Saturday, 5 December 2009

Equality Bill developments

The UK Equality Bill passed its Third Reading in the House of Commons on Wednesday, and has now moved to the House of Lords, where the Second Reading is scheduled for 15 December.

The Hansard record of the debate on Wednesday starts here, or TheyWorkForYou has it in a rather different format here. Only 8 members voted against the bill at Third Reading.

An amendment to delete entirely Schedule 9, Clause 2, Paragraph 8, was proposed by David Drew Labour MP for Stroud, who made this speech in support of it. But when put to the vote it was defeated Ayes 170, Noes 314.

The debate on the religious exemptions and related topics starts at this point.

There has been some comment about the bill on blogs. For example Cranmer has written EU forces Government to put gay equality over Christian conscience and also European Commission ‘lobbied Parliament’ to pass Equality Bill which refers to the debate on Wednesday.

The full text of the EU Reasoned Opinion has not been published by the Government, but the Conservatives have obtained a copy from Brussels (they said) so it is surely only a short matter of time before it is available. Meanwhile, according to Mark Harper Conservative MP for the Forest of Dean it does say this:

“The UK Government has informed the Commission that the new Equality Bill currently under discussion before the UK Parliament will amend this aspect of the law and bring UK law into line with the Directive.”

Earlier in the House of Lords, the Bishop of Ripon and Leeds had used the occasion of the Queen’s Speech to speak there about the Equality Bill. You can read his speech in full here.

Posted by Simon Sarmiento on Saturday, 5 December 2009 at 1:24pm GMT | TrackBack
You can make a Permalink to this if you like
Categorised as: Church of England | equality legislation
Comments

"Do not follow the crowd in doing wrong. When you give testimony in a lawsuit, do not pervert justice by siding with the crowd... Do not deny justice to your poor people in their lawsuits. Have nothing to do with a false charge and do not put an innocent or honest person to death, for I will not acquit the guilty." Exodus 23:2-6

Ezekiel 34:16 "I will search for the lost and bring back the strays. I will bind up the injured and strengthen the weak, but the sleek and the strong I will destroy. I will shepherd the flock with justice."

Jesus and his Christians can be for or against life and justice. If they are for, then the reformations will happen with little concern or embarassment to them. If they are against, then the reforms will be done unto them rather than by them.

If Jesus was not concerned that his followers behaved no better than Satanists when they were disciplined, then Jesus has no grounds to object if he or his followers' reputations are no better than Satan or his followers. God metes out justice fairly to both Jesus and Satan and both are on notice that neither have lived up to the standards required by the Lord.

Posted by: Cheryl Va. on Saturday, 5 December 2009 at 3:46pm GMT

" Sexual ethics is not the point.
It is a post about national sovereignty."
- Posting on 'Cranmer' (above) -

Oh Yes? Then why all the proscriptive quotations from the Old Testament in this positing, which makes it quite clear that 'Cranmer's' opposition to the homophobia of Church and State in the UK is scriptural - without hermeneutic consideration?

To pretend that Cranmer's major concern is about 'national sovereignty' is a blatant mis-representation of their stance on the legislation which will bring about the a deliverance from
anti-gay discrimination in the Churches. This is proof of a particular Evangelical resistance to the Gospel characteristic of Advent enlightenement.

Posted by: Father Ron Smith on Saturday, 5 December 2009 at 8:32pm GMT

My last posting (2 Dec @ 8.32pm) could prove to be confusing. Wher I wrote, in the first sentence the word 'Homophobia, please read 'any tolerance of Homosexuality' in Church and state....

Clearly, from this 'Cranmer' posting alone, the web-site is itself homophobic. One can hardly be persuaded of it's championing of British National Sovereignty.

Posted by: Father Ron Smith on Saturday, 5 December 2009 at 11:40pm GMT
Post a comment









Remember personal info?

Please note that comments are limited to 400 words. Comments that are longer than 400 words will not be approved.

Cookies are used to remember your personal information between visits to the site. This information is stored on your computer and used to refill the text boxes on your next visit. Any cookie is deleted if you select 'No'. By ticking 'Yes' you agree to this use of a cookie by this site. No third-party cookies are used, and cookies are not used for analytical, advertising, or other purposes.