The SORs make it illegal to discriminate against someone on the grounds of their sexual orientation when offering "goods, facilities or services".
There is a good summary at the website of Christian Concern for our Nation. The gay lobbyng group Stonewall, has been one of the leading groups campaigning for this legislation. As they say:
Stonewall lobbied extremely hard for these important protections and many individuals and organisations were involved in securing this massive step forward. The government bowed to pressure in the House of Lords and accepted Stonewall's amendments to the Equality Bill. Consequently, it will become illegal to discriminate against lesbians and gay men in the provision of goods and services - from NHS care through to hotels and restaurants.A Christian person operating a bed and breakfast will break the law if they refuse to allow a gay couple to share a bed in their house. If a Church hires out its hall to other groups, it will not be lawful to refuse a gay group who wish to hire the hall. Schools would also be required to remove any "bias" in favour of heterosexuality and thus would fall foul of the law by assuming or teaching that marriage or heterosexual relationships are more normal than homosexual relationships.
In a worrying development, the Northern Ireland Regulations have actually widened the scope of the Regulations. As the Christian Concern for our Nation site points out on its page about concerning development in Northern Ireland:
The NI consultation expressly stated that no law on harassment would be brought in, and yet only 6 weeks later, the published final Regulations do make it illegal to harass someone on the basis of their sexual orientation. This is extremely concerning because the definition of harassment relies largely on the perception of the person who claims they were harassed: all they need do is allege that someone has ‘violated their dignity’ or that someone created a ‘hostile or insulting environment’ for them, and they can take legal action.Indeed, related to schools, current Government Guidance Stand up for us. Challenging homophobia in Schools, tells schools that as part of their action to prevent homophobia, they should avoid "heterosexism" a new word which the Department helpfully defines for us:
HETEROSEXISM describes the presumption that everyone is heterosexual. It refers to a culture in which individuals, families and their lifestyles are categorised according to a heterosexual model. Examples include the assumption that a male pupil will have, or be looking for, a girlfriend; or that a female parent, when talking about her partner, is referring to a male. Such a culture can make LGB pupils and staff feel marginalised, and not valued or understood within the school community.In another part of the document, the advice is given:
"Do not use generic language that assumes parents and staff always have opposite sex partners"Currently, this has the status of "Guidance" from the DfES. If the SORs make "harrassment" illegal, a claim could be made against a Catholic school for assuming that the normal model of family is one with a married mother and father, let alone for teaching it to be God's will.
The basic problem with the legislation is that there are two conflicting claims to rights. The SORs give precedence to the claim of homosexuals to live and work in an environment where nobody is allowed to make the assumption that heterosexuality is the norm. Many Christians claim the right to live according to traditional Christian teaching which sees marriage as a created reality, the family as the fundamental unit of society, and homosexual acts as gravely sinful.
Stonewall give a helpful example of what they mean by harrassment. The "canteen culture" assumption that people all agree with a comment (about homosexuality) would make for a hostile environment for a gay person.
What seems to have escaped the notice of the Government and equality campaigners is that Christians have suffered from exactly this kind of "harrassment" for years. Comments about the Church, the Pope, Catholic teaching, bible-bashers, and indeed "homophobia" can make Christians uncomfortable at work. People routinely pool their ignorance derived from The Da Vinci Code, their blasphemy based on the Life of Brian, their prejudice taken from last nights edition of a soap opera. We don't actually claim the right not to be harrassed in this way: simply a level playing-field in which we are allowed to live what we believe and to speak about it.
This new legislation presents an extremely serious danger. We are on the threshold of becoming the first western "democracy" to make it illegal to live and proclaim the Christian faith.
18 comments:
It's daft! I mean, even if, say, homosexuality is okay. Nature shows us that the norm--i.e. the majority--is heterosexuality. It's stupid to not be able to reflect reality.
This harrassment unleashed upon the west in general and Roman Catholocism in particular stems from the apostasy of the faith in America and Europe and the subsequent idolatry of self, materialism and pleasure.
