Conversion Practice Bans and the Highway of Holiness

The Highway of Holiness and the Conversion Practices Debate: Freedom, Harm and the Christian Path Between Silence and Coercion

Few topics create more heat and less light than the debate over so-called conversion therapy. For some Australians, the word brings to mind stories of shame, pressure and harm that left lasting scars. For others, it describes a threat to something quite different: the freedom of an adult to follow their conscience, seek prayer, and share their testimony of faith.

A recent testimony on The Daily Declaration by Shirley Baskett, a former LGBT+ ministry leader, makes the second case. She argues that proposed laws in Tasmania and Western Australia are “draconian” and may be even more far-reaching than Victoria’s. Her piece draws on the idea of “the highway of holiness” in Isaiah 35 to describe what she sees as a costly but joyful path for Christians who choose to live according to their understanding of Scripture.

We looked at the Tasmanian bill in an earlier post. This one takes up the broader questions raised by Baskett’s testimony: what the Malta case showed, what Christians who have walked this path say, what the research does and doesn’t show, what harms critics of the ban want to prevent, and how Christians can speak truthfully and compassionately to people on every side of this issue. It’s a subject on which sincere people disagree, and one that touches people’s deepest sense of identity, so we’ve tried to write with care.

What Baskett Argues

According to her testimony:

• Laws are expanding. She says activists are pushing laws in Tasmania and Western Australia that are even more harmful than Victoria’s, and notes that Victoria’s law was influenced by Malta’s.
• The Malta case. She cites Matthew Grech, a Maltese singer who was prosecuted for sharing his personal story of leaving a gay life on a Christian radio show.
• Silenced ministries. She says that after Victoria’s law, ministries that were simply supporting fellow believers who wished to live according to their reading of Scripture closed because the risk was too great, and that people who might ask their pastor for prayer are affected.
• Neglected people. She argues that former LGBT+ people, and those who don’t want to act on their feelings, are a small and often isolated minority within churches and the wider community, some of whom are told they “were born that way,” and who struggle to find anyone to pray with them.
• A costly discipleship. She draws on passages such as Matthew 7:13–14, Galatians 5:24 and Romans 12:2 to describe a life of dying to self and renewing the mind, one that applies equally to everyone, “gay or straight.” She warns against making heterosexuality the goal, and says that the aim should be Jesus himself.
• Grace and holiness. She argues that grace isn’t a licence to sin but the power that enables us to say no to ungodliness (Titus 2:12), and she contrasts that with a view that makes behaviour irrelevant.
• Exodus International. She says that when its largest chapter closed in 2013, distorted theology marked the beginning of the end of hope for many.
• A call for religious freedom. She quotes a former gay man, Philip Latislaw, who argues that there’s a fundamental difference between protecting people from coercion and preventing them from freely pursuing their own deeply held beliefs.
• A calling. She believes that former LGBT+ Christians can teach the church what holiness really means, and that it’s something to run towards, not away from.

The Malta Case, Checked

The Matthew Grech case is real, and its outcome is important.

According to reports from The Christian Post, Premier Christian News, EWTN and Christian Concern:

• The background. Malta passed the Affirmation of Sexual Orientation, Gender Identity and Gender Expression Act in 2016, becoming the first European Union country to ban conversion therapy.
• The prosecution. In April 2022, Grech, a singer and former X Factor Malta contestant, gave an interview on PMnews Malta, introduced as a representative of the International Federation for Therapeutic and Counselling Choice (IFTCC). He shared his story of becoming a Christian and leaving a homosexual lifestyle. A senior EU equality official and LGBTQI+ activist filed a police report, alleging that Grech had advertised conversion practices. Grech and the two journalists who interviewed him faced up to five months in prison.
• The outcome. On 4 March 2026, after 17 court hearings and more than three years, a Maltese magistrate acquitted all three. The court considered the interview a personal expression of faith, not an advertisement for conversion therapy. Christian Concern says that supporters of the law rushed an amendment through during the trial.
• Grech’s reaction. He said the process itself had felt like punishment for a crime he never committed, and he called on the Maltese government to repeal the law.

It’s important to notice what this case does and doesn’t show. It shows that a testimony shared voluntarily in a media interview was prosecuted, which understandably alarms people who value freedom of speech and religion. It also shows that the court, in the end, protected the speaker. The acquittal could be read as showing that the law, as applied, didn’t criminalise testimony, even though the process was lengthy and costly. Whether the right response is repeal or clearer drafting is a matter on which people disagree.

The Other Voices: Harm and Survivors

A fair reading has to include people whom Baskett’s piece doesn’t discuss.

