Australia and Europe are poles apart not only geography but also insofar as discrimination towards gays and lesbians are concerned. Australia's federal government is proposing anti-discrimination laws that would leave intersex people vulnerable to discrimination, while the European Court of Human Rights ruled last week that religion is not a justification for anti-gay discrimination.

An intersex person is one who may have the biological characteristics of both genders or some attributes necessary to be defined as male or female, explained Gina Wilson, president of the Organisation Intersex International (OIL) Australia.

She pointed that the draft bill proposes the inclusion of intersex people under the category of gender identity which is not proper since intersex a biological problem, not a gender identity issue.

Ms Wilson pushed for listing of intersex people as a protected attribute separately because past efforts to bring discrimination cases under state laws were rejected since the issues were not gender identity-related.

Estimates by Professor Anne Fausto-Sterling of Brown University reckons that Australia's intersex people including those with chromosomal conditions such as Klinefelter and Turner syndromes is 1.7 per cent of birthrates. Ms Wilson is one of them.

Ms Wilson recalled discrimination she suffered in the past such as being transferred from a female ward to a cleared-out storage room in a public hospital in Sydney four years while she was recovering from a hysterectomy because the other ward patients complained they were uncomfortable with her sharing the same room due to observed differences like her masculine voice.

The main issue, though, is the bill retaining the protection of the law on the right of religious organisations to reject employment to people considered sinners which would perpetuate discrimination against gays and lesbians. The bill integrates five anti-discrimination laws in the country.

In contrast, the European Court of Human Rights decided that two British Christians, who pointed to their religious beliefs, are not justified in discriminating against gays and lesbians.

The cases involved Lilian Ladele, a city registrar who refused to officiate a civil partnership ceremony between same-sex couples and lost her job, and Gary McFarlane, a counselor for a confidential sex therapy and relationship counseling organisation, who likewise turned down extending the service to gay pairs.

In its ruling, the court recognised the right of religious groups to hold their anti-LGBT beliefs, but not to infringe on the rights of these people since the same-sex couples "were in a relevantly similar situation to different-sex couples are regards their need for legal recognition and protection of their relationship."