Such a descent into barbarism in a new dark age can only be stopped by a total restoration of the Roman Catholic Mass of tradition and a true understanding of the effusion of grace that Our Dear Lord pours forth from this sacrifice for our sins everyday. See more on Christ's great parable of efficacious grace!!!
j hughes dunphy
http://www.theorthodoxromancatholic.com
May God help all of you Britons, and may Our Lady pray for you. I'll be sure to pray for you myself, and to thank God for the freedom from such meddling governmental tyranny that I have as an American...since who knows? Someday we could be in the same boat.
I am sure that every bishop in the UK addressed this issue in their Holy Family (or Epiphany) Pastoral Letter. I did not hear our Defender of Orthodoxy's erudition on safeguarding the family as I was in the Ukraine. But the Great Successors of Becket and Fisher, the best Conference of Bishops in the world, surely did waste their congregations attentions on platitudes but cut to the heart of the matter. We are truly Blessed.
You can bet your bottom dollar that, as soon as this becomes law, some gay agent provocateur (e.g. Tatchell) will go out of their way to test this legislation by attempting to hire a church hall or booking a room in a Christian run hotel. Make no mistake this is a vile and quite deliberate anti-Christian persecution and that we need to make a stand. No blood may be shed, but it seems that we are in the age of martyrs again.
Certainly, the legislation will be tested in this way. In fact, it happened in 2004 over the employment law and the Apostleship of the Sea. The AOS won that case because the post was for a pastoral chaplaincy role and they were allowed to use the exemption.
Fr Tim
could you explain a little about the "exemption" please?
Thanks
The 2003 regulations make it illegal for an employer to discriminate against a job applicant on the grounds of their sexual orientation. There is an exemption in Section 7, which allows employers to specify that the job will only be given to a heterosexual if there is a "genuine occupational requirement". It was widely said that this would be interpreted narrowly and only apply to applicants for "jobs" such as priest or imam - the court allowed that it would also apply in the case of a chaplain. This was a borderline case - hence the testing of the legislation.
As I see it, the bigger agenda here is that the people behind this are using Tatchell and co as "useful idiots" to quote Lenin, just as in the past they have exploited the muslims (who have now rumbled them), to bring about their aim of the (atheist) state, not the individual, deciding how your children are brought up, what they are taught, who you can employ, who you can and cannot invite onto your premises etc. etc. This thinking has guided all sorts of decisions from the tightly drawn national curriculum to the massive expansion in day orphanages (sorry..nurseries)
We are now experiencing in a minor way what the people of the USSR had to put up with from 1917 to 1989, if nothing else it will sort the wheat from the chaff as no one faint hearted will want to become a priest or religous in such a country.
If people from outside this country want to understand the mindset of the people who run this country, I suggest they read the dreaded Polly Toynbee's articles in the guardian newspaper (www.guardian.co.uk) as she is one of their their main journalistic 'gurus'.
The "dreaded Polly" is being courted by the Tories no less so there is no hiding place from a new wave of persecution. What is scary is that there is also an EU dimension to this new aggresive secular fundamentalism.
What is happening was predictable and has been so for the last 45 years at least. Alasdair MacIntyre's "After Virtue" predicted the current crisis in modern ethics back in 1981 but still we continued in the Catholic Church with a failed synthesis between thomism and liberalism. This when a marxist-presbyterian like MacIntyre (who eventually turned to pure thomism) was giving us a free lesson in how NOT to do it. Instead we persisted with "R & R" - Rahner and rubbish.
I agree with what Cardinal Pell of Australia has said is going to happen. The secularists will themselves turn against one and other. All it will take is one economic recession, and secular "solutions" will be sought to resolve the "decadence". Sound familiar? You bet. Remember, the rot in Germany during the 1930's began under the Weimar Republic. For a quick crash course watch Bob Fosse's film "Cabaret".
I entirely agree with you. I cannot see any peaceful end to the "rot" that has set in so firmly. Your analysis of the failed synthesis in Catholicism is spot-on.
