularism has created in my view a void in moral and ethical values, with a shifting of focus to self-interest, lack of compassion and competition.

As a result, moral relativism and intellectual stagnation are on the rise. Without a clear vision, people risk floundering, which in my view sees people perish. In places like Australia, where intellectual discourse is increasingly limited and a place very anti intellectual, the absence of meaningful debate stifles growth, something we cannot afford to face. A society that disregards religious thought also undermines its own moral foundation and intellectual depth at the same time, something I believe people will regret in future years.

True freedom only thrives when truth, justice, and wisdom are preserved in public debate, religion being part of such debate with religious freedoms and open discussion having a vital role to play in the future growth and development of society at large.

Losing sight of religious freedoms and the rise of aggressive secularism will only push society further down a pathway we will regret in my view, with religious freedoms being something we must defend for the benefit of all.

Hi NathanJ

I agree that freedom of religion is a very important right, and one that is under attack by aggressive secularism. However, we need to negotiate the inevitable conflicts when different sets of rights and values (not just religious) conflict.

Some examples:
1. Should religious schools be allowed to dismiss homosexual teachers?
2. Should they be allowed to expel homosexual students?
3. Should they be free to teach seven-day creationism in preference to accepted scientific theories on evolution, geology and astronomy?
4. Is it ok for France to ban the Burqa?
5. Is it ok for Saudi Arabia to ban women from riding bicycles?
6. Was Rugby Australia right to sack Israel Folau for homophobic social media posts?
7. Should the sanctity of the confessional mean that priests are not required to report to police someone who confesses to a serious crime?
8. Should catholic hospital be forced to offer abortions?

People of good faith and conscience – including religious folk – will give different answers to these questions.

FYI my answers would be:
1. Yes
2. No
3. No
4. Yes
5. No
6. No
7. Yes
8. No

I'd be happy to explain any one of these.

Religion should be free for anyone to follow however, it needs to be deemed an indictable offence to promote it in public !

Hi Rhian,
"7. Should the sanctity of the confessional mean that priests are not required to report to police someone who confesses to a serious crime?"
- You answered Yes.

So I'm thinking to myself what say happens if a person admits to sexual abuse of women and kids and murder?

Do you think that person deserves to have a free 'out' to get the burden of guilt off their chest without facing the penalty of law that all of us would expect?

I'm not sure they deserve to be able to openly confess to such things free of charge.

I'm not sure any human being enjoys a right to know such things about others and allow them to roam knowing they may continue to harm others.
Is the priests higher moral priority to save blackened souls / protect the sinner and hear their confessions or is it to protect the innocent amongst God's children instead?
- I'm not sure they can have it both ways.

In a secular society I don't believe that
preference should be given to any particular group.
All groups should be treated equally.

Only by treating people equally, giving them equal
rights, expecting all to obey the rule of law, we
might succeed in rejecting unfairness.

We need to seek respectful dialogue in the public square,
in our parliament, and in our courts.

Our aim in a secular society should be to seek justice
and compassion for all, whatever their religion - as
well as for those who have no faith. A secular society should
aim to create equality between religious and
non- religious groups.

Dear Nathan,

Religious freedom is paramount.
All other freedoms converge at the freedom to follow God (which is what life was created for in the first place).
Anyone to thwart religious freedom is an enemy of God, thus ultimately also their own enemy.

But there is a catch: people cannot tell for sure whether any particular action of another is religious or otherwise, whether or not it brings them closer to God, whether or not it serves God - our fickle human minds are just not capable of that.
(perhaps prophets could do that, but we have no prophets today)

Even people who claim to have no faith could be following and serving God in their own way: they may not know it, but still so; and even people who claim to follow and serve God could unknowingly be doing the opposite.

And this is exactly why all freedoms ought to be respected and preserved, not just those that our limited minds deem to be "religious", this is why we should always err on the side of caution and give all people the benefit of the doubt that their actions could be religious.

Foxy is correct in saying that we should treat all people and all groups equally, that anything short of that would be unfair, but nothing could be worse and more evil than the suppression of religion, such as by forcing religious people to place human law above God, thus unlike her conclusion, nobody should ever be expected to obey the rule of law, equally nobody, lest it conflicts with another's religion, i.e. with another's following and serving God.

May God lead us from falseness to truth.
May God lead us from darkness to light.
May God lead us from death to immortality.
May God grant us Peace [from universal calamities]; Peace [from human actions]; Peace [from internal mental disturbances].