Baking for Beelzebub

You’ve probably heard that the Religious Discrimination Bill is needed to protect Christians.

If so, you need to read this article. All of it. Because at some point in this current parliament we will get a Religious Discrimination Bill. And it won’t be pretty for Christians if it is passed into law.

The truth is that this proposed law should be shredded, then burnt, then put in a vault to store toxic waste posing an immediate and dangerous threat to civilisation. Then that vault should be placed inside a rocket on a one way trip to the sun.

And that doesn’t even begin to describe how bad this proposed law really is.

To prove it, I’ll ask you some questions. I hope you think about them. And then I’ll give you the correct answers and you can see whether you passed the test.

These are the questions:

1. Do existing religious discrimination laws protect Christians?
2. Will more anti-discrimination law solve the problems of anti-discrimination law?
3. What type of people work in the anti-discrimination industry?
4. Has an anti-discrimination law ever been improved?
5. Do anti-discrimination laws ever have unintended consequences?
6. Who were the architects of the Religious Discrimination Bill?
7. Does the Religious Discrimination Bill create a mechanism to complain against Christians?
8. Who will be the beneficiary of the Religious Discrimination Bill?

Ponder these questions for a while. Think about them. Even do some research.

Read on below for the correct answers.

One – Do existing religious discrimination laws protect Christians?

No. Don’t be silly.

Queensland has religious discrimination laws. Citipointe Christian College is in Queensland.

Yet when it had protestors at its front gate and was vandalised for daring to even think about teaching Christian beliefs in a Christian school, the Commissar for Religious Freedom in Queensland told the media that Citipointe was the problem. It was breaking the law.

And then Queensland’s Temple of Thought Police busied itself drumming up complaints against Citipointe so it could investigate all Christian thought out of the joint.

Almost every state has some kind of religious discrimination law. The last holdout, New South Wales, is in the process of implementing its own version of these laws.

All up, there are hundreds and hundreds and hundreds of pages of laws that, on the surface, protect Christians in Australia. But they don’t. They don’t protect them at all.

If they did, Christians would not be clamouring for protection. There would be no call for a Commonwealth Religious Discrimination Bill.

Instead, we live in a country in which a judge admitted publicly in 2018 that he felt pressured by the media to jail an archbishop simply because he was a priest.

A week later, a cardinal was unjustly imprisoned.

Churches are frequently burnt down.

And existing religious discrimination laws don’t stop any of these most outrageous attacks, let alone the more minor inconveniences. Instead, they create the culture in which Christians are demonised and persecution is approved.

Understanding this, you’d have to be mad to want a new religious discrimination law, let alone one that centralises power over ‘Religious Freedom’ over the entire nation.

Two – Will more anti-discrimination law solve the problems of existing anti-discrimination law?

No. That solution is like pouring fuel on a fire.

Nothing highlights the problems of anti-discrimination law more than this little absurdity: the former Commonwealth Attorney General said she received legal advice that repealing a law which allows Christian schools to discriminate against rainbow students would actually increase discrimination against rainbow students. That claim was made, even though it was also acknowledged by conservative politicians that this amendment would simultaneously prevent Christian schools from teaching Christian beliefs about gender.

Huh? Come again?

How on earth does that make sense?

Well, it doesn’t. But nothing in anti-discrimination law does.

These laws are deliberately complicated and confusing. That makes it easier to come up with ridiculous decisions, like, for instance, that racial discrimination laws do not prohibit racial abuse directed at white people. Or that sex discrimination laws allow males to get undressed in a female change rooms.

Existing anti-discrimination laws basically make it unlawful to be Christian and then they include exceptions or exemptions which allow Christians to do unlawful things if they pass subjective and emotional tests of ‘reasonableness’ and ‘good faith’.

You should think about that for a minute because it actually highlights very well the precarious legal status of Christianity in Australia.

But there’s not just one anti-discrimination law. There are many of them. And layers of them. They’re just like onions or ogres but more likely to make you cry.

So no one really knows which exemptions apply when in the game of ‘balancing’ rights.

Actually, they’re also just like a three year old kid’s finger painting. Brightly-coloured individual tubes of paint end up in one unholy mess. No one can possibly know how each colour precisely interacted with another when looking at the purply-brown smoosh – but some bright spark can rule that it’s a masterpiece all others must follow.

That’s called precedent.

This finger painting makes more sense than the conflicting layers of anti-discrimination law in Australia.

Anti-discrimination laws are the biggest threat to Christian freedom in Australia. It was anti-discrimination law that permitted Citipointe to be placed under investigation for teaching Christian beliefs.

The solution to this problem is not more anti-discrimination law. The solution is to scrap it entirely.

Three – What type of people work in the anti-discrimination industry?

Anti-Christian psychos. And that’s the nice way of putting it.

