Text Size
Ask a Celebrant

Civil solutions to schizophrenic government attitudes

 PDF Print E-mail
By Rona Goold

Founding Director of the ACCN
Chair of Civil Celebrations Network Inc. 

This issue of "Our Space - Many Voices - One Goal" national celebrancy e_magazine carries an article by George Williams, one of Australia's leading constitutional lawyers, because of the parallels with the evolving Schools Chaplaincy Program and the evolving (or d-evolving) Civil Celebrancy Program.

0 ? zoro-sadar pent-50 symbol-50 aum_50 yinyang shinto mormon-moroni-75 500px-Noi_flag_2 masonic_symbol_shimmering_md_clr gnostic-cross-50
What is needed to grant respect to all peoples of religious faith or people with none?

Being born here in Australia, I have never had a "Citizenship Ceremony" so all those 'fundamental' aspects of Australian's legal, social and cultural structures that are spelled out to new citizens, were never clearly presented to me. Nor did  our primary or secondary schooling of the time - unless I somehow missed those sessions. 

So it is strange to have lived over 5 decades in Australia, believing that Australian's attitude of a "Fair Go" was imbedded in our governance, to find that this is simply not so. I had assumed in working for government organisations and government funded programs that this understanding of the difference between church and state had informed the wording of the Constitution.

Yes our Constitution appears to grant a "fair go" for people who have religious faith, but not for those who have none. Perhaps this is because many of the founding fathers assumed of the existence of a "christian" god, or maybe  assumed the 'state' an already legitimate 'non-religious' body and thus there was not need to spell out the rights of the non-religious. Or both?

George Williams states 'Australia's constitution does not separate church and state. The closest it comes is in section 116, which says the Commonwealth cannot make any law for ''establishing any religion'', ''imposing any religious observance'' or ''prohibiting the free exercise of any religion''.' Reference

In 2009 David Marr's summary of a recent (then) Neilson Report stated "In a nutshell: we are a nation with a Christian past and Christian traditions where half the population calls itself Christians and holds fairly conventional Christian beliefs. Half the Australian population also rated faith as "very or somewhat important" in their lives according to the Nielsen poll. Christianity may not reign supreme as it did at Federation, but it is by no means a spent force in today's Australia". Reference
Yes, half of the country rates faith as "very or somewhat important".  And the Constitution protects the rights of those citizens of faith.

But those figures also mean  half the Australian population does not rate faith as important in their lives at all. This is confirmed by the growing number of couples choosing a civil, rather than religious, marriage ceremony. 67% choose a civil wedding in 2009, compared with roughly 10% a century earlier.

So how can the Australian Constitution protect the rights of half its citizens for whom religious faith is not a significant factor in their lives?

It can not. 100+ years on, the silence is deafening for those for whom religious faith is not relevant.

Williams says the "Maintenance of this democratic principle* rests on the actions and good sense of our politicians." ( *separation of church and state)

Therefore what is the "good sense" of our politicians?

Over the last 20 years, there has been an increasing move to outsource government functions to non-government sector or business agencies.

Welfare and related services such as the Commonwealth Employment Service and support services for people with mental illnesses and addictions problems are now funded through mostly church based organisation. Prisons and refugee services, aged care services, transport and power services to private companies. Certain sections of health and education  services have been receiving greater shares on the public purse.

The argument here is that religious people pay taxes and thus should receive a slice of the tax cake.

What is the "good sense" of our politicians as regards Civil and Religious Celebrants?

We can see this issue of civil/ secular vs christian/ religious values being played out with the Schools Chaplaincy Program and the Commonwealth Marriage Program

Government is prepared to spend an extra  $220 million on having religious chaplains (celebrants) in schools, which currently only allows secular chaplains to be appointed If no religious one can be found.

But Government is not prepared to spend $4.2 million pa# (ie one tenth of that) to have Civil Celebrants well resourced and supported for Australian citizens wanting civil or non-aligned religious marriage ceremonies as opposed to civil registry office weddings or main stream religious weddings.

So one could argue the reverse here ie non- religious people pay taxes and thus should receive a slice of the tax cake.

  • Why should independent civil and non-aligned religious celebrants fund the section of the federal government that administers the Marriage Act that applies to all Australians?
  • Why should the half of the population fund a Schools Chaplaincy Program that clearly is biased to religious celebrants?

