Protecting the values of faith in a secular society

The Morrison government’s religious freedom legislation, promised in the Coalition’s 2019 election platform, should appeal to the families of about a million students who attend Australia’s Catholic, Anglican, Uniting, other Christian, Jewish and Muslim schools. The legislation, reworked by Attorney-­General Michaelia Cash, would protect the right of schools to discriminate in favour of applicants of their own faith in hiring teachers. It would override state laws, including a bill in Victoria that would ban religious institutions from discriminating against job applicants on the basis of faith. The Morrison government’s bill also would require religious educational institutions to have a publicly available policy to ensure information about their preferences was available to the community and applicants for positions. That is fair enough. Moderate Liberal MPs concerned about possible discrimination against LGBTI applicants should not overlook the fact religious schools are entitled to teach students their faith. Many parents enrolling their children do so because they want them to be well-grounded in faith. Such schools should be free to reject ideological programs such as Safe Schools.

National Catholic Education Commission executive director Jacinta Collins, a former Labor senator, has called on the government to speed up its legislation because proposed changes to Victoria’s Equal Opportunity Act could curb the rights of Catholic schools. Her concern suggests the federal legislation will be well received among stakeholders. Hospitals and nursing homes also will be free to hire members of their own faith but not discriminate in who they treat.

Senator Cash’s legislation is unlikely to satisfy many of former Wallaby Israel Folau’s most ardent supporters, however. Folau was sacked in 2019 after posting on social media that “hell awaits drunks, homosexuals, adulterers, liars, fornicators, thieves, atheists, idolators”. The government’s earlier draft legislation, drawn up by former ­attorney-general Christian Porter, included a so-called Folau clause protecting the right of employees to make religious statements outside work. Business groups opposed the clause, which provided that companies with a turnover of more than $50m had to prove an ­employee’s religious statement would cause financial harm to the company before taking action against a worker who spoke out to express unpopular or controversial religious views. But the government has retained exemptions ensuring that professional bodies cannot strike people off on the grounds of their religious ­beliefs.

The detail of the legislation, which will go before the House of Representatives in coming weeks, will be vital. But reports that the bill will not allow for conscientious objections on the grounds that people, especially in regional areas, should be able to access medical treatment, including abortions, could prove problematic for doctors and nurses who refuse to perform abortions, especially in communities suffering from a lack of medical staff.

Legislation dealing with strongly held, faith-based beliefs is always tricky to pass and implement. If the bill passes the house it will be subjected to extensive deliberations in the Senate and is likely to be referred to a committee for extra scrutiny. On what is known, the bill affords important protections but is unlikely to satisfy all churchgoers. The legislation is attempting to walk a delicate line. It is headlined by a statement of belief subclause that overrides state aged, sex and disability discrimination laws. That subclause will not protect speech that incites hatred or violence, or vilifies or intimidates people. Nor should it. The ultimate outcome should be a freer, more tolerant society in tune with the values of the great religions and their teachings.