The Catholic News

In the Catholic News (Feb 7) there appeared a report where the Bishops were asked to stand firm against the legislation of equal opportunity because it opened the door for inroads against Catholic tenets, for example, the ordination of female and homosexual clergy. The freedom of equal opportunity then is antithetic to religious tenets, which form the core of religion, and, legislative influence to change the tenets is not acceptable. This goes against the right to freedom of religion.

Dworkin said there were two basic forms of liberalism and the distinction which separates them is crucial. Both argue against the legal enforcement of private morality and both argue against the moral majority’s views of homosexuality and abortion, and, both argue for greater sexual, political, and economic equality. The paradox lies in the disagreement of which is the fundamental and which is the derivative. If liberalism is based on neutrality, he said, it takes as fundamental the principle the government must not take sides on moral issues and thereby support only egalitarian measures associated with that principle. If it is predicated on equality, it takes as fundamental the government treat its citizens as equals, insisting on moral neutrality only to the degree that equality requires it. The difference of the two versions of liberalism will decide which of the two values will be the grounds for action in law.

However, the right to practice one’s religion cannot be abrogated by the right to equal opportunity. The equal opportunity concept must take into account that not all people are equal in skill or intelligence or latent capabilities. There is a natural difference, through no choice of theirs, but where the choice has been made by nature. Equal opportunity then means a chance or opportunity be open to all who meet the basic qualifications to proceed further in the fields of their choices. It does not mean equal shares in the market or equal rewards in remuneration. If someone, like Bill Gates, has the inherent capacity to produce what others want, it does not mean different amounts of wealth are not valid. This is the defect of blinkered equal opportunity. Why should a surgeon and a road sweeper be paid equally? The equality lies in the opportunity for the sweeper to become a surgeon if he has the latent intelligence to become one. This opportunity has to be open to all to proceed as far as nature intends them to go.

When we come to religion the blinkered equal opportunity effect becomes more refulgent. How can equal opportunity be allowed to destroy religion? Tenets of religion are the quintessence of the faith. Take away even one tenet and the religion loses credibility. The Catholic faith, for example, sees homosexuality as a sin. For the law to arbitrarily sweep aside tenets of religious faith by a law which forces the religion to jettison its beliefs is an unjustified trampling on the freedom to practice one’s religion as enshrined in the constitution. Equal opportunity, therefore, must recognise its limitations and realise a religious dictum cannot be swept away by legislation. Religion, at the same time, cannot practice, for example, human sacrifice or any act which is in antithesis to secular law. As long as the religion within its boundary denotes the calibre of its clergy or the practices of its religion, without infracting secular law, equal opportunity cannot arbitrarily force it to practice otherwise. It would be ultra vires.

Justice Holmes said the most stringent protection of free speech, for example, would not protect a man in falsely shouting fire in a theatre and causing a panic. The Catholic Church is not falsely shouting fire in a theatre and causing a panic. It is merely pointing out some of its tenets in danger of the proposed law. It is not seeking protection on freedom of religion. It is seeking to practice its religion without interference from the law and according to the dictates of the church.

Dudley Au

7 Feb 2010.