Treatment of Israel Folau was inherently unfair

I was pleased to read Kel Richards’s article outlining why Christians such as Israel Folau are compelled by the teachings of Jesus to share their faith in love (“Folau’s faith compelled him to shout a warning: repent”, 1/6). What Christians believe is not a private matter.

What has happened to Folau is inherently unfair — even, it seems, to Australians who are not Christian. The law should be changed to ensure the victimisation of Folau cannot happen again.

For too long the church in Australia has not spoken out when it should have, in love and compassion. Now is such a time for Christians to explain, as Richards has done, what it means to be a Christian.

Bruce Flood, Abbotsford, NSW

Kel Richards misinterprets Bill Shorten’s position when he accuses Shorten of being “tone deaf” to the “distinct unease” that many Australians felt over the Israel Folau case. During the third leader’s debate, Shorten said that, while he agreed Folau’s comments were “hurtful”, he was “uneasy about where that debate has gone”. Shorten argued “Folau is entitled to his views and he shouldn’t suffer employment penalty for it ... Let’s hope that common sense prevails and they find a happy medium.”

Carol Johnson, Mile End, SA

Failure not an option

Paul Kelly is correct — any proposal to recognise indigenous Australians in the Constitution must not fail (“A strong indigenous voice must have the support of the people”, 1/6).

Such an outcome would be a stain on our society. However, we must ensure that we do not set ourselves up for failure. I believe that the Australian people are very well disposed towards indigenous recognition, but any attempt to enshrine in the Constitution a separate entity based on race is doomed to failure.

It baffles me that we have spent decades trying to reach a place where a person is judged by the content of their character, not the colour of their skin, and yet today we are flirting with measures that aim to achieve precisely the opposite.

Denzil Bourne, Jerrabomberra, NSW

Ban above politics

The Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons is not a left-wing issue, it is profoundly a humanitarian, one recognised by diverse supporters such as the International Committee of the Red Cross, the Australian Medical Association and others. Repeated independent polls have confirmed that close to 80 per cent of Australians support a treaty prohibiting these weapons (“Stance on nukes risks backlash”, 1/6).

It is also not true to suggest that signing this treaty will be incompatible with Australia’s alliance with the US. The majority of US non-NATO allies have already given support to the treaty and in New Zealand there is cross-party support for it. Additionally, most of our regional neighbours support the treaty.

There are times when we must take a stand in support of humanitarian principles and it was the Howard government that honourably committed Australia to the Land Mines Ban Treaty in 1997 against the wishes of the US at the time. A nuclear ban is an issue that is above politics.

Robert Tickner, Balmain, NSW

Time for nuclear review

Graham Lloyd says the law that prohibits nuclear power in Australia is due for review, and quotes the International Energy Agency warning that without nuclear power, clean energy is unlikely (30/5). Our government and the opposition see no votes in supporting nuclear power. This is because voters have been ill-informed. Voters and politicians should know that nuclear power is safe and reliable. We should wake up to the great advances in nuclear technology.

Basil van Rooyen, St Ives, NSW