All over this nation, and the world, individuals are making their way into court after court, attempting to use their religious belief systems as a way to circumvent the law. Specifically, laws on discrimination. It’s at the forefront of the battle here in the U.S. over same sex marriage. Basically, those with religious beliefs claim they cannot be expected to abide by various laws if it conflicts with whatever construct of mythology they’ve chosen to use as a foundation for their everyday lives.
Now, there’s a judge in the UK who’s made the case against this sort of litigation crystal clear. I’ve never heard a judge issue such a brilliantly sensible argument against the claim that religious belief should allow exemption from the laws everyone else must adhere to.
A counselor in the UK, who worked with straight couples regarding sexual intimacy issues, was terminated from his position because he refused to treat same sex couples due to his religious beliefs. He went to court, claiming "religious discrimination". A tribunal threw out his case, so he approached the High Court, who has now, under the leadership of Lord Justice Laws, has now also thrown the case out.
The judge stated that religious beliefs cannot trump the law when it comes to individual protection against discrimination. He said ‘We do not live in a society where all the people share uniform religious beliefs. The precepts of any one religion – any belief system – cannot, by force of their religious origins, sound any louder in the general law than the precepts of any other.’
When the judge was confronted with the notion that he was suggesting that religious belief homophobia, an irrational fear of homosexuality, were equal, he was setting a dangerous precedent. The judge was quick to shoot that idea down, firmly denying he’d ever made such a comparison and that there clearly was a misunderstanding about the laws protecting people from discrimination.
He stated, ‘In a free constitution such as ours there is an important distinction to be drawn between the law’s protection of the right to hold and express a belief and the law’s protection of that belief’s substance or content.’
He went on to say, ‘But the conferment of any legal protection of preference upon a particular substantive moral position on the ground only that it is espoused by the adherents of a particular faith, however long its tradition, however long its culture, is deeply unprincipled.’
Finally, he issued the following, genius bit of wisdom…
‘The law must be clear that anti-discrimination laws exist to protect people, not beliefs.
‘The right to follow a religious belief is a qualified right and it must not be used to legitimise discrimination against gay people who are legally entitled to protection against bigotry and persecution. Fundamentalists are mounting one challenge after another in courts and employment tribunals. They are trying hard to undermine the laws that protect gay people from discrimination. They are seeking to create a hierarchy of rights that places Christian dogma over the rights of people to fair treatment.
They must not be allowed to succeed.’
Amen…now if they would just take off those ridiculous wigs…
