Felicity de Fombelle" />


Wordpress (4)
  • Rita Joseph 4 years

    Excellent article! Thank you.

  • Mary 4 years

    I look forward to Catholic institutions being able to freely insist that their staff must adhere to the principles of solidarity and the common good, subsidiarity, just distribution of ownership, income and wealth, hospitality to the stranger including refugees, and upholding the inherent dignity of each person by ensuring basic human needs such as food, shelter, health care, education etc are adequately met. Finally, the freedom to be Catholic and insist that our institutions practice Catholicism! I look forward to being able to discriminate against those who have unjustly hoarded wealth at the expense of the poor and no longer be forced to employ them in Catholic institutions. This new piece of legislation can’t come soon enough.

    • Luis Matamoscas 4 years

      I suspect that here would be those who would object to any suggestion that these are values specific to Catholicism, and others who would argue that how best to implement these principles will result in varying views on which Catholics and others are entitled to disagree in good conscience.
      Freedom to be specifically Catholic, or Jewish or Muslim hinges on those specific teachings which others may reject, also in good faith, but which freedom of religion would allow one to state openly, to practice and to teach, while expecting Catholic, Jewish, Muslim, etc. etc. schools to be free to insist their staff also uphold these teachings.

  • Luis Matamoscas 4 years

    ‘The ABC’s Australia Talks helps you understand where you fit in modern Australia. We asked 54,000 people about their attitudes, behaviours and experiences.’ To my surprise in response to the question: How frequently do you think people in Australia are being discriminated against on the basis of religion? Only 30% of the 54,000 respondents answer Never (5%) or Rarely (25%) and while the ABC’s assessment told me I was ‘in the 41% of people who think that people in Australia are occasionally discriminated against on the basis of religion’ and ‘Most Australians, including those with no religion, agree that people are being discriminated against on religious grounds at least occasionally’, one had to read the whole item to find that 30% of their respondents thought such discrimination occurred Often.

    This leads to the question: was the question ambiguous. Was it taken to mean both that people of religious belief were discriminated against and the contrary that people of religious conviction discriminated against others?