What is the party’s position on the introduction of a Charter of Rights in NSW?
The NSW Liberals & Nationals Government is committed to protecting the human rights of all people in our community. The formulation of a Charter of Rights necessarily involves contentious choices about which rights should be included, and the relative strengths of those rights in inevitable cases of conflict.
A November 2018 report by the NSW Legislation Review Committee held that any consideration of a NSW bill of rights would need to be subject to a wider community debate.
NSW Labor has not supported a Charter of Rights.
A Daley Labor Government will conduct a review of the impact of current legislation on the rights of citizens.
We strongly support the creation of a bill of rights in NSW to ensure that human rights, as well as the social and environmental rights of all people, can be protected. NSW has some of the weakest anti-discrimination laws in the country, so it is crucial that the Act is updated to provide strong protections to provide adequate protection to everyone, including preventing discrimination on the basis of sex characteristics.
The Christian Democratic Party strongly supports one set of laws that applies equally to all Australians, irrespective of gender, age, religion, ethnicity or faith.
The Christian Democratic Party opposes any formal recognition of Islamic sharia law or other cultural or religious based legal systems.
The standard of law should remain solidly grounded and consistent with those on which our national identity and culture were founded upon, whilst ensuring equality for all.
Although we are founded upon Christian principles, morals and values, we fully support the freedom of choice in regards to religion or the choice to reject spiritual faith of any kind.
The Christian Democratic Party supports the rights of churches, institutions, schools and individuals to uphold their Christian beliefs in the public sphere without fear of bullying or litigation.
The AJP would support a charter of rights for both humans and non-human animals, both locally and internationally, as we apply our values to all sentient beings, and the environment.
The protection of human rights is not enhanced through the adoption of a ‘Charter of Rights’. The experience in other jurisdictions indicates that a ‘Charter of Rights’ frequently produces results that undermine religious liberty and other important human rights.
The party supports in principle a charter of rights but would reserve its final decision once seeing proposals of its make-up.
It is sometimes said there are two types of Christians: those who suffer for their religion and those who enjoy it. Today, many Christians are suffering from the reality or fear of Leftist vilification. They are being subject to a campaign of revenge, with gay-Left activists trying to get even for past grievances (real and imagined).
New anti-discrimination laws are needed to overcome this problem, protecting traditional ‘majority’ groups as much as perceived ‘minorities’. Religious freedom should be protected in two significant ways. The first is to outlaw discrimination against people of faith (the Margaret Court case) and attempts to limit their freedom of speech (the Israel Folau case).
The second protection is to ensure government laws do not force people of valid religious faith to do things they regard as morally wrong. In public debate, this is often referred to as the case of the Christian baker asked to prepare a cake for a same-sex wedding celebration.
History tells us that when governments have the power to make people do things they regard to be morally wrong, we move one step closer to a police state. Hence no one should be required to participate in gay marriage activities if, by their religious convictions, gay marriage is sinful.
This was a damning flaw in the 2017 Federal same sex-marriage statute. State anti-discrimination laws effectively coerce Christian service providers (such as bakers, dressmakers etc) to participate in gay marriage, for fear of being prosecuted. Religious freedom laws are needed to overcome this persecution.
The key challenge for lawmakers is to carefully define the reach of religious freedom. These provisions can go too far – in the case of Islam, enshrining Sharia Law. No reasonable person, for instance, would want to give full freedom and legislative protection to the way in which the Koran authorises domestic violence.
Nor should religious freedom laws protect a Christian priest for failing to report acts of child sexual abuse. Valid religious faith must be protected, but in a manner consistent with the values and standards of Western civilisation (of which Christianity itself is an important pillar).
Unfortunately, the Turnbull/Morrison Government mismanaged the politics of the Ruddock Review into religious freedom, allowing it to morph into a debate about gay rights, not Christian rights. One Nation will overcome this shortcoming in NSW, with new legislative protections of religious freedom.
Click the arrow below to see the next question >>