Search This Blog

Wednesday, May 26, 2010

Are Surry Hills Neighbourhood Centre in the Wrong ? I don't think so

Surry Hills Neighbourhood Centre which is a independent Non Government agency based within council premises, have unwittingly become involved in controversies and being accused of links to homophobia

(see one of the many media related article in the link)

http://sydney-central.whereilive.com.au/news/story/gay-aversion-therapy-not-supported-sydney-council/ )

Here are my thoughts (and my first Blog... go easy on me please) 

Come on peeps they are an independent neighbourhood centre, based within a council premises managing community meeting space.  It’s not their job to police religious group’s beliefs and on subject of sexuality the sad fact is most Christian and other religious groups are homophobes. 

Does this mean neighbourhood centres should stop working with Salvation Army... St Vincent de Pauls...Catholic Church, the Anglos, Jewish care and so on?. 

Whether we agree with this particular religious group or not (and this poof defiantly does not) they have same freedom of speech rights as you and I have.  Speaking as someone how had a horrific experience of 'aversion therapy’ as a teenager at the hands of well intended 'Christians', and I will shout at the rafters about their dangers. I still think they have the right to use community space as any other community group when it’s available.
'
As I understand it they where meeting as part of their normal religious meeting group, not as an 'Aversion' specific therapy group (correct me if I am wrong) and this may be one of their practices or beliefs as an organisation.

Yes this group should hear our protests about their absurd and dangerous views on sexuality, and the general public should be made aware of the existence of the many groups,which are within both respected and not so respected religious organisations.

However Surry Hill Neighbourhood Centre (SHNC), like all NGO’s has to be impartial, and accessible and non judgmental to all.  Therefore they shouldn’t be blamed for doing their job; of making meet space available.  Surely when an organisation has an Equal opps polices then non- discrimination applies to religious minorities as well as the LGBT community?  Choice, freedom and mutual respect is at the heart of agreeing to disagree and vital for the promotion of tolerance. We don’t have to become like them to make our point by becoming religion phobic we are being hypocrites.

As far those saying SHNC is Homophobic, they clearly have no understanding of the Centre or their positive work and their historic relationships with the whole community and particularly the LGBT community.

As for the City being concerned about indirectly funding such group I suspect that It will come out the wash that they are not and the group probably paid money to SHNC (not council) to use the sight, which is often a means for NGO to generate much needed income to exist and delver vital services.

So I think SHNC are right to let the group use their premises, however the group itself is misguided in their beliefs.   

 I tressure my right to freedom I will defend the right of others of whom I may disagree with, to be free in their speech and beliefs too.  I will also reserve right to challenge such disasters beliefs in place of mutual respect. 

What do you think ..?

  • What is your thoughts? Should a neighbourhood centre not be accessible to religious groups..?
  • Should religious groups be discriminated against because of their discrimination to LGBT community and others..? 
  • Should Council be interfering with the management of independent and respected NGO who use their space such as SHNC..? and doing so in the media?
  • Should Salvation Army and other 'respected' religious groups stop receiving government funding and community support for their work with the homeless etc because of their views on homosexuality?
  • Where does one group's rights over ride another group’s human right..?
  •  Is religious freedom less important than the rights of our LGBT community..?

there are no easy answers, but I would love to hear your views

and Well done SHNC for remaining impartial!

3 comments:

  1. I believe that the Salvos and other respected (key word) religious groups should be allowed govt. funding despite their views on homosexuality because they do so much good in so many needy areas. However i cannot condone the overt bigotry of rabid fundamentalists who use aversion therapy and promote, for example, the continued high suicide rate amongst gay youth by forcing them to live a lie and to believe that they are 'devil's spawn'.
    As a 64yo lesbian who was forced to live the lie for over 40 years and called an 'abomination' i cannot justify allowing these people to use the neighbourhood centre. It's a fine line, but i choose to draw it.
    They would ride over MY human rights ... so i'll counter by riding over theirs!

    ReplyDelete
  2. Personally, I believe all community centres owe it to our diverse community to be completely secular and no have any religious groups. Lets face it, orgs like Salvos get plenty enough funding and tax breaks to afford their own spaces, and if smaller (crazier) christian orgs need space, they can ask the bigger ones for a room. My views may be slightly skewed by the fact I'm an athiest.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Well I think no group has a right to guaranteed government funding or support, salvos or otherwise. And while I think the Salvation Army has a right, within the context of the law, social expectations and its own conscience to decide its own policy directions, that is also the perogative of Council.

    ReplyDelete