As soon as a politician says you should stop politicising an issue, they’re playing politics. They think you won’t notice. That’s the case with the Ruddock Review into religious freedom.
Step forward, Mark Dreyfuss QC.
Yesterday, Dreyfus posted this:
Once again – Labor legislated to *expand* protections under the Sex Discrimination Act to include sexual orientation and gender identity in 2013. Stop politicising this issue https://t.co/xnqnHmOLWJ
— Mark Dreyfus (@markdreyfusQCMP) October 13, 2018
This is a winner for Labor and they will do all they can to bolt the ‘anti gay’ tag to every government MP. Especially ahead of the Wentworth by-election. Wentworth takes in Paddington and Surry Hills – the gay heart of Sydney.
In 2013, a certain Attorney-General introduced the legislation which is now at the centre of th Ruddock review.
That would be Dreyfuss. The then-Attorney-General Mark Dreyfuss said:
The introduction of the grounds of sexual orientation, gender identity and intersex status into the Sex Discrimination Act, in conjunction with the existing complaints provisions of the Australian Human Rights Commission Act 1986, will provide a complaints mechanism for people who consider they have been discriminated against on these bases. The Australian Human Rights Commission will be able to investigate and attempt to conciliate such complaints.
This is Dreyfus saying that ‘protections’ had been expanded.
This is the very next para from his introduction of the legislation:
The bill also amends existing exemptions as appropriate to reflect the new grounds. This includes exemptions for religious bodies in relation to employment and the provision of education that have been in place for many years. These exemptions will continue under this bill and encompass the new grounds.
Keep that in mind. You see, there is no conscious vote in the ALP. You vote the way the party tells you to vote. If you don’t like it, leave.
So the current crop of Labor MPs virtue signaling about gay teachers – if they were around in 2013 – voted for the amendments.
That would include leader Bill Shorten, seen here today being the parent we all wish we could be:
As a father, I try to teach my children to treat everyone with respect, and to view everyone as equal. Our laws should reflect that too. pic.twitter.com/7aOKxFJD71
— Bill Shorten (@billshortenmp) October 15, 2018
So much virtue.
And in case you’re wondering, that legislation was signed into law by Quentin Bryce. That would be Shorten’s mother-in-law.
Since this story broke last week about the Ruddock review, there has not been a single example of a gay teacher being sacked for being gay. Not one.
Nor has there been a single example of a gay student being expelled for being gay. Not one.
If there had been either, do you think the media would have held it back for even a fraction of a second? Of course not. There is no example.
This is a perfect example of virtue signalling if there ever was one. It’s all talk to action. All talk, no cost. Except that isn’t true.
The Liberal Party is wearing the cost, primarily because the media is not holding the ALP to account for legislation it introduced under the Gillard Government. Every Labor member who was a Labor member in 2013 should be asked why they voted for this legislation.
They should be held to account. They should be asked what has changed in the intervening five years. Did they hate gays in 2013? Or were they afraid in 2013 and didn’t care against whom they discriminated? Is it now expedient? What other discriminations are they prepared to ignore for the sake of a vote?
Labor is getting away with one of the most blatant hypocrisies you will ever see. Labor could have changed the law in 2013 but chose not to and when they did change the law they did nothing about what they now hate. And they are holding the government to account for their legislation.
What is also amazing is the stupidity of the problem.
If you are an openly gay teacher in a Catholic school, no one will care. We’ve moved past that. And the church hardly has a leg to stand on when it comes to issues of sexual morality (too many links to list). The issue about a gay teacher teaching in a Catholic school will arise if that teacher has to teach Catholic doctrine on homosexuality. Will they follow the rules of the school? How would they feel about that? That’s another question Bill Shorten should be asked. But won’t be.
As mentioned at the start of this post, in the ALP, you are expected to vote the way the ALP tells you to vote. Will they now fight for freedom of thought in Catholic schools but not in the ALP?
Of course they will. But you already knew that.