For our Australian Friends.. implications or advantages?

[timothyu]

Religious discrimination bill: what will Australians be allowed to say and do if it passes?

 

[Carl Emerson]

Religious discrimination bill: what will Australians be allowed to say and do if it passes?

Have a read...

Very important and very interesting...

 

[Speedwell]

Religious discrimination bill: what will Australians be allowed to say and do if it passes?

Have a read...

Very important and very interesting...

Will non-Christians be allowed to respond in kind?

 

[Carl Emerson]

On the forum or to the Govt?

 

[JackRT]

To be honest, that makes me feel quite uncomfortable.

 

[Aryeh Jay]

Will non-Christians be allowed to respond in kind?

Why should they be allowed to?

 

[Carl Emerson]

To be honest, that makes me feel quite uncomfortable.

Yes I guess your elbows will be quite sore...

Try shifting your position a little...

 

[Speedwell]

On the forum or to the Govt?

To each other. In Australia.

 

[Speedwell]

Why should they be allowed to?

I think that's what makes our colleague JackRT uncomfortable.

 

[Tanj]

I doubt this second version would pass the senate, and by the time it has come to the senate it will be less stupid than it is now.

Also, the Guardian examples are not quite right, the 2nd version allows a doctor/nurse to deny a procedure, not a person. So for example they cannot deny hormone treatment just to LGBT, they would have to deny all hormone treatments to everyone, and show that was religious based denial.

 

[JackRT]

I doubt this second version would pass the senate, and by the time it has come to the senate it will be less stupid than it is now.

That is a hopeful thought.

Also, the Guardian examples are not quite right, the 2nd version allows a doctor/nurse to deny a procedure, not a person. So for example they cannot deny hormone treatment just to LGBT, they would have to deny all hormone treatments to everyone, and show that was religious based denial.

In Canada a doctor/nurse would be allowed to say "Due to my religious convictions I cannot do that for you but I will refer you Dr. Whoever." The referral cannot be denied.

 

[Tanj]

In Canada a doctor/nurse would be allowed to say "Due to my religious convictions I cannot do that for you but I will refer you Dr. Whoever." The referral cannot be denied.

To be really honest Australia is enough of a secular society that the end result of this will be religious oriented medical practitioners losing patients. Healthcare by and large is an inelastic demand, but choice of doctor isn't. Because of the universal coverage of the Australian system I can go to literally any GP in the country and receive the same subsidy/"insurance". My gut feeling is this piecer of pandering to the religious right will have little to no effect beyond insensitive thugs being given leave to be insensitive thugs on social media.

In addition, there's wording about any comments being constructive and not vilifying. My crystal ball says watch the courts to work out what that ends up meaning.