GAY TRUTH

As is well known, Australia has now joined those other (mainly Western, developed) countries which recognise same-sex marriage.3 The law of Australia on this topic was, following a popular vote in a “postal survey”, officially changed on the commencement of the Marriage Amendment (Definition and Religious Freedoms ) Act 2017 (Cth) on 9 December 2017. The title of the amending legislation seemed to promise that careful attention would be paid the topic of “religious freedoms”; but as it turns out, the protections formally provided were fairly minimal.  The purpose of this paper is to survey those protections which were provided, and to consider some Constitutional issues relating both to the amendments and to religious freedom protections. Suggestions are made as to the need for further protections. Adoption of same sex marriage raises religious freedom issues because the move effectively amounts to a change in a nation’s “public morality”, and takes a stance on the issue of w

An appeal to my fellow conservatives: please stop congratulating that chap who has his boot on your neck. Even Tony Abbott did it, telling parliament on 7th December, ‘I congratulate the Yes campaign for its victory’ as if the debate about same-sex marriage was a cricket match, not a profound struggle for our families and freedoms. The Yes campaign shows no such magnanimity. Bill Shorten famously called No voters ‘haters crawling out from under rocks’ while Victorian Premier Daniel Andrews urged a rainbow crowd to ‘get mad and get even’. On the last day of debate, leaders of the Yes campaign in the gallery applauded a reference to ‘the erosion of religious liberty’, which they regard as a license to hate. This No voter has felt that boot on the neck: vandalism at work, multiple threats of violence, a vexatious case before the Anti-Discrimination Commission, a ban on my book by a major printer, and on it goes. Others have fared much worse, and the harassing of dissenters will onl

On December 5, the Supreme Court heard the case of Jack Phillips , the Christian baker who can’t in good conscience design and create wedding cakes that celebrate same-sex marriages. The justices now will decide whether states , consistent with the First Amendment, can force citizens to express support for same-sex marriage through their artistic products. But this case needn’t have ended up at the Court. And future cases like it can be avoided. Agree or disagree, but Phillips believes he is serving Christ with every cake he makes. He has previously turned down requests to create Halloween-themed cakes, lewd bachelor-party cakes, and a cake celebrating a divorce. He was never reprimanded over those decisions, but the same-sex-wedding cake plunged him into hot water. Not surprisingly, much of the oral arguments focused on the First Amendment. Phillips argued that making him create a cake that celebrates a same-sex wedding would violate his First Amendment rights to free s