Christian registrar to appeal over same-sex ceremonies – Lillian Ladele says London council unfairly expected her to conduct civil partnership ceremonies against her beliefs
This is an important court case for Christians and the outcome of this appeal will greatly impact on the Christian world, one way or the other.
It’s nice to watch Mike Judge from the Christian institute trouncing the opposition. The homosexual community always seem to operate by a policy of, ‘if in doubt, roll out the race card’. Listen up folks, equality on racial grounds is NOT comparable to equality on grounds of sexual lifestyle choices! This is a flawed argument and comparison and offensive frankly.
Controversial claims that Christians should not have to condone homosexuality will be made in the court of appeal today, as a registrar says she suffered discrimination by being required to conduct same-sex civil partnership ceremonies.
Lillian Ladele, 48, has said she was treated unfairly in her role as a registrar for Islington council, which expected her to carry out the ceremonies despite her beliefs that they were “contrary to God’s law”.
“If this decision is allowed to stand it will help squeeze Christians from the public sphere because of their religious beliefs on ethical issues,” said Mike Judge, a spokesman for the Christian Institute, which is backing Ladele’s appeal.
“The rights of Muslims and homosexuals are protected, but the rights of Christians always seem to be on a lower level,” he added.
Today’s hearing comes two years after Ladele was disciplined for refusing to perform the ceremonies, following complaints from two gay colleagues that her actions were contrary to the council’s dignity for all policy.
Two other registrars at the council, one Muslim and one Christian, also objected to the ceremonies on religious grounds after the Civil Partnership Act came into force in 2005.
Ladele, who brought a discrimination claim in 2007, is appealing a ruling by the employment appeal tribunal last December that Islington council had been entitled to view her conduct as amounting to “unacceptable discrimination”.
“[Ladele's actions] offended some gay employees and involved discriminating against third parties making use of the services of the council,” the tribunal said.
Although Ladele’s lawyers will argue that religious views should be allowed to co-exist alongside the rights of gay people, campaigners said the case was part of an increasing pattern of homophobia based on religion.
“This case is part of a homophobic fight-back by Christian fundamentalists who resent the removal in law of their right to discriminate against lesbian and gay people,” said human rights campaigner Peter Tatchell.
“Faith can never be a legitimate reason to seek exemption from the law and the moral obligation to treat other people with respect and equality,” Tatchell added.
“The issue is very simple. Gay people have no right to discriminate against religious people, and religious people have no right to discriminate against gay people.”
The case comes after Pauline Howe, a grandmother who wrote a letter complaining about a local Gay Pride march, attracted widespread media coverage after she received a warning from police.
Howe, 67, whose case has also been taken up by the Christian Institute, received a warning letter from Norwich City council and a visit from Norwich police stating she could have committed a hate crime.
“When people express robust beliefs, it doesn’t mean that they hate other individuals, just that they are concerned about the behaviour,” Judge said.
“People can express strong views without any expression of hatred. I’m just concerned that the police are beginning to apply policies which do confuse these two things.”
Although gay rights group Stonewall have said they agree the police acted “disproportionately” in Howe’s case, human rights groups say that the rights of homosexual people must be protected from religious views.
“Liberty fiercely defends freedom of conscience and religion, including its reasonable expression in the workplace. But other people have rights and freedoms too,” said Corinna Ferguson, legal officer at Liberty, which is intervening in the case.
“Ms Ladele is entitled to her views but not to pick and choose who is worthy of public services.”
Further Internet Links
Christian registrar takes civil partnerships complaint to court of appeal
Tags: Christianity, Law Moral Ethical
November 7th, 2009 at 10:51 am
Just saw this update from Christian Institute
Ladele appeal judgment expected by Christmas
A Court of Appeal ruling is expected before Christmas in the case of Lillian Ladele – the Christian registrar disciplined for her views on same sex civil partnerships.
The appeal was heard on Monday and Tuesday by the Master of the Rolls, Lord Neuberger, and two other Lord Justices of Appeal.
It is believed to be the first case involving a clash between religious rights and sexual orientation rights to have been considered at this level in England and Wales.
Lawyers acting for Miss Ladele say she was shunned by colleagues at Islington Council who mounted a witch hunt against her because of her Christian beliefs.
An employment tribunal accepted Miss Ladele’s claims of discrimination and harassment, but that was overturned by the Employment Appeal Tribunal (EAT) in December last year.
The EAT did accept that Islington had acted in an improper, unreasonable and extraordinary manner but ruled it did not amount to religious discrimination.
The Christian Institute’s Mike Judge said: “Islington Council accepts it was able to provide civil partnerships registrations without forcing Lillian to take part.
“They could therefore have reasonably accommodated Miss Ladele’s genuinely held religious belief without affecting service delivery.
“That would have been a balanced approach which respected both sides of the debate. Instead they chose to make gay rights more important than religious rights.
“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.”
Reacting to last year’s ruling, Miss Ladele’s solicitor Mark Jones said in December: “The evidence showed that Lillian performed all of her duties to the same high standard for the LGBT community 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.
“The case has also been about the reason why Islington Council decided to designate Lillian Ladele a civil partnership registrar, without informing her, when she had asked not to be made one; when the council expressly knew it would conflict with her religious belief (a religious belief it accepted was worthy of respect); and when the evidence showed that her involvement was not even required to help the council provide its civil partnership service.
“The council has since then pursued Lillian Ladele in disciplinary proceedings which it has made clear may ultimately lead to her dismissal.”
March 9th, 2010 at 7:56 am
[...] posts here, here, here and here. [...]