OPINION
Brian Greig is WA spokesperson for Just.Equal Australia.
Recently the Australian Christian Lobby met with WA Attorney General, Tony Buti, to discuss Conversion Practices.
Issuing a media release about this, the ACL said it was pleased with the hearing it got, and conveyed their concerns to the AG that proposed legislation to ban conversion practices might be “Victorian style” and thus have “unintended consequences”, like criminalising prayer and penalising doctors who urge trans kids to “wait and see.”
I have heard the religious right use the phrase “unintended consequences” repeatedly over 30 years. It’s their favourite bogey-man.
Remember how religious conservatives campaigned against marriage equality because of “unintended consequences,” like people marrying bridges?
In the 1990’s they opposed the decriminalisation of homosexuality and the extension of anti-discrimination protections to LGBTIQA+ people because of “unintended consequences”, like allowing bestiality and paedophilia.
When you unpack what they mean by this it’s pretty blatant. It means that no LGBTIQA+ law reform should impinge on the “right” of religious conservatives to continue treating LGBTIQA+ people as second class citizens.
Removing the right of religious conservatives to conduct conversion practices is their current playground of “unintended consequences.” Now they claim it will lead to criminalising prayer and clergy being arrested for engaging in free speech and pastoral mission. “Banning conversions will stop us saving souls.”
It’s important to note here that the Attorney assuaged the ACL by telling them the legislation “hasn’t been drafted yet.”
This is another broken promise by the Cook Government and an unacceptable delay in human rights reform. Premier Cook pledged to pass this Bill a year before the last elevation. Now, two years later – it’s not even drafted.
It’s often said that WA and Tasmania are the last two states to ban conversion practices, but this is misleading. Despite the public relations’ spin from Queensland and South Australia, these two states have not banned it – they have only given the appearance of banning it. It is political fiction.
In both these states the “bans” are ineffective. Both states must amend and upgrade their respective Acts to make it genuinely useful.
In Queensland, the ban does not apply to religious organisations or settings. They get off Scot-free. Given that around 90 percent of conversion practices are in religious environments, the Queensland law is therefore 90 percent ineffective.
In South Australia, the Malinauskas Labor Government torpedoed the draft legislation with three significant amendments at the last minute to weaken the Bill, backed by the religious lobby.
First, SA law allows conversion practices if only done once. This runs the risk of maximising trauma done to vulnerable people in one intense session.
Second, the SA law only allows a maximum of one year for survivors to come forward to lodge a complaint. Most survivors (just like those traumatised by rape and sexual assault), take years, or decades, to come forward. The SA law largely abandons them after 365 days. (There can be some exceptions, but the cut-off is clumsy and unnecessary. No other state has gone down this path).
Lastly, the SA law only allows complaints to be made by the survivor – not third parties. So, if you know about conversion practices taking place, you can’t report it. If you are a friend, family member or doctor of a person psychologically harmed by conversion practices, you can’t report it. (Again, there are a few exceptions, but the denial of third party reporting is unnecessary and the exceptions are clumsy).
The failings and weaknesses of the Queensland and SA laws is exactly what the religious lobby want for WA, along with the assurance that they can continue of offer “pastoral care” for “sexual brokenness” to LGBTIQA+ people, especially those who “consent” to it.
But as Brave Network have made clear through evidence and submissions, informed consent is impossible if survivors are not told that “reparative therapy” does not work, and can be harmful.
Informed consent does not exist where a traumatised LGBTIQA+ person of faith has been told for years that they are sick and “spiritually broken”, and that religious counselling will “cure” them. Craving a cure will be understandable for anyone raised in a deeply religious household and conservative church community.
The ACL’s fear of the Victorian Legislation is understandable. Victoria has the best, most effective, most comprehensive legislation the country – if not the world. Thanks entirely to the survivor-led campaign in that state from 2022.
There is no wiggle-room for religious conservatives here. Conversion practices can be stopped at source – which was the objective of the Andrews’ government. The complete prohibition of conversion and suppression practices in Victoria is not “an unintended consequence”, it was the goal.
The ACL is entitled to lobby the WA Attorney General, but Mr Buti mustn’t be fooled into thinking that protecting vulnerable LGBTIQA+ people from depression, anxiety and suicidal ideation is somehow an impingement on freedom of religion and speech.
Two Bills have been drafted in Tasmania to ban conversion practices. The first was criticised for being far too weak, the Tassie community wanted something much closer to the Victorian model. As such, a second Bill will be introduced soon. That leaves WA coming last, again.
