Source document: https://docs-lawep.s3.us-east-2.amazonaws.com/1697642755841.pdf (Australia)
Dear Committee Members, I am writing to express my concerns concerning the subtle but continuing undermining of the rights of people in Australia to express their opinions, in a non threatening manner, be they based on ethical, moral or religious grounds.
It would appear that, particularly in the area of religious beliefs, anyone who stands for and expresses their view in support of long held and heart felt key foundational pillars by which they live their lives, have been viciously vilified as hateful and intolerant.

I may not like or agree with Bill Shorten or Pauline Hanson or Malcolm Turnbull but publicly stating that fact should not result in my being labelled a communist, a racist or a supporter of monied interests.
Our Freedoms to express our thoughts should not make us the subject of scurrilous name calling at best, physical and emotional threats, (as occurred when the anti-same sex marriage lobby group were forced to cancel a planned meeting at the Mecure Hotel in Sydney in Sept 2016 in and go into hiding to discuss their options) and to litigation as has been shown already in Australia with the court cases against Archbishop Porteous and Dr David Van Gend, simply for stating their opinions about same sex marriage.
In Victoria, Doctors, who on ethical, moral or religious grounds, do not wish to perform abortions are being forced, under threat of de-registration, to direct those patients to other doctors who might carrying out the procedure.
Such a doctor may feel that he or she is still being forced into the "aiding and abetting of this "crime" as it goes against their Hippocratic oath (remember what an oath use to be - something you committed to with all your intellect and heart) as well their moral and/or religious beliefs.

What pressure is this putting on the doctor who is "referred to".

ICCPRs, Article 18 expressly provides “Everyone shall have the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion.
This right shall include freedom to … to manifest his religion or belief in worship, observance, practice and teaching.” and UDHRs, Article18 also recognises the right of freedom of religion to include the right “to manifest his religion or belief in teaching, practice, worship and observance.” These rights are fundamental to having a healthy and civilized society where freedom of ideas and respectful thought is welcomed.

This is the cornerstone of what democracy is all about.
Enshrining into law anything that promotes what one should be allowed to think and believe in society is the embodiment of anarchy through intimidation and victimization and should be strenuously opposed.

Just as Abortion laws and Anti- discrimination Laws in Victoria are being used as a big stick to force the community there "into line under threat of expensive litigation" so the Same- Sex Marriage issue will be used to put a nail in the coffin of Freedom of thought, speech and action.
Experience overseas has shown this.

Even in Australia the so-called "safe schools program" has been quietly introduced into schools with minimum consultation with parents over content.

Parents have an expectation that the Government has closely vetted the content and can be trusted to ensure that content, the ideas we teach our children, are consistent with societal norms and this has sadly not been the case.
Inquiry into the status of the human right to freedom of religion or beliefSubmission 131 It is important to note that exemptions just will not work as they will inevitably be watered down and the cost of fighting to keeping them will become too costly.

In Ireland the exemption for the Catholic Church to be free to employ staff who believe in their basic values and principles, is under threat from homosexual and lesbian teachers now trying to remove these exemptions.
Employment of such teachers will inevitably undermine the churches' principles and make the working environment there untenable.

It is imperative that not only the current Freedoms we have, be maintained, but in fact we should be looking at the strengthening of the inalienable rights we have to speak respectfully to anyone about any topic.

That is why we have been given the ability to think in the first place.

Why think at all if you can't express your thoughts in a non- threatening way to someone.
We all need to be able to discuss issues and challenge each other beliefs without threat.

That's how we grow as a society.

If someone is frightened of the answer, then perhaps their ideas are not based on solid ground.

Sometimes we need to be gig enough and gracious enough to just agree to disagree without penalty.

Yours faithfully, Phil Wheatley Inquiry into the status of the human right to freedom of religion or beliefSubmission 131