Comments: Equality Bill and the CofE

It is clearly time for liberal and democratic governments to begin to phase out the practice of giving public funds to religious organizations (Churches, Mosques, Temples, etc. and those organizations sponsored by them that have a "religious ethos"). These organizations intend to continue to discriminate against LGBT persons due to the biological differences between them and the dominant majority.

Imagine discriminating against transexuals in employment on a "religious" basis! The Churches and the Mosques want the legal "right" to refuse to hire someone in a same sex civil partnership because the love and commitment of these persons to each other presents an image to the world that is contrary to the "religious ethos" of these organizations.

We have seen in the United States where this unholy alliance between government funding of religious organizations leads, in particular in the case of the Catholic Church, and their threats to shut down homeless shelters, adoption agencies, and feeding programs for the hungry unless they are permitted by law to discriminate against LGBT persons.

While members of these religious organizations may wish to continue to fund this organized hatred based on ignorance of science and just plain mean spiritedness, there is no justification for the state to continue to fund these religious organizations.

In England, of course, this presents a problem for the establishment of the CofE. And so it is fitting that the government refuses to allow the CofE to discriminate in this manner, while reluctantly maintaining the allowance for discrimination in the hiring of religious ministers.

But, it is simply shameful for the CofE and the Arhbishop's Council to argue for a more extensive "right" to engage in discrimination.

Posted by karen macqueen+ at Friday, 20 November 2009 at 5:27pm GMT

Thank you, Simon, for this article, which clarifies the J.C.H.R.'s rejection of 'special' rights to discriminate against LGBT persons' ability to be employed by their respective faith communities. What a victory this is for those of who believe that the Church of England should not be trying to enforce legislation against LGBT people being accepted as employable and welcomed as part of the work-force of the Church.

Sadly, those who have opposed the acceptance of gays in the Church tend also to be those who are afraid of the influence of women in the Church. This discriminatory outlook needs to be given the same treatment that is demanded of all (including the Church and Governments of Uganda & Nigeria) who deny the human rights of anyone - not just the LBGT community and women who are already a part of the Body of Christ within the Church.

Posted by Father Ron Smith at Friday, 20 November 2009 at 9:41pm GMT

I don't understand why everyone thinks its cool to have an exemption for ministers. Especially in an established church.

But I wish people wouldn't keep pouring scorn and contempt on the RCC in DC because they made some stupid political moves akin to the moves typically made by labor unions. The RCC is in thick with the unions, so maybe they had the same bad advisors. Anyway the RCC should never have bid to provide the social services for DC. How could they not see what was coming at them? They set themselves up for a fall. He who pays the piper calls the tune. But with luck they can get free now and let someone else pick it up. Maybe the LDS or Assemblies ;=). You can bet it won't be the Episcopalians. Or the Anglicans either. Both of which have very good advisors.

Also, Dr. MacQueen, I am one hundred percent in agreement about stopping government subsidies to churches of any kind in the USA. It is a malignant practice. I include tax exemptions as something that should be discontinued, as I hope but do not trust you do too. because it violates the establishment clause IMO.

Posted by anthony at Saturday, 21 November 2009 at 8:45am 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.