Crunch
Right. This is where two principles slam right into each other. They are frankly irreconcilable. They can’t both be fully accommodated, any more than two bodies can occupy the same space.
The Catholic Church is to go to war over new legislation on rights for homosexuals, vowing to create “gay rights martyrs” if the laws are passed. In a change of tactics, Church officials now say they will not close down adoption agencies as a result of new laws forcing them to deal with applications from gay couples. Instead, they will deliberately break the law in order to bring a case to court. The Church believes it could then challenge a guilty verdict through Article 9 of the Human Rights Act, which upholds the freedom of religious expression.
One wonders if it will succeed. One imagines that it might; and that would be a disaster.
This is a perennial problem in the US, as I’ve mentioned before, because of the free expression clause of the First Amendment. That clause is sometimes held to invalidate legislation. How broadly judges define ‘the freedom of religious expression’ is probably going to be an increasingly worrying issue as time goes on. The more broadly it is defined, the less possible a secular state becomes. That is deeply alarming to those of us who don’t want the Vatican or imams or preachers dictating terms for all of us.
I note that in Australia and UK no parliament can make a law binding a future parliament, and such items as ‘bills of rights’ only apply as long as parliaments want to follow them.
But ….
“DON’T PANIC” should have been in large friendly red letters, shouldn’t it
Crunch indeed OB. But one could say, as I think you hint at the end of the next post, that the crunch occurred right at the start of this when the supreme Catholic principle of doing what the Church sees as God’s will, I guess, collided with the supreme liberal principle of equality under the law.
I’m not worried that the Vatican etc will be dictating terms for all of us, though the view from the USA may be more alarming. The current controversy suggests that they may have more to fear from us dictating to them. Fortunately, the HRA doesn’t take sides, as Nicholas Lawrence’s comment nicely shows.
“We will see priests prosecuted for saying they are not renting the hall for a same-sex celebration.”
Well, wont it make a nice change to see them up on different type of charges?
“What about the Christian bookshop which refuses to stock gay literature?
They will all be breaking the law.”
Perhaps they should stock their shops with books that will teach them that paedophiles are recidivists, as they need to learn this real fast, so as not to break an even bigger law.
Sniff!
My “don’t panic” in red letters has vanished.
Arn’t we allowed technicolour?
Or is this a sense-of-humour failure?
“I think we should be told (ed)” – quote from the Eye …..