PROTECT RELIGIOUS FREEDOM, BUT NOT AT THE EXPENSE OF LAW

NEW laws are on the way to protect people’s religious freedom. It’s a direct consequence of the same sex marriage vote, and we need to tread carefully.

Of course, the law should be clear, so a priest, rabbi or imam can’t be forced to perform a same sex marriage that’s not supported by their faith. But that’s about all the protections we need.

I am deeply respectful of people of faith and recognise the vast majority of Australians do have faith in a higher being. A fact lost on most of the media.

My major concern about these laws is one of being consistent. Most people would agree with the idea that religious law can’t supersede the law of the land.

We don’t believe in Sharia law and we must ensure that any legal protections for religious freedom don’t become a shield for people who want to hide behind their faith when breaking the law.

The most obvious example of this is the disgraceful practice of radical Islam that approves of the marriage of teenagers (and younger) to adults.

Recent court cases have shown there are plenty of people who think religious blessing over such relationships is more important than the actual laws of marriage that make it clear both people need to be over 18.

These aren’t marriages, they are religious approval of sexual abuse.

Yes, this is the extreme example. But that’s what we are talking about when we are drawing the lines of where and where not religious law sits outside the laws of the land.

Many on the left claim there is no need for religious freedom laws because there is no evidence of religious persecution or religious people forcing others to marry people they don’t want to.

But these are the same people screaming for laws to prevent religious schools being able to expel students or sack teachers who are gay.

The only problem is there’s no evidence of this actually happening anywhere.

Now, I do think strict religious schools should be able to employ or reject students according to the rules of their faith. But they cannot use their faith to justify discrimination if they take one dollar in government funding.

Put simply, if you take money from the taxpayer, you need to play by the rules.

I repeat, I am respectful of people of faith. But we can’t write laws that will be wilfully misused by people in the name of their god.

I also strongly disagree with Bill Shorten who claims these laws shouldn’t be an election issue. I can’t think of anything more people deserve a say on more than where faith and the everyday collide.

He is just trying to avoid having to win over more than the Twitter minority who are largely left and are openly antagonist to the vast majority of people of faith.

WE CAN’T WRITE LAWS THAT WILL BE WILFULLY MISUSED BY PEOPLE IN THE NAME OF THEIR GOD.