This article is from the source 'guardian' and was first published or seen on . It last changed over 40 days ago and won't be checked again for changes.
You can find the current article at its original source at http://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2016/feb/18/frank-brennan-warns-turnbull-marriage-equality-plebiscite-could-turn-very-nasty
The article has changed 5 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.
| Version 3 | Version 4 |
|---|---|
| Frank Brennan warns Turnbull marriage equality plebiscite could turn 'very nasty' Frank Brennan warns Turnbull marriage equality plebiscite could turn 'very nasty' | |
| (about 2 hours later) | |
| The human rights lawyer and Jesuit priest Father Frank Brennan has written to the prime minister, Malcolm Turnbull, opposing a plebiscite on same-sex marriage, describing it as “a costly unproductive exercise” that “risks turning very nasty”. | The human rights lawyer and Jesuit priest Father Frank Brennan has written to the prime minister, Malcolm Turnbull, opposing a plebiscite on same-sex marriage, describing it as “a costly unproductive exercise” that “risks turning very nasty”. |
| Brennan has instead emphasised the importance of legislating “religious freedom” in the same-sex marriage law he believes the parliament will inevitably pass. | Brennan has instead emphasised the importance of legislating “religious freedom” in the same-sex marriage law he believes the parliament will inevitably pass. |
| He also defended the right of the clergy to “evangelise” their views opposing marriage equality and described the reaction to an anti-discrimination investigation into a pamphlet produced by the Catholic church as “ridiculous”. | He also defended the right of the clergy to “evangelise” their views opposing marriage equality and described the reaction to an anti-discrimination investigation into a pamphlet produced by the Catholic church as “ridiculous”. |
| Brennan, who posted a copy of the letter on his Facebook page on Wednesday, said he was prompted to write after being asked to co-sign a letter from 40 other religious leaders that also urged Turnbull to abandon the planned plebiscite. | Brennan, who posted a copy of the letter on his Facebook page on Wednesday, said he was prompted to write after being asked to co-sign a letter from 40 other religious leaders that also urged Turnbull to abandon the planned plebiscite. |
| That letter, from a group of Buddhist, Baptist, Anglican and Uniting church leaders, warned that a public vote would be divisive and the resulting “volatile, public and politically charged debate” could “distance leaders from lay people, marginalise faith communities from broader society and alienate LGBTI individuals within religious communities”. | That letter, from a group of Buddhist, Baptist, Anglican and Uniting church leaders, warned that a public vote would be divisive and the resulting “volatile, public and politically charged debate” could “distance leaders from lay people, marginalise faith communities from broader society and alienate LGBTI individuals within religious communities”. |
| Turnbull has publicly advocated for marriage equality but said he would to stick to the Coalition’s plan to hold a plebiscite on marriage equality when he ousted Tony Abbott for the Liberal leadership in September. | Turnbull has publicly advocated for marriage equality but said he would to stick to the Coalition’s plan to hold a plebiscite on marriage equality when he ousted Tony Abbott for the Liberal leadership in September. |
| Brennan argued that a vote was “a waste of time and risks turning very nasty” given that both Turnbull and the opposition leader, Bill Shorten, support same-sex marriage. | Brennan argued that a vote was “a waste of time and risks turning very nasty” given that both Turnbull and the opposition leader, Bill Shorten, support same-sex marriage. |
| “The plebiscite advocates were opponents of same-sex marriage who thought it would give them more airplay back in the days when the prime minister was a strong opponent of same-sex marriage,” he wrote. | “The plebiscite advocates were opponents of same-sex marriage who thought it would give them more airplay back in the days when the prime minister was a strong opponent of same-sex marriage,” he wrote. |
| “With you and Mr Shorten on the same page on this issue, the opponents will get little airplay.” | “With you and Mr Shorten on the same page on this issue, the opponents will get little airplay.” |
| Brennan said that it was “only appropriate that religious groups like the Catholic bishops be able to evangelise their position, especially their concern that children in future be assured a known biological mother and a known biological father”. | Brennan said that it was “only appropriate that religious groups like the Catholic bishops be able to evangelise their position, especially their concern that children in future be assured a known biological mother and a known biological father”. |
