政府资助的基于信仰的教育、社会福利、医疗保健和老年护理背景下的LGBTQ+非歧视和宗教自由

IF 1.4 2区 社会学 Q2 SOCIOLOGY Journal of Sociology Pub Date : 2022-02-10 DOI:10.1177/14407833211072566
D. Ezzy, Lori G. Beaman, A. Dwyer, B. Fielder, Angus McLeay, S. Rice, Louise Richardson‑Self
{"title":"政府资助的基于信仰的教育、社会福利、医疗保健和老年护理背景下的LGBTQ+非歧视和宗教自由","authors":"D. Ezzy, Lori G. Beaman, A. Dwyer, B. Fielder, Angus McLeay, S. Rice, Louise Richardson‑Self","doi":"10.1177/14407833211072566","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Anti-discrimination laws around the world have explicitly protected LGBTQ+ people from discrimination with various levels of exceptions for religion. Some conservative religious organisations in Australia are advocating to be allowed to discriminate against LGBTQ+ people in certain organisations they manage. The political debate in Australia has focused on religiously affiliated organisations that provide services in education, social welfare, health care, and aged care. We argue that religious exceptions allowing discrimination should be narrow because they cause considerable harm, reinforce, disadvantage and because LGBTQ+ people are deserving of respect and rights. We draw on a national representative survey to demonstrate that the views of some conservative religious lobby groups do not represent the views of the majority of religious people in Australia or the views of the majority of Christian people.","PeriodicalId":47556,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Sociology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.4000,"publicationDate":"2022-02-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"LGBTQ+ non-discrimination and religious freedom in the context of government-funded faith-based education, social welfare, health care, and aged care\",\"authors\":\"D. Ezzy, Lori G. Beaman, A. Dwyer, B. Fielder, Angus McLeay, S. Rice, Louise Richardson‑Self\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/14407833211072566\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Anti-discrimination laws around the world have explicitly protected LGBTQ+ people from discrimination with various levels of exceptions for religion. Some conservative religious organisations in Australia are advocating to be allowed to discriminate against LGBTQ+ people in certain organisations they manage. The political debate in Australia has focused on religiously affiliated organisations that provide services in education, social welfare, health care, and aged care. We argue that religious exceptions allowing discrimination should be narrow because they cause considerable harm, reinforce, disadvantage and because LGBTQ+ people are deserving of respect and rights. We draw on a national representative survey to demonstrate that the views of some conservative religious lobby groups do not represent the views of the majority of religious people in Australia or the views of the majority of Christian people.\",\"PeriodicalId\":47556,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Sociology\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-02-10\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"2\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Sociology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"90\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/14407833211072566\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"SOCIOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Sociology","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/14407833211072566","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"SOCIOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

摘要

世界各地的反歧视法明确保护LGBTQ+人群免受歧视,宗教也有不同程度的例外。澳大利亚一些保守的宗教组织主张允许在他们管理的某些组织中歧视LGBTQ+人群。澳大利亚的政治辩论集中在提供教育、社会福利、医疗保健和老年护理服务的宗教附属组织上。我们认为,允许歧视的宗教例外应该是狭隘的,因为它们会造成相当大的伤害、强化和不利,而且LGBTQ+人群应该得到尊重和权利。我们根据一项全国代表性调查表明,一些保守的宗教游说团体的观点并不代表澳大利亚大多数宗教人士或大多数基督徒的观点。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
LGBTQ+ non-discrimination and religious freedom in the context of government-funded faith-based education, social welfare, health care, and aged care
Anti-discrimination laws around the world have explicitly protected LGBTQ+ people from discrimination with various levels of exceptions for religion. Some conservative religious organisations in Australia are advocating to be allowed to discriminate against LGBTQ+ people in certain organisations they manage. The political debate in Australia has focused on religiously affiliated organisations that provide services in education, social welfare, health care, and aged care. We argue that religious exceptions allowing discrimination should be narrow because they cause considerable harm, reinforce, disadvantage and because LGBTQ+ people are deserving of respect and rights. We draw on a national representative survey to demonstrate that the views of some conservative religious lobby groups do not represent the views of the majority of religious people in Australia or the views of the majority of Christian people.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
5.90
自引率
8.30%
发文量
33
期刊介绍: The Journal of Sociology is an international peer reviewed journal that publishes the highest quality original research in the social sciences.
期刊最新文献
Book Review: The Precariat: The New Dangerous Class – Special COVID-19 Edition by Guy Standing Do-it-yourself lifestyle movements in grassroots activist communities: A case study of Brisbane, Australia Book Review: Social Networks and Migration: Relocations, Relationships and Resources by Louise Ryan ‘This is NOT human services’: Counter-mapping automated decision-making in social services in Australia Book Review: Digital Migration by Koen Leurs
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1