Speaking Of Broken Promises: The Religious Discrimination Laws…
Ok, just from memory which is fine because nobody ever seems to spend a couple of minutes checking out a potential CEO on the internet anymore, I seem to remember that we were promised laws that would stop people being persecuted for their religious beliefs.
And, again from memory, it went something like this:
- Religious organisations should not be forced to employ anyone who didn’t subscribe to their religious beliefs.
- People should not be forced to abandon their religious beliefs because of the organisation they wish to join.
- We will decide what constitutes a religious belief and the circumstances under which these will count…
All right, my memory is a little bit faulty but it does seem to me that this is like the whole free speech thing which seems to be expressed in the popular media – if I’m important enough to have my views amplified by the media – any disagreement is somehow inhibiting my freedom of expression and shouldn’t be allowed…, particularly on Twitter which is just a sewer…
And speaking of Chris Uhlmann, I’m wondered how long it is before he blames wind power for the lack of electricity in Florida…
Anyway, I’m still trying to get my head around the idea of why religious organisations should be allowed to exclude people from employment because they’re atheists who don’t subscribe to their viewpoint but non-religious bodies shouldn’t be allowed to exclude religious people who want to condemn their clients and employers to hell…
Of course, this is all general and has nothing to do with the recent brouhaha about the Essendon CEO who lasted less time in the job than your average Tinder date.
When it comes down to it, he should have never got the job for the obvious reason that he was the person in charge of finding the next CEO.
Let’s be clear here: If you tasked me with the job of finding a replacement for Shaun at “Mad As Hell” and I came back a few weeks later and said after due consideration, I think it should be me, you’d have to think that I was far from a disinterested party and that maybe there was the sort of conflict of interest that meant that I should consider becoming the next Liberal leader rather than a comedian…
Fair point, there isn’t much of a difference these days.
But surely someone who gave him the tick must have noticed that he had NAB on his resume and wondered what he did there. Surely they could have done a quick search and found that he was head when the bank was charging dead people for financial advice and that the Royal Commission found him a wee bit unconvincing.
Still, as he believes in life after death, at least the charging of dead people is consistent with his religious beliefs.
Like what we do at The AIMN?
You’ll like it even more knowing that your donation will help us to keep up the good fight.
Chuck in a few bucks and see just how far it goes!
Your contribution to help with the running costs of this site will be gratefully accepted.
You can donate through PayPal or credit card via the button below, or donate via bank transfer: BSB: 062500; A/c no: 10495969
6 comments
Login here Register here-
Canguro -
New England Cocky -
pierre wilkinson -
wam -
wam -
leefe
Return to home pageLet’s face it, Rossleigh, it’s a weird world, and it’s getting weirder. The chuckle-inducing values schism that is the religious mob’s insistence on discriminating against potential employees because they might be doing stuff that clashes with their ‘values’, vs. their insistence that they be given carte-blanche to waltz into any situation cum environment with their screwed and antiquated positions unchallenged and staunchly defended is beyond parody; thankfully there still exist folk with enough still functioning upstairs to recognise the lunacy of the conjointly held positions.
The NAB guy being case in point. It’s as if I were to parade up George St wearing a sandwich board that said ‘Just Say No to Drugs’ and at the end of the shift, dump the gear and make a beeline to the Cross to hook up with my favourite dealer for a bit of smoko.
These types deserve every bit of exposure and ridicule that we can muster, and rightly so.
Well Rossleigh, it is a little bit like the Nazional$ Party that espouses ”traditional family values” as the lying under their political philosophy for continuing to support the representative of the Nazional$ in New England.
.
Metropolitan folk may not understand that adultery, alcoholism, amorality and misogyny are ”Nazional$ family values” while racism, self-service and corrupt dealings also feature in this political philosophy.
.
These values are NOT supported across the electorate but appear to dominate the thinking of Tamworth women who continue to vote for the Nazional$ …. so do those women also support adultery & alcoholism?
.
Or is it simply a matter of enjoying the privileged life style of church condoned prostitution?
reminds me of the feting of certain football players who righteously were offended by and refused to wear gay pride jerseys, compared with the indignation offered by the same media when a certain netball team declined to be seen in a jersey offering promotion of a company who’s previous CEO proffered offensive and bigoted opinions.
hypocrisy writ large
Rossleigh,
it is a religious right to have secret rites and privileges. They can ask about employee’s religious rites with being asked.
Perhaps it is time to separate out the business component of religion and set equal employment and taxes.
Women accept their place and participate in NEC’s description of his electorate.
For the tableland a teal is unlikely to defeat the scones?
dumb am I the churches, mosques and synagogues can ask about a person’s religious beliefs but protect themselves from any scrutiny?
Plaudits for whomever chose that image.