The proposed fee for independent civil and non-aligned religious celebrants to fund the Marriage Law and Celebrant Section is being discussed at $ 600 pa for celebrants# whose average number of weddings is less than 7 weddings per celebrant per year. With Ongoing Professional Development requirements at around $ 200 pa and all the associated costs of running an independent celebrancy practice, the average possible gross income of $ 2,800 means an independent celebrant is unlikely even to cover out-of-pocket expenses.

The salary for a Schools Chaplain is $ 20,000 per annum.

The Civil Celebrations Network Inc has argued that there is a fundamental under-pining requirement for a CIVILISED society of values that honour all humans equally.

0
atheist

?

agnostic

  chinese-feng-shui-doublehappiness  confucianism_water-symbol  falun-gong-50  jain_symbol_small1  bahai-star  dharma_wheel-50  druze-star-wp-pd-50  crescent-50 odin-horn

cao-dai-eye-symbol-50
Secular VS Religious should not be the focus
Rather that 'civil rights and responsibilities' based on "human rights' needs to guide decision making for all citizens


The Civil Celebrations Network Inc argues
  • the need to see "secular and religious beliefs" as like any other systems of thought or concepts as having impacts for the way people are treated
  • that impacts need to be judged against the civil and human rights standards, and where found lacking, 'civil"-ised values need to prevail .
  • the need for the development of units in the national Vocation and Education Training (VET) system to ensure that secular and religious celebrants appreciate
Perhaps NOW is time for the national government to heed the recommendations of the Human Rights Consultation that:

  • that the Federal Government develop a national plan to implement a comprehensive framework, supported by specific programs, of education in human rights and responsibilities in schools, universities, the public sector and the community generally. (Recommendation 2)
  • in the absence of a federal Human Rights Act, the Acts Interpretation Act 1901 (Cth) be amended to require that, as far as it is possible to do so consistently with the legislation’s purpose, all federal legislation is to be interpreted consistently with the interim list of rights and, later, the definitive list of Australia’s human rights obligations. (Recommendation 12)
Continuing failure to do so,will widen the divides between Australians on religion grounds and threatens to revert Australia's to last century where families where fractured over religion beliefs, as explored in the ABC Hindsight program, Marrying Out, rather than held together by mutual respect and love.


# EXTRACT: From CCN Inc Response to the recent School Chaplaincy Report 
More information

• Human rights, Discrimination and Citizenship –

Evolution of separation of church and state;  Human Right’s’ history and examples of the ways belief systems about the meaning of life and causes of human behaviour have and still do impact - on the treatment of women, people with disabilities, people with mental illness, people vulnerable to life style pressures etc. Rights and Responsibilities of Citizens in a secular multicultural society

• Spirituality, Religion and Community -

Relationship between belief, faith, knowledge and behaviour; Secular (Civil) Spirituality, New Age and other Forms of Spirituality, Comparative Religion, Cults, Advantages and Disadvantages, Stages of Religious/ Spiritual/Psychological  Growth, Examination of spiritual and religious beliefs and their impacts on human rights and society.

* Rites of Passage and Stages of Human Growth to Maturity (physical, mental, spiritual and social, cultural).

Symbolism. Dependence, Independence, Interdependence issues.  Their relation to alcohol and other drug use, mental health, violence, etc. Examination of the SA program used in some schools, called The Rite Journey (a unique educational programme designed to support the development of self-aware, vital, responsible and resilient adults) – placement of School Chaplain trainees with this program – http://theritejourney.com.au/


# EXTRACT: From recent Federal Government Announcement associated with the recent delivery of the Federal Budget to the national
More information

Marriage celebrants have significant legal responsibilities and perform an important ceremonial role. Failure to properly perform duties can have a significant negative impact on members of the public. The legal requirements imposed on Commonwealth marriage celebrants through the Marriage Celebrants Program to retain registration are appropriate and necessary for the authorisation and monitoring of people with such important responsibilities.

It is therefore critical that the Program is adequately resourced to ensure the high standards Australians rightly expect of marriage celebrants are properly enforced.

The Government has determined that the best way to ensure the Program’s long term sustainability and integrity is by recognising that the costs associated with the regulation of Commonwealth marriage celebrants should be met by the celebrants themselves.

The measure to reform the Program announced by the Government will ensure that the Commonwealth Marriage Celebrants Program remains financially and professionally viable over the longer term.