'We will fight them on the beaches......' etc...
A so-called SOR 'Law' that is plainly an 'asses bottom' of legislative non-sense will fail sooner rather than later.
I believe that if the homosexuals decide to make a challenge in the courts on a 'trumped up' case, they will fail dismally.
I for one cannot understand why the people of Britain put up with this! Why should a man who chooses to have perverted sex with another man have these perversions protected by law.
Can't the British Judiciary find better issues upon which to pontificate. It's a sham.
'living in the time of martyrs again'...are we not going a touch too far? There are extremists in every camp, we need, I believe, to avoid locking horns with extremists to make our own position more understandable (and therefore more attractive ) to non-catholics. I remember a priest friend of mine who moved to a new inner city parish which had a very large gay population being most popular and including many of them in his services as well as actively preaching the Gospel by the caring actions of his like. The problem, he said, was the tiny minority of very loud, vocal gay men who would scream 'i ******* hate church' etc, at him whenever he tried to visit or engage them in conversation. Extremists, we all find, are louder than ordinary subscribers in most communities. Lets look for signs of God's grace, as my friend did, wherever we can. I think he was surprised quite how much he found.
Nobody is suggesting that the gays will win the war. What Cardinal Pell implied was that there would be a secular reaction to the decadence. That's when the trouble could start especially if a recession kicks in. Having rejected Our Lord people will pursue easy solutions.
That English Ballet star to become the new Sally Bowles?
I don't know why Father is blaming Stonewall, or even the local "national" Government, for that matter. All that is happening here is this country is implementing Article 2 (paragraph 6) of the Treaty of Amsterdam (1997) -- outlawing 'discrimination based on sex, racial or ethnic origin, religion or belief, disability, age or sexual orientation.'
Of course John Paul II and his church supported the European project whole-heartedly, and were apparently quite keen to ignore its true nature. But there's nothing that can be done about it now. These laws are now with us and they're never going to go away.
The Catholic Church in Europe is just going to have to choose either to ditch her moral teachings and pulp her Catechisms, or to give up her revenues on hiring church-halls to non-Catholic groups. I know which option I'd choose, but then I'm not a Catholic priest.
Oliver, JPII was also positive about Islam for similar reasons to those you have outlined. He was far more liberal and optimistic than people credited him for. All this talk of JPII being a centraliser and a conservative is such nonsense. What evidence in the UK have we that our local Church suffered from the centralizing tendency of the papacy these last 30 years? The tone of many of the posts here and from Fr. Tim himself is the lack of authority in our Church!
B16 seems to be ushering in a more pessimistic or at least realistic tone at the Vatican (he is more Augustinian than Thomast) but I am not certain that the message is getting across. Youth 2000 for example, here in the UK, has a book of hymns that are more Dan Schutte revisited than Evelyn Waugh. Indeed one of the hymns in it was written by Schutte! I thought that we were all safe from him today but obviously not. Even Dan's wikipedia entry questions his contribution to the Catholic Church.
When even the secularists and non-catholics start asking questions then you know you are in trouble. Was it not Agatha Christie who signed a petition demanding an indult for the misnamed Tridentine Mass back in the 60's and whose name was thus recognized by Paul VI? On seeing it he immediately granted the indult of course.
Perhaps we should pass control of the local Church to a non-Catholic modern day Agatha Christie who can use wikipedia for intellectual support.
I wonder how many of the Christians campaiging against this measure would also wish to campaign against unmarried heterosexual couples being allowed to share a bed?
TWS
your last comment presupposes an equivalence between heterosexual and homosexual relationships. Even though a heterosexual couple might be "living in sin", their relationship does not contravene the natural order nor do they engage in acts that "cry out for vengeance" as the Catholic catechism clearly states.
Not unrelated is the claim that a celibate homosexual is no different from a celibate heterosexual. This attitude has resulted in the homosexualisation of the priesthood. It is an attitude that reduces sexuality to exclusively genital phenomenon.
Post a Comment