Let’s face it: you have to be a really special person to work in the anti-discrimination industry.

Normal people could not do it. They’d either go mad and throw themselves from a bridge, or quit before they get PTSD.

The anti-discrimination industry’s job is to determine whether a gay man can call a transgender ‘woman’ a fat dude in a dress.

That’s an actual complaint, by the way, which wound its way through New South Wales’ Temple of Thought Police and then into its tribunals, all at taxpayer expense. You’ll be pleased to know that the answer is no, a gay man certainly cannot call a transgender ‘woman’ a fat dude in a dress.

Normal people can’t handle this crap. But special people in the anti-discrimination industry ponder these questions each and every day and then get all warm and fuzzy inside.

They give seminars about unconscious bias and train others to train others on measures to control passive-aggressive silence. They appear before parliamentary committees to tut-tut about jokes and the need for more laws to combat an ever increasing array of hate crimes.

They can explain to you why Donald Trump can’t use Twitter but the Taliban can.

When they clock off, these special people go home and tell their non-binary partners over a kale and nutmeg tea with sustainably-sourced and climate-friendly soy milk brought to them on a massive cargo ship powered by heavy fuel oil how sad the world is. They console themselves in the knowledge that, by crushing all dissent, they are at least doing their bit to make Australia more diverse. And their idea of a good time is Instagramming their next ‘Wear it Purple Day’ costume.

The New South Wales Anti-Discrimination Board 2020/21 annual report featured this lovely montage of the various ‘Wear it Purple’ day costumes its staff members wore.

It’s part of their job to march in the Mardi Gras.

On the surface, these special people are next-level do-gooders. But that is just empty virtue signalling, a mask that they use most of all to blind themselves to their own rotten hearts.

When you strip away the façade what you really find is an individual who has only one creed: the state is god. And they are its High Priests.

At their very core, these special people are addicted to power. Wielding it is not just an end in itself. It is the only end.

These people yearn to exercise power over others so completely that all reason and even the natural law is obliterated.

The pinnacle of power is to remake man in their own image and force an entire society to comply with a new unnatural order. The weirder the better. Forcing peak madness is proof of peak power.

This is the kind of person who works in the anti-discrimination industry. Needless to say, these people instinctively hate Christian morality. They want to purge it from the land.

And the Religious Discrimination Bill will give these people power over every Christian school in Australia. And much more.

You don’t have to guess where these special people stand on Christian schools. They’ve already told us.

Rosalind Croucher is the President of the Australian Human Rights Commission. She will have ultimate authority to accept complaints against Christians under the Religious Discrimination Bill.

When Citipointe hit the headlines she retweeted an article attacking Christian schools which was, unsurprisingly, written by the former ‘Human Rights Commissioner’.

Rosalind Croucher retweeted this article which demanded that Christian schools lose their current freedoms in the wake of the Citipointe Christian School saga.

The Sex Discrimination Commissioner, Kate Jenkins, also weighed in on the issue, telling the ABC that she was concerned about protecting transgender rights.

And so did the Child Commissioner, Anne Hollonds. The ABC got her on as well, where she explained that kids should be ‘protected’ from discrimination on the basis of their sexual orientation and gender identity in Christian schools.

This is just my personal opinion – but anyone who thinks it is normal for children to have a sexual orientation or gender identity is not fit to be the ‘Children’s Commissioner’.

These people don’t have an unconscious bias against Christianity. It is blatant and open.

Any Christian calling for these people to ‘protect’ Christianity is building their own guillotine. And have you really thought about who will be given the gig as ‘Religious Discrimination Commissioner’? It won’t be me. But it could be this guy…

Four – Has an anti-discrimination law ever been improved?

That’s easy. No.

Remember the QUT case? White students were kicked out of an unmarked room that was apparently an Aboriginal ‘safe space’. For simply noting that QUT was fighting discrimination with discrimination they faced years in court under racial discrimination laws.

The nation was outraged and parliament debated amending S.18C of the Racial Discrimination Act. But it was all too hard. These laws were not improved. They never are.

When they are changed it’s only to make them worse.

When the Sex Discrimination Act was passed it prevented businesses from deciding that a newly married woman might not be the best hire due to a likelihood of pregnancy. Exceptions allowed the Defence Force to keep women from the front line.

Now, under this law, women are prioritised to serve in the infantry and an employer must use the preferred pronouns of a masculine cervix owner undergoing IVF.

The Religious Discrimination Bill is a perfect case in point. The very process of getting it through the House of Representatives resulted in amendments to the Sex Discrimination Act that would have destroyed Christian education in Australia.

Anyone who says they didn’t see these amendments coming is a moron. They were always gonna come.

The former Prime Minister promised these amendments three years ago.

