|
|
|
timmy
|
 |
Has no life at all |
Location: UK, in Devon
Registered: February 2003
Messages: 13796
|
|
|
We have had what is claimed to be a landmark decision at a UK industrial tribunal.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/london/7499248.stm describes the outcome of an employment dispute. I'd be interested in considered opinions about what the result means.
Bear in mind the employees have rights as well as those dealt with by employees.
Author of Queer Me! Halfway Between Flying and Crying - the true story of life for a gay boy in the Swinging Sixties in a British all male Public School
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
JimB
|
 |
Likes it here |
Registered: December 2006
Messages: 349
|
|
|
I think the following quote from the article expresses the situation, and my opinion, very well: "Public servants like registrars have a duty to serve all members of the public without fear or favour. Once society lets some people opt out of upholding the law, where will it end?"
Another quote in the article is also important: "This decision appears to show that religious rights trump gay rights ..." Replace "gay rights" in that statement with any other set of rights you want and the picture is very clear.
Should religious opinion, beliefs or dogma allow a public servant to decide policy? I believe the answer is no and that this decision is wrong.
JimB
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Benji
|
|
Likes it here |
Location: USA
Registered: August 2007
Messages: 297
|
|
|
I quite agree, when one serves the public sector, one must comply with the laws that they are bound to uphold. Separation of Church and State, this person should have been removed or transferred from the position by her superiors, preventing the personal harrassment she claimed. While firing might have been just, simply demoting her on cause of unable to perform duties would have sufficed.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
marc
|
 |
Needs to get a life! |
Registered: March 2003
Messages: 4729
|
|
|
All one has to do is find a person inclined to support the rights of potential gay partnerships.
What is the advantage to have an adversary performing a ceremony of such personal importance.
Mountains out of mole-hills here I think.
Life is great for me... Most of the time... But then I meet people online... Very few are real friends... Many say they are but know nothing of what it means... Some say they are, but are so shallow...
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Should you accept a job where some aspect of its performance conflicts with your religious beliefs? If she is an upright, moral individual, shouldn't she resign a job that is in any way conflicting with her beliefs. She may consider her income to be too meager for her to violate her principles, but isn't she payed out of your taxes? Aren't gay people taxed just as heavily as others? Does any public servant have the right to pick and choose which part of the public they will serve? Couldn't you argue that it is immoral of her to deny people of their rights?
Youth crisis hot-line 866-488-7386, 24 hr (U.S.A.)
There are people who want to help you cope with being you.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
timmy
|
|
Has no life at all |
Location: UK, in Devon
Registered: February 2003
Messages: 13796
|
|
|
In the UK we do not separate church and state at all. Never have and are unlikely ever to do so.
Author of Queer Me! Halfway Between Flying and Crying - the true story of life for a gay boy in the Swinging Sixties in a British all male Public School
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
timmy
|
|
Has no life at all |
Location: UK, in Devon
Registered: February 2003
Messages: 13796
|
|
|
The "rules" changed during her employment.
Author of Queer Me! Halfway Between Flying and Crying - the true story of life for a gay boy in the Swinging Sixties in a British all male Public School
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Then her employment should change to fit the rules. It would be the only "moral" thing for her to accede to.
Youth crisis hot-line 866-488-7386, 24 hr (U.S.A.)
There are people who want to help you cope with being you.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
unsui
|
|
Likes it here |
Registered: September 2007
Messages: 338
|
|
|
No Message Body
[Updated on: Fri, 24 October 2008 18:01] |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
JimB
|
|
Likes it here |
Registered: December 2006
Messages: 349
|
|
|
First you say, "This issue is not about religion"; then, "it is about control"; followed by, "All religion is about control". It appears to me that you are contradicting yourself. I agree that it is about control and also agree that that is what religion is about. So I can not agree with you when you say "This issue is not about religion".
I also find your definition of religion, "a belief in an entity that created and controls the universe, and one's relationship with that entity", to be very narrowly oriented. The bible and other major religious books are 90 percent about other things than "the entity that created and controls the universe", which is what leads to religion being mostly about control.
This woman wanted to force her religious beliefs on others through her public service job. I agree with Paul, the proper thing for her to have done was resign or ask for reassignment.
JimB
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Dear Timmy,
It is true that employees have and ought to have rights, but it is also true that public servants should be willing to uphold the law.
Usually a compromise is reached where, for example, a devout Roman Catholic nurse won't be asked to help with an abortion.
And there are people like me who would not have such a person attend a relative of mine at childbirth because they believe that the child's life is more important than the mother's.
So it's a bit like Stonewall's slogan: Some people are religious bigots: get over it!
Really we should be more tolerant and not just because we were asking for tolerance ourselves not too long ago.
Love,
Anthony
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
'The official should have been fired or demoted.' You don't realise what a tangled web the employment laws are in Great Britain. It's very difficult to give someone the sack, particularly in the public sector. Imagine. The US could have gone that way if they had chosen Hillary Clinton.
The case was not just about her refusal to conduct the ceremony. It was also about her treatment by her employers (a public body) afterwards. It was a management problem. I'm sure there are more than one registrar in Islington. With a little sensitivity another registrar could have been given the assignment. Or did the management have an ulterior motive, wanting to create a cause célèbre?
