|
December
21, 2008
The
reasoning of the pro-gay judicial liberals defies
understanding and common sense. They say they are
"not taking disciplinary action against Ms Ladele
for holding her religious beliefs" but in the
same breath say that they are taking disciplinary
action "because she was refusing to carry out
civil partnership ceremonies and this involved discrimination
on grounds of sexual orientation." That is some
fancy verbal footwork. So the fact that carrying out
civil partnership ceremonies for gays is against her
faith belief and values do not matter? We already
see where all this is going, or where it has already
gone. This is an all-out assault on Christianity and
our faith. We will be forced to do what we believe
is wrong, or else we are fined, fired, sent to jail,
and the like.
The
mantra of the homosexualist movement is individual
rights. But they have no qualms about violating others'
rights, especially that of conscientious objection.
Another mantra is tolerance. But they are intolerant
of Christian faith beliefs and values.
Make
no mistake about it. The anti-life forces are moving
for universal acceptance of abortion and gay rights.
They are out to destroy the family.
Who
will stand against them? Who will remain unafraid?
Who is willing to confront these evil forces to the
point of laying down our very lives?
The
Lord calls you. Will you respond? Be not afraid. Trust
in Jesus.
God
bless.
frank
Christian
U.K. Registrar Loses Right of Conscience on Same-Sex
Civil Unions
By
Kathleen Gilbert
LONDON,
December 19, 2008 (LifeSiteNews.com) - London's Employment
Appeals Tribunal (EAT) has overturned a ruling that
granted compensation to a U.K. registrar subjected
to harassment and the potential loss of her job after
refusing to conduct civil unions between same-sex
couples.
The
court ruled that Islington Council of north London
had not unjustly discriminated against 47-year-old
Lillian Ladele, who objected to involvement in the
unions because of her Christian beliefs.
"The
council were not taking disciplinary action against
Ms Ladele for holding her religious beliefs,"
stated the EAT ruling. "They did so because she
was refusing to carry out civil partnership ceremonies
and this involved discrimination on grounds of sexual
orientation."
Ladele
brought her employer to court after she claimed she
was bullied and treated as a "pariah" by
her fellow employees because of her adherence to Christian
beliefs on homosexuality. Ladele would not perform
such ceremonies and instead arranged for other colleagues
to handle them. Nonetheless, the
Council accused her of gross misconduct and refused
to consider her for promotion, eventually threatening
to fire her if she did not conduct a homosexual union
herself.
The
Central London Employment Tribunal had unanimously
agreed that Ladele's treatment amounted to religious
discrimination and unlawful harassment. The Islington
Council then took the case to the EAT, where they
argued that Ladele's beliefs ought not interfere with
her directive to provide equal treatment regardless
of sexual orientation.
The
EAT tribunal ruled in favor of the Council's interpretation,
stating that the earlier tribunal had "erred
in law" and there was no basis for concluding
any discrimination against Ladele based on her religious
beliefs had taken place.
“Let’s
say I am an anarchist and I feel strongly that I want
to go around blowing things up, but my employers object,"
EAT president Judge Patrick Elias told a tribunal
hearing last week. "It may well be that anarchy
is my genuinely held belief. But it does not mean
that my employer’s decision not to allow me
to [do so] is discriminating against that belief.”
Ladele
plans to take her case to the Court of Appeal.
"Religious
freedoms must be respected but not at the expense
of upholding civil liberties for all," commented
Sarah Ludford MEP, Liberal Democrat European justice
& human rights spokeswoman, as reported by the
U.K.'s homosexual news service PinkNews.com.
"But
while the Labour government’s apparent indulgence
of religiously-based prejudice could make it very
difficult for lesbian and gay teachers to find work
in faith schools, at least the Ladele case is an encouraging
sign that UK courts will uphold the principle that
religion cannot trump the right to equal treatment."
Ladele's
lawyer Mark Jones said in a statement outside of court
that Ladele "wants to make it clear that, whatever
other commentators may have said, this case has never
been an attempt to undermine the rights of members
of the lesbian, gay, bisexual or transgender communities.
"The
evidence showed that Lillian performed all of her
duties to the same high standard for the lesbian,
gay, bisexual or transgender communities, as she did
for everyone. This case has been about the shortfall
between the principle of equal dignity and respect
for different lifestyles and world views, and Islington
Council's treatment of Lillian Ladele - conduct which
the tribunal felt moved to describe as extraordinary
and unreasonable."
Colin
Hart, director of The Christian Institute, expressed
disappointment at the ruling. "Gay rights are
not the only rights," he said. "If this
decision is allowed to stand it will help squeeze
out Christians from the public sphere because of their
religious beliefs on ethical issues." The Christian
Institute is a non-denominational Christian lobby
group that supported Ladele's case.
In
the words of registrar Elizabeth Thatcher, Civil marriage
registrars who face losing their jobs for living their
Christian beliefs are slowly entering a "climate
of fear" created by the U.K.'s increasingly aggressive
laws favoring universal acceptance for homosexual
behavior.
See
related LifeSiteNews.com articles:
Climate
of Fear" Growing in Britain for Christian Civil
Marriage Registrars
UK
Tribunal Rules that Christian Cannot be Forced to
Conduct Gay Partnership Ceremony
"For
to me life is Christ, and death is gain." (Phil
1:21) |