Extract from a Guardian Australia article published on 13 October 2018 which reported that Scott Morrison ‘promised’ to repeal the clause in the Sex Discrimination Act which allowed Christian schools to discriminate on grounds of sexuality.

He publicly did so again last year and even told the parliament on 25 November 2021:

Nothing in this bill—I stress: nothing—allows for any form of discrimination against a student on the basis of sexuality or gender identity. You won’t find anything of that nature in this bill. Such discrimination has no place in our education system.

Whatever the Religious Discrimination Bill is when it gets to parliament, it will be something worse when it is spat out the other side. That is the only certainty when it comes to anti-discrimination law. And no one can safely predict what it will look like in ten years, except for the fact that it will be even more destructive than we could have possibly imagined.

Five – Do anti-discrimination laws ever have (intended) unintended consequences?

Yes. Der. Always.

These ‘unintended’ consequences happen so often that you can safely predict that whatever it was claimed the law would protect at the outset is about to be bombed into oblivion.

It happens so often that one could conclude that this always was intended from the start.

The Sex Discrimination Act was sold as a law that would protect women. This law now requires women to accept that a strange bloke can get undressed in front of them in the women’s change room.

If the Religious Discrimination Bill follows suit, Christian churches will probably be required to host satanic festivals within twenty years.

That’s not hyperbole.

The first ‘religion’ protected under the Australian Capital Territory’s religious vilification laws is a Satanic cult that follows the writings of Aleister Crowley. A century ago he claimed that the most pure form a sacrifice was a male boy.

That happened.

So what could possibly go wrong with a law that makes it unlawful to ‘discriminate’ on grounds of belief (including non-religious belief) in a nation with a growing population of militant atheists, an ever-widening concept of what discrimination is and institutions filled with ‘offensive’ Christian vestiges that no one understands anymore?

All the little crosses on all the little crowns on Army uniforms? There’ll be court cases over that.

Telling an employee to put a cross on a bun in the lead up to a Christian holiday? There’ll be court cases over that.

Putting out stamps for Christmas? There’ll be court cases over that.

Employing Christian chaplains? There’ll be court cases over that too.

As leading legal academic Jeremy Gans pointed out on Twitter when I asked him about the looming battle of the hot cross bun, anti-discrimination law causes organisations to become risk averse.

The very best we can hope for under the Religious Discrimination Bill is that Christianity will only be ‘risk-managed’ out of Australian life by businesses and institutions that don’t want to play discrimination lottery in Australian courts.

More likely, it will become the primary weapon of choice against Christians. The ‘conservatives’ who vote for it will claim this was unintended. They’re either stupid or lying. It isn’t.

Twitter discussion between myself and legal academic, Jeremy Gans, in which he foreshadowed that the biggest impact of any Religious Discrimination Bill would be a ‘risk-adverseness’ in relation to religion in businesses and organisations.

Six – Who were the architects of the Religious Discrimination Bill?

The same anti-Christian bureaucrats already overseeing the anti-Christian discrimination industry. That’s who.

Remember the famous Ruddock religious freedom review?  It was trumpeted as the solution to the issue of religious freedom after the parliament decided to legalise ‘gay marriage’.

This review directly lead to the Religious Discrimination Bill.

There were five people on this review.

One was Rosalind Croucher, the President of the Human Rights Commission. She’s made her displeasure at Christian education clear.

The other was Annabelle Bennett, the former President of the New South Wales Anti-Discrimination Board. She’s spent much of her spare time recently rubber-stamping complaints from a serial and vexatious gay activist.

These are the people who came up with the genius idea that Christian schools should only be able to ‘discriminate’ if they first grovel and issue a ‘Statement of Belief’. But that is not how it will be viewed – rather, it will be seen as a ‘Confession of Bigotry’.

Christ warned of wolves in sheep’s clothing. Christians who have been conned into believing that the Religious Discrimination Bill will protect them have been deceived by plain old wolves.

By the way, Fr Frank Brennan was also one of the five people on this review. At this point, all Catholics at least should roll their eyes.

Frank Brennan openly supported ‘homosexual marriage’ in defiance of Catholic teaching.

Seven – Does the Religious Discrimination Bill create a mechanism to complain against Christians?

Yes. That’s exactly what it does.

Anyone following the debate about the Religious Discrimination Bill would think that this proposed law was all about protecting Christian schools. But it does no such thing.

What the bill actually does is provide a mechanism for people to drag other people to court because their religious views ‘discriminate’ against them in almost any area of life.

You get one guess as to who will be doing the dragging and another as to who will be gittin’ a-dragged.

For instance, S.26 of the proposed bill makes it unlawful to discriminate against another person in relation to good and services on the grounds of religious belief.

It sounds nice in theory.

