Allowing religious organisations to discriminate runs contrary to community standards.

WHY are Victorian religious groups committed to inequality? I thought that it was a Christian precept that everyone was equal before God. As with Animal Farm, however, it appears that some are more equal than others.

In a surprise move that pre-empted the report of the parliamentary Scrutiny of Acts and Regulations Committee Inquiry into Exceptions and Exemptions in the Equal Opportunity Act, Attorney-General Rob Hulls has announced that religious organisations may continue to discriminate selectively.

Although they will not be permitted to discriminate on the grounds of race, disability, political belief, age, physical features or breastfeeding, they will be permitted to discriminate on the grounds of sex, marital status or sexuality. While the proscription on the ground of the first cluster is claimed to represent an ''advance'' on the present position, the continuing exception in respect of the latter is a retrograde step.

It also imports a curious ranking of grounds based on a questionable moralising subtext that does not accord with contemporary community attitudes. The exception would continue to conflict with the objectives of the act itself, which promotes equal opportunity for everyone, and the elimination (as far as possible) of discrimination between people.