Reconciling Freedom and Equality for Peaceful Coexistence: On the Need to Reframe the Religious Exemptions in the Sex Discrimination Act

Alex Deagon
{"title":"Reconciling Freedom and Equality for Peaceful Coexistence: On the Need to Reframe the Religious Exemptions in the Sex Discrimination Act","authors":"Alex Deagon","doi":"10.55803/e683r","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"In this article I evaluate the capacity for the religious exemptions in the Sex Discrimination Act (Cth) to provide peaceful coexistence through reconciling freedom and discrimination. The exemptions provide that religious educational institutions can directly discriminate against staff and students on the basis of sexual orientation and gender identity if they do so in good faith and in accordance with their religion to avoid injury to the religious susceptibilities of adherents to that religion. The exemptions fail to provide peaceful coexistence through reconciling freedom and discrimination for two reasons. First, the exemptions are offensively and irrelevantly targeted at sexual minorities, undermining the dignity of diverse staff and students. Second, in their form as exemptions, they frame the communal rights of people of faith as a grudging exception to a general prohibition against discrimination, positioning religious institutions as seeking a special privilege to maliciously make decisions based on prejudice. Reframing the exemptions as positive associational rights simultaneously addresses these twin failures by 1) removing the stigmatic focus on sexual minorities, 2) supporting equality, and 3) providing a necessary and robust legal protection for religious educational institutions to select and regulate members of their community to maintain a religious ethos, thus supporting religious freedom. The recognition of positive rights for religious institutions contributes to peaceful coexistence by promoting diverse approaches to the public good while avoiding the hostile targeting of sexual minorities.","PeriodicalId":118952,"journal":{"name":"Australian Journal of Law and Religion","volume":"16 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"1900-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Australian Journal of Law and Religion","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.55803/e683r","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

In this article I evaluate the capacity for the religious exemptions in the Sex Discrimination Act (Cth) to provide peaceful coexistence through reconciling freedom and discrimination. The exemptions provide that religious educational institutions can directly discriminate against staff and students on the basis of sexual orientation and gender identity if they do so in good faith and in accordance with their religion to avoid injury to the religious susceptibilities of adherents to that religion. The exemptions fail to provide peaceful coexistence through reconciling freedom and discrimination for two reasons. First, the exemptions are offensively and irrelevantly targeted at sexual minorities, undermining the dignity of diverse staff and students. Second, in their form as exemptions, they frame the communal rights of people of faith as a grudging exception to a general prohibition against discrimination, positioning religious institutions as seeking a special privilege to maliciously make decisions based on prejudice. Reframing the exemptions as positive associational rights simultaneously addresses these twin failures by 1) removing the stigmatic focus on sexual minorities, 2) supporting equality, and 3) providing a necessary and robust legal protection for religious educational institutions to select and regulate members of their community to maintain a religious ethos, thus supporting religious freedom. The recognition of positive rights for religious institutions contributes to peaceful coexistence by promoting diverse approaches to the public good while avoiding the hostile targeting of sexual minorities.
为和平共处调和自由与平等:论性别歧视法中宗教豁免的重构必要性
在本文中,我评估了性别歧视法(Cth)中的宗教豁免通过调和自由与歧视来提供和平共处的能力。豁免规定,宗教教育机构可以基于性倾向和性别认同直接歧视工作人员和学生,如果它们是出于善意并根据其宗教信仰这样做,以避免伤害该宗教信徒的宗教敏感性。由于两个原因,豁免未能通过调和自由与歧视来实现和平共处。首先,这些豁免是针对性少数群体的冒犯性和不相关的,损害了不同教职员工和学生的尊严。其次,以豁免的形式,它们将有信仰的人的公共权利框定为普遍禁止歧视的勉强例外,将宗教机构定位为寻求一种基于偏见恶意做出决定的特权。将豁免重新定义为积极的社团权利,同时解决了这两个问题:1)消除对性少数群体的污名化关注,2)支持平等,以及3)为宗教教育机构选择和规范其社区成员以维持宗教精神,从而支持宗教自由提供必要和强有力的法律保护。承认宗教机构的积极权利有助于促进公共利益的多样化方法,同时避免敌意地针对性少数群体,从而促进和平共处。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信