| “To date, the bishops have spoken cautiously and respectfully, with perhaps the occasional lapse into loose language,” he said. “They know their views are not in fashion. It is ridiculous to have national debate on a plebiscite stifled by assertions that church teaching on marriage is offensive to some individuals and likely to cause offence to the so-called ‘reasonable person’.” | “To date, the bishops have spoken cautiously and respectfully, with perhaps the occasional lapse into loose language,” he said. “They know their views are not in fashion. It is ridiculous to have national debate on a plebiscite stifled by assertions that church teaching on marriage is offensive to some individuals and likely to cause offence to the so-called ‘reasonable person’.” |
| He said national debate should not be “stifled” while the Tasmanian Anti-Discrimination Commission investigates whether a pamphlet titled “Don’t Mess With Marriage”, signed off on by the Hobart archbishop, Julian Porteous, and distributed to 12,000 Tasmanian families whose children attend Catholic schools in September, breached anti-discrimination laws. | He said national debate should not be “stifled” while the Tasmanian Anti-Discrimination Commission investigates whether a pamphlet titled “Don’t Mess With Marriage”, signed off on by the Hobart archbishop, Julian Porteous, and distributed to 12,000 Tasmanian families whose children attend Catholic schools in September, breached anti-discrimination laws. |
| “The commissioner’s processes should not be used to shut down national debate about the desirability of profound social change, silencing one side of the plebiscite debate while the other side is free to be as offensive to religious folk as they will, given that there is no state enforcer of religious niceness – and neither am I campaigning for one,” he said. | “The commissioner’s processes should not be used to shut down national debate about the desirability of profound social change, silencing one side of the plebiscite debate while the other side is free to be as offensive to religious folk as they will, given that there is no state enforcer of religious niceness – and neither am I campaigning for one,” he said. |
| “Many of those who take offence at remarks by the bishops are those who think churches should butt out of all moral debate in the public square. On this one, we should all let a thousand flowers bloom. | “Many of those who take offence at remarks by the bishops are those who think churches should butt out of all moral debate in the public square. On this one, we should all let a thousand flowers bloom. |
| “When the plebiscite vote is carried in favour of same-sex marriage, as I am confident it will be, there will still be a need for our parliament to legislate complex provisions protecting religious freedom and expanding the freedom to marry. It’s only a parliament, not a plebiscite, which can legislate the complex details of equality and the protection of all rights, including the right to religious freedom.” | “When the plebiscite vote is carried in favour of same-sex marriage, as I am confident it will be, there will still be a need for our parliament to legislate complex provisions protecting religious freedom and expanding the freedom to marry. It’s only a parliament, not a plebiscite, which can legislate the complex details of equality and the protection of all rights, including the right to religious freedom.” |
| The Porteous case has been held up by Australian Christian Lobby’s managing director, Lyle Shelton, as a reason to permanently override anti-discrimination laws, saying the pamphlet was “gentle and respectful” and the laws were “creating a chilling effect on free speech”. | The Porteous case has been held up by Australian Christian Lobby’s managing director, Lyle Shelton, as a reason to permanently override anti-discrimination laws, saying the pamphlet was “gentle and respectful” and the laws were “creating a chilling effect on free speech”. |
| The Australian Christian Lobby was one of the main groups that pushed for a public vote on marriage equality. | The Australian Christian Lobby was one of the main groups that pushed for a public vote on marriage equality. |
| Rodney Croome, the national director of Australian Marriage Equality, said attempts to suspend anti-discrimination laws showed the debate “will become a platform for hate and vilification”. | Rodney Croome, the national director of Australian Marriage Equality, said attempts to suspend anti-discrimination laws showed the debate “will become a platform for hate and vilification”. |
| “The Australian Christian Lobby needs to answer some serious questions including what it intends to say that will breach anti-hate laws and how it expects eight state and territory governments to willingly suspend their anti-hate provisions,” Croome said. | “The Australian Christian Lobby needs to answer some serious questions including what it intends to say that will breach anti-hate laws and how it expects eight state and territory governments to willingly suspend their anti-hate provisions,” Croome said. |