Before addressing the most recent letter released by Abbotsleigh regarding the issue at hand, a note of thanks to:
- All LGBTIQA+ staff and students past and present; we are grateful to have heard some of your stories, we value you, and we will continue to support you. Although we have consistently refrained from doing so, some of the media coverage has used ‘gay’ as an umbrella term, and we would like to stress that we stand with all sexuality and gender diverse individuals.
- The alumni, parents and members of the Anglican Church who have spoken out in favour of equality and shown that we were not merely looking back on our time at the school through rose-tinted lenses: the overwhelming majority of the wider Abbotsleigh community really does value diversity, acceptance and empathy.
- Everyone who has contributed to the movement to ensure that children in Anglican schools – and, indeed, all schools – can learn and grow in a positive and loving environment.
Additionally, we would like to clarify that:
- The AOGU is neither in favour of nor against this movement. They are independent of the school but cannot take a position on this issue because although they represent all alumni, they cannot claim to speak for all of us. We are, however, grateful to the many active members who have shown their support.
- We welcome all members of the wider community to attend the Let’s Educate Equality protest to be held on November 10th. This is not an Abbotsleigh-specific protest, although it was organised by Abbotsleigh alumni.
Now, on to the letter.
The latest letter released by Abbotsleigh and subsequent outcry by alumni and parents on social media shows that the administration remains out of step with the actual values of the Abbotsleigh community. The letter again attempts to reassure the community that Abbotsleigh will never act on their right to discriminate. Again, we must reiterate: if there is no intention to act on this right, then why publicly advocate to retain it?
The letter does attempt to clarify this:
- “It is important that I try to clarify a very confusing point: In the Open Letter to Parliamentarians, Anglican schools were asking for the government to maintain current legislation until better legislation can be drafted. We believe that there should be positive legislation that guarantees the right of freedom of religion in Australia. In our view, discrimination has nothing to do with religious freedom and the issues need to be separated.”
Perhaps the schools are unaware of the legal effect of the legislation they are defending, because it is difficult to understand how one could read the relevant provision as having nothing to do with discrimination. Section 38 of the Sex Discrimination Act 1984 (Cth) is a specific exemption for ‘educational institutions established for religious purposes’ under an Act that otherwise prohibits discrimination against “another person on the ground of the other person's sex, sexual orientation, gender identity, marital or relationship status or pregnancy.” ‘Religious freedom’ is herein inextricable from ‘discrimination’.
Why the need to maintain the current legislation until ‘better legislation’ can be drafted? Why is there a need to maintain a single exemption relating to a specific form of discrimination just because it’s the only exemption that currently exists? Again, the school has failed to explain why they need to hang on to this archaic law if they never plan to use it.
Many heads of schools have claimed in follow-up letters that their views have been misrepresented and their main concern regards the hiring of those whose values align with the school. An article in the Sydney Morning Herald states:
- “Many of the schools' heads say their views have also been misrepresented; they are not concerned about the sexuality of their staff, but rather their ability to hire people whose values align with those of the school in a wider sense."
The legislation makes no reference to ‘values’, only “sex, sexual orientation, gender identity, marital or relationship status or pregnancy.” The legislation doesn’t exempt people from discriminating against people based on whether or not they share ‘values’ such as ‘empathy’ or ‘respect for others’: even in its widest sense, the term ‘value’ cannot be used to refer to a personal characteristic such as ‘gender’ or ‘sexuality.'
Abbotsleigh has previously cited the need to hire “within their ethos." However, the response from alumni and parents makes it clear that the ‘ethos’ of the Abbotsleigh community does not involve discrimination against LGBTIQA+ individuals. Furthermore, it is difficult to argue that 'sexuality' or ‘gender’ come under the term ‘ethos’, given that the Oxford dictionary defines ‘ethos’ as “the characteristic spirit of a culture, era, or community as manifested in its attitudes and aspirations.”
Indeed, other Anglican schools have said they don’t need to retain this exemption. SCEGGS Darlinghurst, for example, released a strong statement in which they emphasised that they did not support the law. Being an LGBTIQA+ individual and being a Christian – an Anglican, even – are not two mutually exclusive concepts.
At the end of the day, the focus of our petition is not to change the school’s position on using/not using/retaining/rejecting Section 38 of the Sex Discrimination Act 1984 (Cth). The focus of our petition is to ask the school to retract its public support for retaining the law, as the message it sends to LGBTIQA+ staff and students is damaging. Whilst we appreciate that Headmistress Megan Krimmer has taken the time to speak to Senior School girls and other members of the community, she has unfortunately maintained her support for the discriminatory law.
Please join us at the Let’s Educate Equality protest next Saturday November 10th to demonstrate peacefully against discrimination in schools and to remind LGBTIQA+ students and staff that they have our love and support.