• Survivors of coercive practices. Australian research, including a 2018 report by La Trobe University, has documented people who describe being subjected to shame, isolation, aversion techniques, “exorcisms” or pressure to change, with long-term consequences for their mental health. These stories are real, and many involve Christian settings. Anyone who cares about the people Baskett describes should care about them too.
• What the Tasmania Law Reform Institute found. In 2022, it concluded that conversion practices had caused severe harm in that state and were still taking place.
• The professional consensus. Major professional bodies, including the American Psychological Association, have concluded that efforts to change sexual orientation are unlikely to succeed and carry some risk of harm. Many Christian leaders now agree. In 2013, Exodus International’s president publicly apologised for the pain the organisation had caused, said that the majority of people he had met had not experienced a change in their attractions, and the group closed. Baskett presents the closure as a theological failure. Those who saw it from other perspectives saw an act of honesty. Both perspectives have a basis, and Christians can learn from each.
• Supporters of bans. They say they aren’t trying to criminalise testimony, ordinary prayer or parental guidance, but practices that are intended to change or suppress a person’s identity and that cause harm, and they argue that exceptions and drafting can protect legitimate religious activities.

What the Science Says, and Doesn’t

Baskett writes that the “born that way” idea is almost universally believed despite there being “no valid scientific or theological base for it.” That statement goes beyond what the evidence supports, and it’s worth being careful.

• Mainstream science holds that sexual orientation isn’t simply chosen, and that it arises from a complex interaction of genetic, hormonal and environmental influences. No single “gay gene” has been found, and the evidence doesn’t support a simple deterministic story.
• Fluidity is real for some. Research, including by the psychologist Lisa Diamond, whom Baskett appears to refer to as a lesbian feminist researcher, has found that sexual attractions and identities change over time for some people, particularly women. Diamond has also been a prominent critic of attempts to change orientation, and her work doesn’t claim that change can be produced on demand.
• Change in behaviour or identity isn’t the same as change in attraction. Many Christians who experience same-sex attraction choose celibacy or a mixed-orientation marriage, grounded in their reading of Scripture, and they often don’t claim that their attractions have gone away. Baskett says as much: “Their feelings may not change; however, there are many who refuse to let their feelings define their identities.” That distinction is crucial, and it underlies the most thoughtful Christian responses.
• Theology doesn’t depend on the science. Whatever one concludes about causes, the Christian ethic of sexual faithfulness within marriage applies to everyone, and the biblical call to discipleship doesn’t depend on the origins of desire.

Is Voluntary Pastoral Care Under Threat?

This is the heart of the disagreement. Baskett and Latislaw argue that laws like these threaten the freedom of adults to seek spiritual guidance for the life they want to live. Supporters of the laws say they’re aimed at coercion and harm, not consensual conversation.

The practical question is where each bill draws the line. Key issues include:

• Whether consent is a defence. Some bills disregard consent, on the grounds that someone raised in a religious community may not be able to freely consent.
• Whether a harm threshold applies. Some laws require serious harm and intent, while others cover any practice that tries to change or suppress identity.
• Whether prayer, preaching, parental guidance and testimony are expressly protected, and how clear those protections are.
• How the law treats minors versus adults.
• Who enforces it, and how complaints are investigated.

Different Australian jurisdictions have answered these questions differently: Victoria, the ACT, Queensland (for health practitioners), New South Wales and South Australia have all legislated in different ways. As of this year, Tasmania and Western Australia are the only places in Australia without such a law, and bills are being considered in both. The detail of each matters far more than the label.

The Highway of Holiness

Baskett draws on Isaiah 35:8–10, a passage about a highway on which “the redeemed shall walk,” where “everlasting joy shall be upon their heads.” It’s a beautiful image, and it speaks to the Christian conviction that following Jesus is a path of transformation.

A few observations from Scripture and Christian tradition are helpful:

• Holiness is for everyone. Hebrews 12:14 calls all believers to pursue holiness, and 1 Peter 1:15–16 says, “Be holy, because I am holy.” The “narrow way” of Matthew 7:13–14 is the same for every Christian, whatever their temptations.
• We die to self together. Galatians 5:24 describes those who belong to Christ as having crucified the flesh with its passions and desires. Baskett rightly says this applies equally to the gossip, the person caught in pornography, the proud and the greedy, as well as those with same-sex attraction.
• Grace and holiness belong together. Titus 2:11–12 says the grace of God teaches us to say no to ungodliness. Romans 6 insists that grace isn’t a licence to sin.
• Humility is essential. First John 1:8 says that anyone who claims to be without sin deceives themselves. A church that treats some sins as more shameful than others, or sets people up as examples of “success,” undermines the gospel. Luke 18:9–14 warns against the Pharisee’s prayer.
• Gentleness and consent. Galatians 6:1 says that those who are spiritual should restore a person gently. Second Timothy 2:24–25 says the Lord’s servant must be kind and correct opponents with gentleness. Faith can’t be forced (Romans 14:5).
• Don’t promise what only God can give. The danger Baskett identifies, of making heterosexuality the goal, is real, and so is the opposite danger of promising that Jesus will remove every temptation. The gospel promises forgiveness, new life, the Holy Spirit and a family in the church. It doesn’t promise that every struggle will vanish in this life (2 Corinthians 12:9).
• The call to community. Hebrews 10:24–25 and Galatians 6:2 call us to meet together and bear one another’s burdens. Baskett’s observation that many people who choose this path feel isolated in family-oriented churches is a challenge that every congregation should take seriously.

