Freedom of religion is a concept prevalent in most countries around the world. Australia, as a multicultural and diverse country, consists of many citizens who practice the worlds dominant religions: Christianity, Islam, Buddhism, Hinduism, etc. The growth of religious diversity has always been evident in Australia; steadily changing with the increase of immigration, media exposure, and many more circumstances that have led to a more religion-accepting society. Religious freedom is a policy that exists to enable those who practice their religion to practice freely without fear of persecution, discrimination, or prohibition. However, freedom of religion does not exist as an excuse to enable said persecution or discrimination toward others. It does not exist for people of faith to proliferate prejudicial views and use their religion as an excuse to assert said views.
It is imperative that we, as a society, need to realize that Australias current policy enabling freedom of religion and faith must not be used as a scapegoat for bigotry, discrimination, and abuse. Firstly, exploiting the current policy can lead to severe consequences for the perpetrator when they have been found to use their religion to victimize themselves and escape retribution. An example of a backfired misuse of religious freedom can be displayed by Israel Folau, an Australian rugby player, who was sacked by Rugby Australia over homophobic comments made on social media. As said by MP Barnaby Joyce, People were a little bit shocked that someone could lose t
heir job because of what they believe. It made everyone feel a bit awkward and uneasy. He references ones beliefs as a reason why one might lose their job; was he referring to the beliefs that fall under Folaus Christian faith? Or was he actually referring to the misinterpreted ideas of an archaic religion that was used to seemingly justify Folaus appallingly homophobic comments? So, can your faith really be used to justify your discriminatory views when youre not even preaching correctly? And should those views even be generalized with your religion if theyve been developed from your ignorance and misinterpretation, rather than the explicit, core teachings? Amid the controversy, Folau has hit back at Rugby Australia, claiming that he was sacked because of his religion and therefore experienced an unlawful termination as protected under Section 772 of the Fair Work Act. The Fair Work Act is used to protect those who are at risk of unlawful termination because of their sexual orientation, gender, ethnicity, or religion. However, there is a difference between firing someone for the sole reason that theyre Christian and firing someone because they express extremist ideologies that they have misinterpreted from Christianity. Folaus situation falls under the latter. It is absurd for Folau to claim that he was punished for expressing his faith; he was punished for expressing bigoted and malicious views, and wrongfully used his faith as a way to evade ramifications and turn the situation around to villainize those who oppose him.