By Rona Goold
Founding Director of the ACCN
Chair of Civil Celebrations Network Inc. 

This issue of "Our Space - Many Voices - One Goal" national celebrancy e_magazine carries an article by George Williams, one of Australia's leading constitutional lawyers, because of the parallels with the evolving Schools Chaplaincy Program and the evolving (or d-evolving) Civil Celebrancy Program.

0 ? zoro-sadar pent-50 symbol-50 aum_50 yinyang shinto mormon-moroni-75 500px-Noi_flag_2 masonic_symbol_shimmering_md_clr gnostic-cross-50
What is needed to grant respect to all peoples of religious faith or people with none?

Being born here in Australia, I have never had a "Citizenship Ceremony" so all those 'fundamental' aspects of Australian's legal, social and cultural structures that are spelled out to new citizens, were never clearly presented to me. Nor did  our primary or secondary schooling of the time - unless I somehow missed those sessions. 

So it is strange to have lived over 5 decades in Australia, believing that Australian's attitude of a "Fair Go" was imbedded in our governance, to find that this is simply not so. I had assumed in working for government organisations and government funded programs that this understanding of the difference between church and state had informed the wording of the Constitution.

Yes our Constitution appears to grant a "fair go" for people who have religious faith, but not for those who have none. Perhaps this is because many of the founding fathers assumed of the existence of a "christian" god, or maybe  assumed the 'state' an already legitimate 'non-religious' body and thus there was not need to spell out the rights of the non-religious. Or both?

George Williams states 'Australia's constitution does not separate church and state. The closest it comes is in section 116, which says the Commonwealth cannot make any law for ''establishing any religion'', ''imposing any religious observance'' or ''prohibiting the free exercise of any religion''.' Reference

In 2009 David Marr's summary of a recent (then) Neilson Report stated "In a nutshell: we are a nation with a Christian past and Christian traditions where half the population calls itself Christians and holds fairly conventional Christian beliefs. Half the Australian population also rated faith as "very or somewhat important" in their lives according to the Nielsen poll. Christianity may not reign supreme as it did at Federation, but it is by no means a spent force in today's Australia". Reference
Yes, half of the country rates faith as "very or somewhat important".  And the Constitution protects the rights of those citizens of faith.

But those figures also mean  half the Australian population does not rate faith as important in their lives at all. This is confirmed by the growing number of couples choosing a civil, rather than religious, marriage ceremony. 67% choose a civil wedding in 2009, compared with roughly 10% a century earlier.

So how can the Australian Constitution protect the rights of half its citizens for whom religious faith is not a significant factor in their lives?

It can not. 100+ years on, the silence is deafening for those for whom religious faith is not relevant.

Williams says the "Maintenance of this democratic principle* rests on the actions and good sense of our politicians." ( *separation of church and state)

Therefore what is the "good sense" of our politicians?

Over the last 20 years, there has been an increasing move to outsource government functions to non-government sector or business agencies.

Welfare and related services such as the Commonwealth Employment Service and support services for people with mental illnesses and addictions problems are now funded through mostly church based organisation. Prisons and refugee services, aged care services, transport and power services to private companies. Certain sections of health and education  services have been receiving greater shares on the public purse.

The argument here is that religious people pay taxes and thus should receive a slice of the tax cake.

What is the "good sense" of our politicians as regards Civil and Religious Celebrants?

We can see this issue of civil/ secular vs christian/ religious values being played out with the Schools Chaplaincy Program and the Commonwealth Marriage Program

Government is prepared to spend an extra  $220 million on having religious chaplains (celebrants) in schools, which currently only allows secular chaplains to be appointed, If no religious one can be found.

But Government is not prepared to spend $4.2 million pa# (ie one tenth of that) to have Civil Celebrants well resourced and supported for Australian citizens wanting civil or non-aligned religious marriage ceremonies as opposed to civil registry office weddings or main stream religious weddings.

So one could argue the reverse here ie non- religious people pay taxes and thus should receive a slice of the tax cake.

  • Why should independent civil and non-aligned religious celebrants fund the section of the federal government that administers the Marriage Act that applies to all Australians?
  • Why should the half of the population fund a Schools Chaplaincy Program that clearly is biased to religious celebrants?