Our Take

Here’s where we’d like to add some commentary.

1. Condemn abusive practices without hesitation.

Shame, coercion, isolation and humiliation have no place in the church. If Christians don’t say this clearly, we’ll struggle to be heard when we defend legitimate freedoms.

2. Defend voluntary pastoral care and testimony.

An adult who freely asks for prayer, who seeks to live in line with their convictions, or who tells their own story shouldn’t have to fear prosecution. That’s a legitimate concern, and Grech’s three-year ordeal shows why.

3. Insist on clear laws.

Whatever one’s view on the principle of bans, vague definitions create risks for everyone: for people who might be harmed, and for those who might be wrongly accused. Christians can ask for clear protections for prayer, preaching, parental guidance and testimony, and for a high threshold for criminal offences.

4. Listen to both groups.

There are people who have been hurt by church-based efforts to change them, and people who have found meaning in following Christ in costly ways. They’re often described as opponents, but sometimes the same person has experienced both. Each deserves to be heard.

5. Be careful with the science.

“Born that way” and “no scientific basis” are both too simple. A fair Christian approach acknowledges the complexity, avoids confident claims about causes, and focuses on what Scripture says about discipleship.

6. Make the church a home.

If we’re concerned about people who are celibate, single or struggling, the answer isn’t only legal. It’s a church where singleness is honoured, where friendship and hospitality are central, where people can be honest about temptation of every kind, and where no one is made to feel like a project.

7. Don’t stake the gospel on a law.

Christian witness has survived under every kind of legal regime. Engaging with the process is right and necessary, but our hope isn’t in a particular statute. It’s in Christ.

The Other Side of the Conversation

In fairness, here are some other perspectives:

• Survivors and LGBTQ+ advocates would say that Baskett’s account underestimates the harm done by conversion practices, that the language of “choice” can mask pressure, and that people raised in conservative religious communities may not be free to choose. They would add that laws don’t prevent anyone from living a celibate life or from praying.
• Medical and psychological bodies generally support bans on practices that seek to change orientation or gender identity, citing the risk of harm, while some call for careful drafting.
• Some Christians, including some who experience same-sex attraction and live celibately, say that “ex-gay” language and promises of change have been deeply damaging, and that the call to holiness should be held without the expectation of a change in orientation.
• Other Christians hold a more affirming view of same-sex relationships, and they would say that Baskett’s account reflects only one reading of Scripture.
• Legal experts note that most existing Australian laws were drafted to avoid criminalising ordinary prayer and preaching, and that courts apply them carefully. Others, as in Malta, warn that the process of investigation can be punishment in itself.
• Politicians from several parties argue that the aim is to protect vulnerable people, particularly young people, from harmful practices, while leaving religious freedom intact.

A thoughtful reader can accept the force of concerns on each side.

What You Can Do

• Pray for people who are struggling with their sexuality or identity, for those who have been hurt by the church, and for lawmakers in Tasmania and Western Australia.
• Read the bills themselves, not just commentary from either side.
• Contact your MPs if you live in Tasmania or WA, with specific questions about definitions, consent, thresholds and protections for religious practice.
• Review your church’s practices. Make sure that pastoral care for people who struggle with sexuality or gender is voluntary, gentle, confidential, free from shame and clear about where it refers to professional help.
• Befriend people who are single, celibate or isolated in your congregation.
• Listen to the stories of people on different sides of this debate.

If You Need Support

If you or someone you know is struggling with questions about sexuality or gender, or has been harmed by a religious or other practice, support is available. In Australia, Lifeline is available any time on 13 11 14, QLife (1800 184 527) offers peer support for LGBTIQ+ people, and Beyond Blue is on 1300 22 4636. In an emergency, call 000. Your GP, a counsellor or a trusted pastor can also help.

Questions to Reflect On

• Have I ever pressured or shamed someone about their sexuality, and what would repentance look like?
• How does my church treat people who are single, celibate or struggling?
• Where would I draw the line between pastoral care and coercion?
• What would it mean to follow Christ if my feelings never changed?
• How can I listen to someone whose experience is very different from mine?

A Short Prayer

Lord Jesus, you are the way, the truth and the life. We thank you for every person who is seeking to follow you, whatever the cost. Heal those who have been harmed by cruelty done in your name, and protect those who want to walk with you freely. Give wisdom to lawmakers who must write clear and just laws, and keep your church from both harshness and silence. Teach us to be a people of grace and truth, where every person is known, welcomed and safe, and where holiness is a gift to run towards, not a burden to carry alone. Amen.