It’s not so nice when a goth sporting black nails, a pentagram shirt and a tattoo that says ‘I love Satan’ marches into a cake shop demanding a rainbow black forest adorned with an upside down crucifix. And, yeah, this actually happens.

Before the Sex Discrimination Act the baker could tell him to go away. At the moment he has to smile and break out the rainbow sprinkles. When the Religious Discrimination Bill passes he’ll have to start baking for Beelzebub.

Christians will be forced to bake cakes for Satan if the Religious Discrimination Bill is passed.

That’s the type of complaint that the Religious Discrimination Bill will unleash against Christians in every walk of life, from the workplace to community club.

It is nothing more than an anti-Christian complaint factory. For every Christian who does somehow find solace in this law, another dozen will be done over by anti-Christian zealots.

And the whole rainbow madness will just get worse. Right now, gay activists can only complain that Christians are discriminating against them ‘cos they’re gay. That’s sexual discrimination. Once the Religious Discrimination Bill is law of the land, they’ll be able to add a second complaint as well: religious discrimination.

Think about it for just a moment.

If a landlord gives any indication that they would prefer to rent their home to a Christian family rather than a throuple with assorted hanger-onnerers, they’ll get done over under both the Sex Discrimination Act and the Religious Discrimination Bill.

We’re about to be hit with twice as much pain. And Christian groups are furiously running around urging this insanity on.

Worse, even if the complaint does go nowhere, Christians will still be forced to endure the process. That is the punishment. Trust me, I know a thing or two about how this works after having spent almost the last decade in court answering to vexatious complaints from a gay activist.

It might be free to lodge complaints but Christians will fork out thousands for having the privilege of being ‘protected’ under religious discrimination laws. In the process, they’ll also have to suffer the indignity of being forced to ‘prove’ to activist bureaucrats and state judges that their Christian beliefs are, actually, Christian beliefs.

That’s another nightmare that will go pear-shaped real quick.

We should all brace ourselves for the lesbian Uniting Church ‘priestess’ with a billboard to appear as an expert witness, proclaiming that the parable of the good Samaritan was when Christ taught the world that transgenderism was tickety-boo.

The anti-discrimination industry is about to be funded by the Commonwealth to open its own inquisition against Christians. I’m sure that’ll work out real well for us.

Nowhere are these problems pointed out with such clarity than in the text of the Religious Discrimination Bill itself.

Section 7 deals with religious schools. And its title is: ‘Religious bodies may generally act in accordance with their faith’.

Text from the proposed Religious Discrimination Bill. It should be noted that this was the original text as supported by many Christians.

“Generally”? No thanks.

I’m never reassured when the government says Christian schools may ‘generally’ act in accordance with Christian beliefs, especially when there are conditions, interacting state laws and fine print so complicated that a court is needed to work it all out.

It all implies that Christian schools specifically won’t be able to act Christian much at all.

You shouldn’t be reassured either.

Eight – Who will be the beneficiary of the Religious Discrimination Bill?

Non-Christians. End of story.

Just as the Sex Discrimination Act benefits feminists over fathers and homosexuals over heterosexuals and the Race Discrimination Act attacks the culture and civilisation that emerged from the Roman Empire and was nurtured in Europe, the Religious Discrimination Bill will prioritise non-Christians over Christians.

So much so, that this bill even comes with a clause to aimed at ‘redressing disadvantage’.

You’ve heard of this before.

It’s what every big business and government department does when they advertise a position open only to females or Aboriginals.

Under the Religious Discrimination Bill these same organisations will now be allowed to advertise positions that are only open to, let’s have a wild stab, Muslims.

That’s coming at a national level. Don’t look so surprised. The states already permit it under their existing religious freedom laws.

By the way, were any Islamic schools ever mentioned when the Thought Police, politicians and the media were calling for blood at Citipointe?

Well, now we think about it, no.

That’s because the Religious Discrimination Bill is not intended to target Islamic schools. Just Christian ones.

It is already to lawful to advertise jobs that are open only to Muslims under existing state religious discrimination laws which allow for ‘positive discrimination’ against Christians.

If you’ve read to this point and still don’t get why the Religious Discrimination Bill is such a bad idea, then there’s probably no saving you.

Have fun cowering to the Thought Police.

Be part of the solution

This content is produced and published without censorship or paywall by the team at The Good Sauce, thanks to Good Sauce Supporters. If you’d like to be part of the independent media solution by helping us produce more content like this, become a Good Sauce supporter today.

Bernard Gaynor is a decorated veteran of three deployments to Iraq with the Australian Army serving with military intelligence specialising in Arabic language and culture. A Catholic conservative with the courage to speak up when totalitarian political-correctness demands silence, he is deeply interested in the loss of values in modern society and its impact on all aspects of life. He is prepared to breach enemy lines with valour to defend Australia’s traditional way of life, particularly on the political and cultural fronts.