Will the Australian government enact anti-proselytism laws and ban criticism of other belief systems on the grounds of defending social harmony?
This is just one of the concerns amongst evangelical Christians as the Australian Human Rights Commission (AHRC) begins its Freedom of Religion and Belief in the 21st Century project.
Their aim is to map the state of play for religious freedom in Australia, especially the recent impact on Muslim communities.
“The project could be a good thing if it brings to light any inappropriate limitations on the freedom of religion and belief,” the Rev Dr Andrew Cameron, chair of Sydney Diocese's Social Issues Executive told the Diocesan Synod last week. “Or, it may be unhelpful if it recommends changes that damage the delicate balance of religion freedoms that have developed in Australian life. We don't know yet. But this is an important enough project that some of us want to do our part to be actively involved as citizens.”
Nevertheless, many Christians remain very concerned about the project. And Dr Cameron acknowledges there “may be good reasons for these concerns” in a special briefing paper released last week.
"For example, at some points the discussion paper hints of a challenge to important Christian freedoms" existing "religious exemptions' to anti-discrimination law, and of new religious anti-vilification laws, will emerge as topics for consideration; and conservative Christians are traditionally edgy about these matters,” he writes.
What AHRC says it is doing
According to the discussion paper, the report will include seven sections.
First, it will consider the outcomes from the 1998 report into freedom of religion. Next it will examine religion in the Constitution, and then it will explore how Australian society can better balance the expectations of faith-based organisations with civil organisations. It is likely this will include the way Christian schools and charities deliver services on behalf of the secular authorities.
Other sections will include: religion and security following September 11, religion and politics, religion and technology, and religion and cultural expression.
The Race Discrimination Commissioner, Tom Calma, called for as many Australians as possible to become involved in the discussion when he launched the project in Canberra in September.
"The intent of this discussion paper is to examine and report upon the extent to which this right can be enjoyed in Australia today by drawing from practical everyday experiences and observations," said Mr Calma. "This is easy for some, while others feel religion and human rights don't mix, like oil and water."
Submissions will close on January 31, 2009.
In calling for submissions, the commissioner illustrated how religious belief impacts on many of the biggest news stories, listing the ongoing impact of September 11, creationism in schools, Christianity in politics, gay rights and women's rights within the churches, amongst others.
"Given that these issues are continually in the headlines, it is timely that they be comprehensively evaluated in terms of their impacts on the practice, expression and perception of religion and spirituality in Australia," said Mr Calma.
However Mr Calma said one of his main concerns was “that the relationship between religion and belief with culture” is such that “religious vilification can easily translate into racial vilification and discrimination”.
"A better understanding of these issues and the way they influence, and are influenced by, our attitudes and laws will assist us to advance our nation's social and cultural prosperity," he said.
Yet, there is little doubt secular-left bodies will seek to use the AHRC project to push for a downgrading of Christianity in public life because they belief the churches receive unfair preferential treatment.
In an article in Civil Liberties Australia's magazine Clarion, Elizabeth Murray reflected a softer version of this sort of sentiment: "Freedom of religion is a basic liberty that is undermined by the exclusivity of many fundamentalist religions in Australia these days. As such, traditional Aboriginal spirituality and other matriarchal and earth-based religions are systemically discriminated against, which then promulgates a culture of intolerance, through widespread public ignorance and the destruction of sacred sites."
That said, it would be wrong to assume that AHRC is not already aware that secular atheism, in particular, is a belief system with its own agenda.
In his speech Mr Calma mentioned "extreme' secular voices who contribute to "polarising' discussion on religious freedom.
An end to Christian Australia?
In his new SIE briefing, Dr Cameron says he does not necessarily expect the Federal Government to change laws as a result of AHRC's project.
"We should also note that the AHRC is an advisory body only," he said. "Its recommendations can influence legislative change, but legislation is finally changed by the Parliament" We cannot predict what effect, if any, the final report will have on law and government policy."
Nevertheless many Christians will see the AHRC's project as an attack on Australia's "Christian heritage'.
Dr Cameron and the SIE reject this view.
"It is undeniably correct to highlight the many ways Christianity informed and shaped our early colonies and Federation," he said. "Yet many Australians deny the Lordship of Jesus Christ, do not profess to follow him, and know nothing of repentance and forgiveness before God. Hence evangelical Christians cannot in good conscience call Australia "a Christian country'. To do so would mask the way this generation of Christians needs to show other Australians how Christ is good news for them."
As a result the SIE will argue to the AHRC that Australia “is not a Christian country, but is not a blank slate either”.
"Australia needs to find a way to share cultural space between people of different beliefs, while never pretending away the depth of its Christian roots."
At this stage, the Social Issues Executive views the project as an opportunity to lay the foundation for long-term dialogue with government.
"We view the process as an opportunity to offer a "defence' for the excellence of Christian belief, and for the rationale of Christian practice, a bit like early Christian apologists once did in ancient Rome."
