Australian PM should now be sacked - lied to 5 million Australian religious protections
John Howard has debunked Malcolm Turnbull’s argument that religious freedoms will lead to sharia law in Australia and declared he fears the fight for protections in the same-sex marriage debate will “die in the sand”.
PM TURNBULL SHOULD BE SACKED
The former prime minister John Howard, who campaigned for religious freedoms and parental rights during the same-sex-marriage postal survey, yesterday said the argument that extra religious freedoms could mean the establishment of Islamic law in Australia was a disgraceful fear campaign that was not true.
PM TURNBULL HAS NO INTENTION OF GIVING ANY RELIGIONS FREEDOMS
“The argument that religious freedoms will lead to the imposition of sharia law is just plain wrong and is a disgraceful appeal to community fears,” Mr Howard said. “Sharia law cannot be introduced without state government approval and that is simply not going to happen. Anyone practising some of the punishments of sharia law would be committing a crime.”
The Prime Minister has cautioned against additional religious freedoms because of the danger of allowing sharia law and has created a committee, including Howard government minister Philip Ruddock to report by March on necessary religious protections in expectation of the passage of the same-sex marriage bill before Christmas.
“The argument that religious freedoms will lead to the imposition of sharia law is just plain wrong and is a disgraceful appeal to community fears,” Mr Howard said. “Sharia law cannot be introduced without state government approval and that is simply not going to happen. Anyone practising some of the punishments of sharia law would be committing a crime.”
The Prime Minister has cautioned against additional religious freedoms because of the danger of allowing sharia law and has created a committee, including Howard government minister Philip Ruddock to report by March on necessary religious protections in expectation of the passage of the same-sex marriage bill before Christmas.
TURNBULL IGNORES 5 MILLION NO VOTERS -SUFFER LEGAL ACTION
Mr Howard, who challenged Mr Turnbull to disclose religious protections before the same-sex- marriage debate, said the government “should have had a plan” setting out religious protections in the event of a Yes vote on same-sex marriage.
Mr Howard, who challenged Mr Turnbull to disclose religious protections before the same-sex- marriage debate, said the government “should have had a plan” setting out religious protections in the event of a Yes vote on same-sex marriage.
TURNBULL PROMISED BUT LIED TO PROTECT PEOPLE OF FAITH
He also predicted that the proposal for a committee to look at religious freedoms next year would mean the extra religious protections the Prime Minister promised during the same-sex debate would never come to legislation next year.
Mr Howard yesterday criticised the Coalition’s handling of the same-sex marriage debate, except for the conduct of the postal survey itself. He was disappointed that conservative cabinet ministers didn’t speak out more and the lack of preparation for legislation.
“Precisely as I said, the pressure is on to move on to legislate the outcome of the postal survey before Christmas and that effectively ‘kicks the can down the road’ on religious protections,” he said.
“My worry is that the whole thing will die in the sand.”
Mr Howard said there were two key protections related to same-sex marriage legislation — parental rights and continuing exemptions for religious bodies in relation to employment — and the federal government should tie those protections to education funding.
“There has to be protection for a capacity for parents to monitor what their kids are taught on sensitive gender identity issues and that means being able to say my child is not going to take part in that instruction,” he said.
“Parents should have that right; parents have the right to say my child will not take part in scripture lessons.
He also predicted that the proposal for a committee to look at religious freedoms next year would mean the extra religious protections the Prime Minister promised during the same-sex debate would never come to legislation next year.
Mr Howard yesterday criticised the Coalition’s handling of the same-sex marriage debate, except for the conduct of the postal survey itself. He was disappointed that conservative cabinet ministers didn’t speak out more and the lack of preparation for legislation.
“Precisely as I said, the pressure is on to move on to legislate the outcome of the postal survey before Christmas and that effectively ‘kicks the can down the road’ on religious protections,” he said.
“My worry is that the whole thing will die in the sand.”
Mr Howard said there were two key protections related to same-sex marriage legislation — parental rights and continuing exemptions for religious bodies in relation to employment — and the federal government should tie those protections to education funding.
“There has to be protection for a capacity for parents to monitor what their kids are taught on sensitive gender identity issues and that means being able to say my child is not going to take part in that instruction,” he said.
“Parents should have that right; parents have the right to say my child will not take part in scripture lessons.
SACK TURNBULL NOW
“You don’t need the UN to tell you it is in our national DNA that parents have the ultimate authority on how their children are raised on those sorts of issues that involve moral judgments. Parental rights trump the rights of state education authorities. One way of dealing with that is for the federal government to make all the money it gives the states on education dependent on parental rights and the same thing applies to independent schools.”
“You don’t need the UN to tell you it is in our national DNA that parents have the ultimate authority on how their children are raised on those sorts of issues that involve moral judgments. Parental rights trump the rights of state education authorities. One way of dealing with that is for the federal government to make all the money it gives the states on education dependent on parental rights and the same thing applies to independent schools.”
