Date: February 7, 2025Author: Editor, cairnsnews 26 Comments
By MICHAEL SLOVANOS
ANTI-vilification and hate crime laws should protect communities from real threats, says the Australian Christian Lobby (ACL) CEO Michelle Pearse.
“But instead of tackling genuine concerns—like the rise of antisemitism—governments are using these laws to expand protected attributes and push radical agendas. The result? More division, more confusion, and a dangerous erosion of free speech,” she says in an email to supporters.
The ACL, which has some sort of “favoured status” with the Jewish community and the Liberal National Party, lobbied via Senator Matt Canavan for some reasonable protections for free speech.
“Without clarification, the words ‘violence’ or ‘force’ could be interpreted as psychological harm, and harm be interpreted as violence. With prison sentences attributed to these crimes, ACL was pushing for an amendment,” said Ms Pearse.
“We are grateful for Senator Matthew Canavan’s attempt to include the word ‘physical’ before ‘force’ and ‘violence’. However, disappointingly, this amendment was rejected.”
We have learned that it was the Liberals, apparently under pressure from the Jewish lobby, who pushed for mandatory jail terms under the legislation, in effect turning it into even more of a police state bludgeoning tool in brazen defiance of speech and religious protections such as those so clearly stated in Section 116 of the Constitution.
Instead we now have the same draconian controls on political speech that there are in Keir Starmer’s UK and EU neo-Marxist states. Was this obnoxious legislation, the Criminal Code Amendment (Hate Crimes) Bill 2025, in fact the objective of the spate of “anti-semitic attacks”.
We now have to ask whether the ACL has got the guts to use its influence among the thousands of Australian churches to put both major parties on notice that they will be recommending a vote for pro-freedom parties and candidates instead of mainstream parties? How about it Michelle Pearse?
Thanks to Albanese and Dutton, we now have the situation where Australian preachers – or any public speakers for that matter – who speak out against the LGBTQ movement, Islam, satanism or God-forbid, Judaism – will find themselves getting a visit from the Federal Police.
There are plenty of people out there with giant chips on their shoulders who would relish the opportunity to dob-in a fundamentalist preacher or two because they “misgendered”, insulted or “vilified” them. Likewise there are plenty of bureaucrats with the same ideological chip on their shoulders who would relish the opportunity to prosecute these “anti-progressives”.
Ms Pearse goes on to note that in Victoria, the Anti-Vilification and Social Cohesion Bill is being debated this week. “Rather than addressing real cases of hate, this bill removes key protections for religious speech, creating uncertainty about what can and cannot be said in public.
“By deliberately omitting protections for proselytizing, the government has made it clear that preaching the Gospel or even sharing biblical truth could soon be legally challenged.”
We would remind the Victorian Government and the ACL that the Commonwealth Constitution Section 116 has very explicit protections for religion: “The Commonwealth shall not make any law for establishing any religion, or for imposing any religious observance, or for prohibiting the free exercise of any religion, and no religious test shall be required as a qualification for any office or public trust under the Commonwealth.”
One would think that would stop a responsible government from legislating in contradiction to that very clear protection of religious freedom, but it didn’t. Various “legal experts” have claimed for years that because there is no specific federal Act of Parliament to protect religious freedom, it simply doesn’t apply.
What they are saying in effect is that the Constitution, which is certainly law, doesn’t matter until you take it the High Court. So state governments like Victoria’s, that are run by leftist ideologues, basically think they can legislate what they like.
ACL has woken up this, calling it lawfare in action. “Vague and subjective definitions of “hate” allow activists to weaponize these laws, dragging Christians through costly legal battles simply for holding to their beliefs,” said Ms Pearse.
“But it doesn’t stop there—anyone who challenges the prevailing political or ideological narrative could be at risk. What happens when parents question what their children are taught in schools? When journalists report on controversial topics? When everyday Australians voice concerns about the direction of their country?
“Laws like this don’t just target people of faith—they silence anyone who speaks outside the approved script.” Exactly, which is why ACL needs to get a tad more militant with the likes of Peter Dutton and to think seriously about a Section 116 challenge in the High Court.
Pearse draws upon the history of persecution in the 1st century church when the apostles were ordered to stop speaking about Christ and says the truth of the Gospel still compels Christians today. “No law can change what we know to be true, and no threat can silence the hope we carry,” she says. We hope so.
The Criminal Code Amendment (Hate Crimes) Bill 2025 passed this week broadens “hate crime” definitions to include sex, sexual orientation, gender identity, intersex status, and disability; in addition to race and religion (which was already included). It lowers the legal threshold from intent to recklessness, meaning individuals could be prosecuted for words or actions they didn’t intend to lead to violence.
Ms Pearse asked supporters to thank senator.canavan@aph.gov.au “for his attempt to protect people of faith against unnecessary litigation.”
Nelle's journey 