Hugs
N
[Updated on: Fri, 11 July 2008 19:23]
I dream of boys with big bulges in their trousers,
Never of girls with big bulges in their blouses.
…and look forward to meeting you in Cóito.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Benji
|
|
Likes it here |
Location: USA
Registered: August 2007
Messages: 297
|
|
|
I didn't know that, I wrongfully assumed that there was a seperation. In California, after the court lifted the ban on same sex marriage. A county clerk procalimed she would not issue licenses based on her moral beliefs. After the uproar, she quickly backtracked and said her office would not issue any marrigae licenses for either side. Claiming the blacklog would be too much for her office to handle.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
unsui
|
|
Likes it here |
Registered: September 2007
Messages: 338
|
|
|
No Message Body
[Updated on: Fri, 24 October 2008 18:00] |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Yes, Nigel,
I think the interesting question is what was the motive of the management. The whole thing would not have been a matter for dispute if the Islington Council hadn't chosen to make it a matter for dismissal.
But would you allow an employee to refuse to carry out a legal procedure on religious grounds? I mean the religious grounds could be any reason under the sun!
What if I were a registrar and refused to give public services to priests on the grounds that they were immoral (which I truly believe they are!).
Love,
Anthony
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
JimB
|
|
Likes it here |
Registered: December 2006
Messages: 349
|
|
|
You present yourself very well and I can not disagree with the general points that you have made. However, I have difficulty accepting your equating of morals and religion. You say, “What she was actually doing was forcing her morality on others.” And at the end you suggest, “If you reread the article mentally substituting 'morality' or 'morals' for 'religious liberty' or 'religion', the true danger of the issue becomes very apparent.”
Ms Ladele never mention morals or morality, it was always religion.
“... against her Christian faith”, “... victory for religious liberty” and “... harass people over their religious beliefs”; those are her words.
In addition, a person can have high moral standards without being religious and some very religious people have been known to do some very immoral things.
I certainly do agree with you when you say, “Religious power is by no means dead”. I confess to overstating it, and risk offending some, when I say that in my opinion all of organized religion is about power and little else.
I do not mean to be argumentative but I can not put an equal sign between morals and religion.
JimB
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Yes indeed JimB,
There is a symbol for it (U2260 in charmap) an equals sign overstruck with an oblique stroke.
I agree with you about religion being about power and that religious people act immorally quite often and even the teachings of many religions include immoral teachings - think of the Catholic teaching about condoms and the number of people who have caught HIV as a result.
Love,
Anthony
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Anthony, it's impossible to give a blanket answer to this since the British discrimination laws are such a minefield. Each case has to be reviewed by its own merits and as I said I suspect there was an ulterior motive at work. I also suspect that under the present climate if it had been a Muslim registrar who refused to carry out the ceremony for religious reasons, the reaction would have been entirely different.
If it were me I would realise that I would either have to carry out my duty and suppress my personal feelings, or resign. But as that is purely hypothetical, I cannot say what my decision would be.
Hugs
N
I dream of boys with big bulges in their trousers,
Never of girls with big bulges in their blouses.
…and look forward to meeting you in Cóito.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Message deleted because the symbol required would not replicate itself on the forum. The point would have been lost.
Hugs
N
[Updated on: Sat, 12 July 2008 08:22]
I dream of boys with big bulges in their trousers,
Never of girls with big bulges in their blouses.
…and look forward to meeting you in Cóito.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
yusime
|
|
Likes it here |
Location: United States
Registered: April 2008
Messages: 195
|
|
|
Separation of powers and Separation of Church and State are not exactly new to political philosophy, because where there are conflicting interests, legislative, judicial, and executive there is a natural balance of power. Where there are conflicting religious morals a very tenuous but important part of Separation of Church and State does still exist in every democratic system. Without it there would be bloodshed towards an unprecedented end. Which enables Freedom of Religion to flourish.
The United States, though imperfect at times, was the first Nation State to attempt to completely remove Religion and Government from each others business. Thanks to the rulings of the Supreme Court, which gave us that special interpretation, we managed to survive and even thrive with adherents to many religions and non-adherents alike.
Separation of Church is the reason America is still around. If we ever stop separating religion and and politics the world as we know it will be changed forever.
He who joyfully marches in rank and file has already earned my contempt. He has been given a large brain by mistake since for him a spinal cord would suffice. Albert Einstein
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
unsui
|
|
Likes it here |
Registered: September 2007
Messages: 338
|
|
|
No Message Body
[Updated on: Fri, 24 October 2008 18:00] |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
JimB
|
|
Likes it here |
Registered: December 2006
Messages: 349
|
|
|
I too enjoy a good discussion that introduces me to other points of view and expands my horizons. And I appreciate your graceful acceptance of dialog that may not be clear.
Religion is such a significant part of so many people's lives that it is a valuable effort to gain a better understanding of it and how it properly integrates into society. The story initiating this thread is a good example of where that integration is faulty.
For instance, I feel that we can gain a better understanding of the attitude of radical Moslems (namely their hatred of those of other religions) by researching the history of Islam and its people. Please note that I say "a better understanding", not "total understanding" nor acceptance of their attitude.
JimB
|
|
|
|
|
] 
A Place of Safety
Search
Help
Register
Login
Home
