Adjournment Speech: Separation of Church and State

A robust separation of church and state provides essential protections of the liberty of all members of society. Not only does it ensure that no one religion dominates and imposes itself on persons of other or no faith, it also ensures that the State can operate in a rational and accountable fashion.

It is thus alarming to see attempts to undermine this separation and to compromise the essentially secular nature of Australia's public life. From public funding of faith-based schools and events like World Youth Day, to attempts by religious minorities to restrict the basic human rights of others who do not conform to their narrowly defined constraints, Australia, like the rest of the world, is now in the midst of a debate to determine appropriate limits on the interference of organised religion in the decisions of the State.

This is not a debate—as it so often mischievously portrayed—about restricting the rights of people to live their lives according to their faith. There is no attempt to restrict the rights of people to adhere to a religion and to derive great personal comfort and spiritual enrichment from their beliefs and from the rituals and community of their faith. Nor is it a debate about muzzling or devaluing the exceptionally valuable contributions to public life of people motivated by religious belief. A number of religious organisations provide vital support for the most marginalised people in our community. Many church spokespeople provide valuable evidence and arguments that contribute to the public policy debate on a wide range of issues, often based on their expertise in delivering community services to the vulnerable.

I take this opportunity to specifically acknowledge the work of Reverend Dr Ann Wansbrough, who worked tirelessly for justice on behalf of the Uniting Church for over 20 years, often in partnership with non-religious organisations. The Greens will miss her important voice for peace, justice and the environment and wish her well in her future work.

The interface between organised religion and the State becomes problematic when a particular faith or religion seeks what Reverend Tim Costello calls "privileged access to power", when representatives of religious institutions enter into a debate by asserting that their faith holds a superior position to the faith or reasoned opinion of others. Rather than arguing from the commonly held concepts and publicly shared language of social justice and human rights, such interventions rely on the absoluteness of their special received wisdom.

Examples of this include the expectation of exemptions from anti-discrimination and vilification laws, the assumption of moral superiority in debates about sexual and biological ethics, and the defence of scripture classes in public schools to the extent that churches have ensured that the vast majority of students of no religious affiliation cannot use their time productively.

For example, in 2005, Reverend Danny Nalliah of Catch the Fire Ministries most offensively asserted the inherently violent nature of Islam and suggested that Muslim places of worship were "Satan's strongholds" which should be "pulled down". Evangelical Christians demanded that he be exempted from existing Victorian law preventing vilification of people of other religious beliefs. When he was found guilty, their first response was to demand the law be repealed rather than to question whether Mr Nalliah might have some soul-searching to do.

Yesterday many members received materials from the Fatherhood Foundation which suggested that gay and lesbian people are mentally disordered, promiscuous, and much more likely to be paedophiles, despite overwhelming objective evidence to the contrary. These statements would probably be illegal if the documents were not published by a religious organisation.

This Chamber has been subjected to claims that Australia is a Christian nation, with the consequence that all laws passed here should be compatible with Christian ethics. We still face the anachronism of opening each sitting day with an explicitly Christian prayer.

The growth of faith-based schools is a special cause for concern. The idea that some people's religious views about the role of a divine being in creating the universe should be allowed to undermine the teaching of the basis of the scientific method in our schools is one that takes society down a dangerous path. When scientific truths are hidden from students in this way, the capacity of tomorrow's leaders to solve critical social and scientific problems is undermined. The Government must end its complicity in allowing the teaching of so-called Intelligent Design and creationism in science classes in some Christian, Muslim and Jewish schools.