Two Nations Legislate Dangerous Trends for Christians

by Fred Jackson and Jenni Parker
December 21, 2004

(AgapePress) - Christians in several countries are noting with alarm the mounting evidence of what can happen when governments favor homosexuals or religious sects with special rights, while anti-Christian bias is increasingly sanctioned. Recent examples have come to light in Australia and in Canada.

In Australia, a judge has ruled that an evangelical Christian group's criticism of Islam violated the nation's law against racial and religious vilification. Pastors Daniel Nalliah and Daniel Scot of Catch the Fire Ministries were tried under Victoria's new race and religion hate laws and found guilty of publicly mocking Islam. The Islamic Council of Victoria had filed legal action against the ministers, claiming that they called followers of Islam demons, liars, and terrorists.

Last week in the Victorian Civil and Administrative Tribunal, Judge Michael Higgins cited comments Scot made to a church congregation during a seminar on Islam, saying that Muslims want to turn Australia into an Islamic nation and that the Koran promotes violence, killing, and looting.

According to a WorldNetDaily report, the judge found that Scot's comments were not made "in the context of a serious discussion," but were instead "presented in a way which is essentially hostile, demeaning, and derogatory" of Muslims, their god Allah, the prophet Muhammed, and Islamic beliefs and practices in general. The judge ruled that a website article and a newsletter published by Catch the Fire Ministries were also in violation of the religious vilification laws.

Scot and Nalliah maintain their innocence and insist that no hate speech was involved in the ministry's presentation. Following the decision the pastors spoke to the media, stating their intention to "continue to stand up for religious freedom and freedom of speech in Australia." They added that they expect this ruling will have "major implications for the critique of the religious texts of other religions."

In their formal complaint, the Islamic Council asked for an apology, compensation and costs. Since there is no set monetary limit under the haThis could amount to many hundreds of thousands of dollars - on the other hand they could be very 'nice' and simply ask for an apology. However, there is no set monetary limit under this legislation, so the penalty in the case remains to be determined.

According to a Catch the Fire Ministries article, the case continues to be watched by Christians and governments nationally and internationally, and the British government is currently considering similar legislation to the Victoria statute.

Meanwhile, in Canada, the Globe and Mail newspaper is reporting that civic officials in some provinces could be forced to perform civil marriages for homosexuals, even if they object on religious grounds. A new homosexual marriage law that has been approved by Canada's Supreme Court allows an exemption for churches, but it fails to provide any protection for Christians who might work as marriage commissioners, court clerks, or justices of the peace.

According to the Globe and Mail, there is disagreement among the provinces concerning the assertion of Justice Minister Irwin Cotler that civic officials will be able to opt out of performing same-sex marriages based on religious grounds, with different jurisdictions adopting different policies. Manitoba's Premier Gary Doer says commissioners in his province must perform such ceremonies if they want to remain licensed, because as provincial officials they must not discriminate.

Saskatchewan has established the same policy, with no opt-out for civil employees. However, one Conservative Member of Parliament in Saskatchewan, MP Maurice Vellacott is insisting that Cotler has "made it very plain" that civic officials would be able to opt out of performing homosexual marriages if they have "conscience qualms" about doing so, and therefore, the Justice Minister has an obligation to ensure this right.

And in New Brunswick, where same-sex marriage is still against the law, the provincial officials are preparing legislation to allow court clerks who perform civil marriages to opt out of performing them for same-sex couples by citing a religious objection. And in British Columbia, marriage commissioners have been instructed that they can refuse to perform a same-sex marriage, so long as they refer the couple to a commissioner who will perform the ceremony.

Twelve B.C. marriage commissioners have resigned over that rule, however, apparently unwilling even to make same-sex marriage referrals. Meanwhile, in Manitoba, two commissioners have quit over their province's "no opt out" policy and have filed human rights complaints. The current legislative quagmire is one that many Christians, Canadian and otherwise, predicted well before the Canadian Supreme Court decided in favor of redefining marriage.

Now, while some human rights activists argue that no province has the right to allow its civil officials to refuse to marry a homosexual couple, others argue with equal vehemence that government employees must not be forced to act against their religious convictions. There is no end to the controversy in sight.