foxdemon wrote:It seems there are concerns within the religious community that they will face legally enforced discrimination.
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-08-15/same-sex-marriage-is-more-complex-than-yes-campaign-admits/8804466
Australia votes on these issues? Do Australians also vote one whether blacks can marry? Or Jews? This is like that old joke about two wolves and a sheep voting on supper. But let us set aside the debate as to whether or not the majority should be allowed to decide if minorities have rights, and answer your concern.
Yes, I am sure some people are concerned that they will no longer be allowed to discriminate against LGBT people whenever they want. If they own a bakery, to use the often cited example, they may be forced to bake a wedding cake for Adam and Steve.
Please note that even if this comes to pass and bakeries are forced to do such things, the entire extent of this "discrimination" that oppresses bakeries is to limit the bakery's ability to discriminate. That is it.
Mind you, since bakeries do not have immortal souls, it makes no sense to worry about the bakery's spiritual beliefs.
I think your use of terms such as 'homophobia' and 'bigot' well illustrates exactly what they are worried about. I am sure we agree that the religious conservatives have no right to impose their religious views on others but it seems we disagree about whether social progressives have a right to impose their views on others.
If you think that I am imposing my views by pointing out bigotry, then the only way for me not to impose my views would be to be silent whenever people are homophobic or show bigotry. This would not only be a limit to my free speech, but it would also protect discrimination from criticism. This would be affording special privileges (in terms of free speech) to bigoted views, as any otther view is open to criticism.
The salient example of forcing values onto the community is the Safe Schools program, which is regarded as controversial. Even LGBTI critics are punished for not towing the pollitically correct line.
http://www.theaustralian.com.au/national-affairs/education/catherine-mcgregor-sacked-for-safe-schools-criticism/news-story/310298ea0dc3c06fda7cb6fc6dbae69d
Your link directs me to a paywall. Apparently Rupert Murdoch thinks I should pay money to read his opinion on the program.
So what we can see here is that there is another agenda behind preventing bullying in schools. And that agenda is about forcing beliefs on others.
Actually, we cannot see anything like that, due to the paywall. Which belief is being forced on others?
Sorry, POD, but many people just don't trust social progressives anymore.
Lol. When was this magical time when everyone trusted us?
I remember championing LGBT rights about thirty years ago in the Canadian midwest. People would literally try to beat us up just because we refused to be homophobic.
Trust us...