The Paris Olympic Games have kicked off with significant controversy, drawing intense criticism from various groups worldwide. The focal point of the backlash is a scene from the Opening Ceremony—a drag queen parody of da Vinci’s The Last Supper—that many interpreted as mocking Christianity and Jesus Christ, leading to widespread condemnation for being disrespectful and offensive.

Many commentators and church representatives around the world have responded with vehement criticism, voicing their  shock and disappointment that an event that should serve to unite the world’s nations chose instead to divide so dramatically. As Stephen McAlpine has said, Christians should be “very vexed” by the spectacle. The inclusion of children in a highly sexualised scene has also been widely condemned.

Christian author and academic Carl R. Trueman said:

A culture that has given the world the plays of Racine and Moliere, the novels of Stendhal and Hugo, the paintings of the impressionists, and the music of Berlioz and Faure served the world a dish of blasphemous kitsch and gaudy perversion.

Commentator for the Australian newspaper Greg Sheridan said the following:

The Paris Olympics foulness illustrates the cultural self-hatred and contempt Western artistic elites have for their own civilisation. It’s a human death wish and civilisational suicide. The Paris grotesquerie was condemned by Christian leaders, many other faith leaders, and civic leaders internationally.

Catholic Bishop Robert Barron was scathing in his criticism:

I see this clear mockery of the Last Supper, and for Christians, the Last Supper, when Jesus, in anticipation of his death, gives his body and blood to the world… it's… at the center of Christianity, and to see… drag queens and so on, cavorting in imitation of da Vinci's Last Supper, how could Christians not construe that as a slap?

Following the criticism, the organisers were forced to apologise, with reports of sponsors withdrawing financial support from the Games.

The open criticism of the event however serves as a reminder of the importance of free speech in a healthy society. The ability to openly express dissenting opinions depends on the strong history of fundamental freedoms, including freedom of speech and religion, in the Western world.

In contrast to this is the treatment of HRLA client Lyle Shelton at the hands of activists. For many years, Lyle has been critical of the sexualisation of children at the hands of gender ideology much like that displayed at the opening ceremony. Shelton’s critique was met with significant backlash, including legal consequences and social ostracism.

Lyle has spent the past three and a half years defending himself against charges of vilification after writing blogs critical of Drag Queen story time events for children at a public library in Brisbane.  Lyle’s critiques were not derogatory or insulting but were factual and expressed his personal views that children should be protected from sexualised role models.

The Queensland Civil and Administrative Tribunal ultimately found that Lyle’s blogs “did not, and do not amount to vilification” of the two drag queens. However, Lyle is now awaiting a new trial date, after the drag queens filed an appeal of the decision. This ruling exposes the imbalanced nature of discrimination laws and exposes a complaints process which is itself a form of punishment. Lyle has endured many years of uncertainty about the outcome of these complaints, with no end yet in sight.

Lyle should be free to express his criticisms openly and without retribution about a matter of ongoing public interest and debate. That he has been unable to do so is a grave concern, especially as such issues become more pervasive and extreme in the culture.

HRLA exists to help protect the fundamental freedoms of all Australians.