Britain versus The Pope

[Ben Kenobi]

Your seeking to maintain the status quo in this respect is the thin end of the wedge as you are in effect condoning the ‘right’ to perpetuating a homophobic work environment.

I'm defending the right of the Church to remain in harmony with their teachings. I'm defending freedom of association, and the right for private organisations and charities to hire people that they want to hire, not have the government hire for them, as they do in fascist countries, and apparently, now in Britain.

Elevating the cause celebre is not sufficient cause to reject the essential defense of fundamental freedoms.

Indeed it is precisely this sort of unjust tyranny that has been fought against in many guises down the ages, be they workers’ rights, voters’ rights (male and female), the right to free schooling and healthcare, against slavery, against racism, against sexism, and in this case, against homophobia.

Again, all cause celebres. The result has been an array of quotas, confusion, constraints and intrusion of the inevitable growth of the state of Britain, at the expense of the freedoms of the people. The biggest loser in the end are the people who you claim to be defending, as they are poorer and worse off then they would be without any intervention at all.

If you are against this form of equality, then it stands to reason that you are against all other forms of equality and basic human rights fought for the same reasons.

Quite the contrary. I believe that all men are created equal, and are endowed by their creator the right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. Nowhere do I see you elevating liberty to the form of a freedom that ought to be enjoyed by all peoples. Yes, I agree that it is a problem when there is discrimination, wrt to employment, but the solution is not to infringe on the liberty of the employers, and certainly not to 'help' workers by imposing limitations on when they can work, where they can work, what they can charge for their services, who they can work for, etc. How is it to the benefit of the worker to lose a percent of his paycheque and be robbed of aspects of his liberty? At least the mugger is kind enough not to justify his actions as to the benefit of workers.

After all, you take for granted your own rights that were fought on your behalf – it is therefore hypocritical that you should not therefore support the rights of others…

And those rights include liberty. You have no right to bind me so you can feel more secure when you are incapable or unwilling to exercise your rights.

[Ben Kenobi]

That might be important to them, but legally in the UK it can't be how they make their choice.

Then Britain is a fascist country.

And people advertise and market **** they don't believe in all the time. No reason a Muslim or a gay man couldn't do a marketing job for the catholic church. Unlikely that they'd choose to, but they'd be quite capable.

The point being that the church, in the end, makes the decision not the state. The blowback effect of these laws is that the employers are far less likely to hire or interview or do anything to indicate an interest in qualified people just because they do not want to face lawsuits.

This has been my own experience over the years.

[MikeH]

My STRAW MAN detector exploded!

but I've already countered most of them so I won't bother again. You never read or understand the responses.

[MikeH]

I'm proud that we use the law as a tool to prevent the church from persecuting minorities.

[Ben Kenobi]

By persecuting the Catholic church?

Good to see Britain reverting to the days of Cromwell.

What benefit is there to liberty if all it can do is persecute one minority at the expense of another?

[MikeH]

Poor Catholic church being persecuted into hiring the best candidate for the job. If we're not careful they'll be persecuted into becoming a more efficient and stronger organisation!

The fact that the law also prevents someone from choosing not to hire someone because they are a Catholic seems to have escaped your attention.

[Ben Kenobi]

My goodness, that my right not to do something is defended is something I greatly treasure.

My god man, what's next? My right not to have me feelings hurt? I should sue you for hurting my feelings.

[MikeH]

Oh boo hoo, the nasty government says I can't act like a bigot, only think like one

[onodera]

MikeH, I *hate* to side with Ben in this debate, but noncommercial organisations should be able to discriminate against specific sorts of people as long as they do not obtain aid from the secular government. I'm on the fence regarding commercial organisations in the same position (this sounds too libertarian for my tastes).
People are free to believe anything. Anything, however stupid or illegal that is. They can believe that:
- their religion is the only right one and everyone else will suffer for their wrong beliefs
- homosexuality is a sin
- eating pork is bad
- abortion is forbidden
- Jews must live in ghettoes
- men must sleep with their wives and their horses
- every year you have to share a meal of human flesh with your parish

People can believe anything. What they can't do is follow their beliefs if their actions will infringe on the rights of other people. They can't:
- forcibly convert other people to their faith
- kill gay people
- prevent other people from eating pork
- blow up abortion clinics
- force Jews to live in ghettoes
- force other people to have sex with horses
- kill and eat other people

However, they should be able to:
- preach that their religion is the only right one and everyone else will suffer for their wrong beliefs
- say that homosexuality is a sin and prevent gays from joining their group
- sell no pork in their shops
- excommunicate women who perform abortions and criticize pro-choicers
- preach that Jews should live in ghettoes and live in ghettoes if they're Jews themselves
- sleep with their wives and their horses
- kill themselves so their parish can perform the ritual

I am an atheist myself, but I do not think anyone should force religious people to give up their beliefs as long as other people don't suffer.

[MikeH]

as long as other people don't suffer.

eg. By being denied work?

[MikeH]

BTW there is no restriction on volunteers etc. Only employees.

[Ben Kenobi]

Help Help! I'm bein' repressed!

[MOBIUS]

BTW, talking of not wanting Muslims to work for the church:

One of the striking things I noticed in both Egypt and Morocco was that Christian and Jewish religious sites (such as WWII cemeteries, churches and synagogues) in both those countries overwhelmingly employed Muslims in positions such as caretakers etc - so clearly they are not practising what YOU preach, Ben.

[onodera]

eg. By being denied work?

People have a right to work for the RCC?

[MikeH]

They have a right not to be denied work by anyone purely because of their sexuality.