Current direction
Protect freedom of expression, conscience, religion and freedom from religion equally under law.
Honest Politics should support:
- state neutrality between religions;
- protection against threats, harassment and unlawful discrimination;
- freedom to criticise beliefs and institutions;
- proportionate action against direct incitement and intimidation;
- equal treatment before the law;
- privacy and bodily autonomy;
- due process.
Conscience questions
Assisted dying, abortion and related bioethical questions should not define the movement before detailed work is required.
Where legislation reaches Parliament, representatives should examine evidence, rights and safeguards and may be allowed a free vote according to the future party constitution.
The movement should not currently state that it supports assisted dying "if legislated". Legislation is the decision, not a safeguard that makes the prior position neutral.
Main cost and strongest objection
Protecting plural freedom can require tolerating speech, belief and personal choices that others find offensive or harmful. Limits must sometimes be drawn where rights conflict or direct harm occurs.
The strongest objection: that broad commitments to neutrality and autonomy do not resolve hard cases involving discrimination, safeguarding, incitement, reproductive rights or assisted dying.
What could change this direction
The direction should change where a rule privileges one belief, restricts freedom without necessity, removes due process or fails to protect people from direct unlawful harm.
Before this becomes a developed proposal
The policy must identify a precise problem, realistic options, evidence, rights, distribution, cost, delivery responsibility, territorial scope, evaluation and stopping conditions. A stronger public status cannot be created by wording alone.
Challenge this position
Relevant evidence, delivery experience, factual corrections and serious objections can be submitted through the evidence route.