The proposed fee for independent civil and non-aligned religious celebrants to fund the Marriage Law and Celebrant Section is being discussed at $ 600 pa for celebrants# whose average number of weddings is less than 7 weddings per celebrant per year. With Ongoing Professional Development requirements at around $ 200 pa and all the associated costs of running an independent celebrancy practice, the average possible gross income of $ 2,800 means an independent celebrant is unlikely even to cover out-of-pocket expenses.

The salary for a Schools Chaplain is $ 20,000 per annum.

The Civil Celebrations Network Inc has argued that there is a fundamental under-pining requirement for a CIVILISED society of values that honour all humans equally.

0
atheist

?

agnostic

  chinese-feng-shui-doublehappiness  confucianism_water-symbol  falun-gong-50  jain_symbol_small1  bahai-star  dharma_wheel-50  druze-star-wp-pd-50  crescent-50 odin-horn

cao-dai-eye-symbol-50
Secular VS Religious should not be the focus
rather that 'civil rights and responsibilities' based on "human rights' needs to guide decision making for
BOTH Secular and Religious ie for all citizens


The Civil Celebrations Network Inc argues
  • the need to see "secular and religious beliefs" as like any other systems of thought or concepts as having impacts for the way people are treated
  • that impacts need to be judged against the civil and human rights standards, and where found lacking, 'civil"-ised values need to prevail .
  • the need for the development of units in the national Vocation and Education Training (VET) system to ensure that secular and religious celebrants appreciate
Perhaps NOW is time for the national government to heed the recommendations of the Human Rights Consultation that:

  • that the Federal Government develop a national plan to implement a comprehensive framework, supported by specific programs, of education in human rights and responsibilities in schools, universities, the public sector and the community generally. (Recommendation 2)
  • in the absence of a federal Human Rights Act, the Acts Interpretation Act 1901 (Cth) be amended to require that, as far as it is possible to do so consistently with the legislation’s purpose, all federal legislation is to be interpreted consistently with the interim list of rights and, later, the definitive list of Australia’s human rights obligations. (Recommendation 12)
Continuing failure to do so,will widen the divides between Australians on religion grounds and threatens to revert Australia's to last century where families where fractured over religion beliefs, as explored in the ABC Hindsight program, Marrying Out, rather than held together by mutual respect and love.


# EXTRACT: From CCN Inc Response to the recent School Chaplaincy Report 
More information

• Human rights, Discrimination and Citizenship –

Evolution of separation of church and state;  Human Right’s’ history and examples of the ways belief systems about the meaning of life and causes of human behaviour have and still do impact - on the treatment of women, people with disabilities, people with mental illness, people vulnerable to life style pressures etc. Rights and Responsibilities of Citizens in a secular multicultural society

• Spirituality, Religion and Community -

Relationship between belief, faith, knowledge and behaviour; Secular (Civil) Spirituality, New Age and other Forms of Spirituality, Comparative Religion, Cults, Advantages and Disadvantages, Stages of Religious/ Spiritual/Psychological  Growth, Examination of spiritual and religious beliefs and their impacts on human rights and society.

* Rites of Passage and Stages of Human Growth to Maturity (physical, mental, spiritual and social, cultural).

Symbolism. Dependence, Independence, Interdependence issues.  Their relation to alcohol and other drug use, mental health, violence, etc. Examination of the SA program used in some schools, called The Rite Journey (a unique educational programme designed to support the development of self-aware, vital, responsible and resilient adults) – placement of School Chaplain trainees with this program – http://theritejourney.com.au/


# EXTRACT: From recent Federal Government Announcement associated with the recent delivery of the Federal Budget to the national
More information

Marriage celebrants have significant legal responsibilities and perform an important ceremonial role. Failure to properly perform duties can have a significant negative impact on members of the public. The legal requirements imposed on Commonwealth marriage celebrants through the Marriage Celebrants Program to retain registration are appropriate and necessary for the authorisation and monitoring of people with such important responsibilities.

It is therefore critical that the Program is adequately resourced to ensure the high standards Australians rightly expect of marriage celebrants are properly enforced.

The Government has determined that the best way to ensure the Program’s long term sustainability and integrity is by recognising that the costs associated with the regulation of Commonwealth marriage celebrants should be met by the celebrants themselves.

The measure to reform the Program announced by the Government will ensure that the Commonwealth Marriage Celebrants Program remains financially and professionally viable over the longer term.

< Prev   Next >
 
Copyright © 2008 Australian Celebrants & Celebrations Network  | Privacy policy | Terms and conditions | Contact | Links | Site Search | Sitemap