|
|
 |
| |
To see real persecution look at gay rights battle
• A RECENT article might suggest that all Islington clergy are prepared to stand behind an Islington Council employee who has refused to register gay and lesbian civil partnerships (Clergy backs registrar over gay weddings, January 18).
This is far from the truth.
As the minister of Unity Church, Islington’s Unitarian congregation, I fully support the right of same-sex couples to legal recognition for their partnerships. I strongly oppose the actions of council employee Lillian Ladele, who is now taking Islington Council to an employment tribunal on the grounds that homosexual partnerships conflict with her Christian religious beliefs.
Many Christians would, of course, differ on Ms Ladele’s interpretation of Christian ethics. Indeed, I wonder about her selective observance of biblical commandments: Ms Ladele has been photographed wearing gold jewellery, which is clearly forbidden in 1 Timothy 2:9. Does not the requirement that women keep silent in church (1 Corinthians 14:34) conflict with her official duties?
Ms Ladele, as a public servant, is required to carry out democratically enacted legislation. If she is unwilling to do that, the really principled position would be for her to resign from her employment.
Whether or not she is personally engaged in such registrations, Ms Ladele receives her salary from an institution that supports gay partnerships. She seems to want it both ways.
I hope that other denominations will join me in standing up for the rights of same-sex couples by condemning Ms Ladele’s action. Rather than allowing actions that might curtail the hard-won rights of gays and lesbians, we should be working towards full equality for all committed couples by speaking out against provisions of the Civil Partnership Bill that prohibit any accompanying religious celebration.
Ms Ladele’s action has wider implications beyond the immediate question of one registrar refusing to register civil partnerships. If she succeeds, it could cause serious ripple effects elsewhere in local government, allowing employees to refuse all manner of duties on religious grounds. Paradoxically, Ms Ladele claims the council is persecuting her for her beliefs. This implication is offensive. She should familiarise herself with the history of gay rights struggles in order to understand the real nature of persecution.
ANDREW PAKULA
Minister, Unity Unitarian Church Islington
• IT really lifts my spirits every time I leave the Town Hall after my Saturday surgery to bump into gloriously happy couples of all types celebrating their love for each other.
I was therefore saddened by the Rev PD Johnson’s letter (Registrar hounded over her deeply-held beliefs, January 18), in which he attacked “Stonewall and its fellow travellers” for throwing the “usual abuse” at a council registrar.
I understand that the registrar in question had been suspended for refusing to conduct civil partnership ceremonies on the basis of her Christian convictions. Mr Johnson claims that registering these partnerships “would mean her condoning homosexual relationships”.
And while it is not the job of politicians to tell others what the words of God may or may not mean, I cannot sit by while others attempt to undermine equality in the provision of public service on any basis.
We do not ask registrars to pass judgement on those who enter into a union under their auspice. This registrar is a public servant, an employee of the state – I would never tell her what to think, but she must be able to do the job that the state asks of her. Just as a registrar must marry those who are marrying for the second, third or possibly a fourth time, even if they disagree fundamentally with divorce, they must register civil partnerships irrespective of their feelings on homosexual relationships.
Mr Johnson says that “the sinfulness and consequences of homosexual practices are clearly and consistently taught throughout Holy Scripture”. And I admit, it is true that at certain points the Bible implies that homosexuality is a sin (for example, Leviticus 18:22, 20:13).
Whatever the central truths of religious works – whether the Bible, the Qur’ran, the Torah or anything else – their precise pronouncements on many social issues have to be read in the context of the times in which they were written.
Am I to be admonished for the 10 per cent polyester in my 90 per cent cotton shirt, as Leviticus 19:19 would have it? What would trade unionists make of the Ephesians 6:5 instruction for slaves to obey their earthly masters with respect and fear? And I don’t know many young Islington women who would agree with the proposition that a bride found not to be a virgin should be stoned to death at the door to her father’s house (Deuteronomy 22:20-21).
As a woman MP for Islington South and Finsbury, I would certainly not agree with 1 Timothy 2:1, that “a woman should learn in quietness and full submission”. Far from being quiet, I was a vocal supporter of the Civil Partnerships Act, which we should celebrate as a major step towards equality.
Far from denigrating marriage, it simply allows more people to have their stable relationships recognised in law. And last year, I proudly supported the goods and services regulations in the Equality Act, which outlawed all discrimination on the basis of sexuality. As this Bill was going through Parliament, I wrote to and called up Ruth Kelly’s office to urge against any opt-outs – and fortunately we succeeded. I strongly believe that when it comes to equality, there can be no exceptions.
Mr Johnson’s views do not by any means reflect the views of all Christians. Many people would begin an answer to his question, “What should be the true Christian’s attitude to homosexuals?”, by considering the words of the apostle John: “No one has seen God at any time; if we love one another, God abides in us, and His love is perfected in us.”
EMILY THORNBERRY
Labour MP, Islington South and Finsbury
• THE Rev PD Johnson makes the reasonable point that Lillian Ladele ought not to have been suspended by Islington Council from her job as a registrar. She could quite easily have been deployed in another department.
Mr Johnson claims that Ms Ladele was being asked to violate her Christian conscience in overseeing civil partnerships. Readers were given a number of biblical verses to back up this contention. Oddly enough, Leviticus was not quoted by Mr Johnson, even though it is the basis of Paul’s Epistle to the Ephesians.
Leviticus states: “Man shall not lie down with man as with woman, it is an abomination.” “Abomination” is not an expression of distaste – it means the persons involved have to be stoned to death. So also do divorced people.
I find it difficult to believe that Islington’s registrars do not officiate at the civil weddings of divorced persons. I imagine it happens on a fairly regular basis.
This is not a sneer at Ms Ladele or Mr Johnson. They have probably “inherited” this interpretation of Leviticus (it is known as the Holiness Code).
But they are, surely, obliged to give some thought to their “deeply-held beliefs”. Other citizens have equally “deeply-held beliefs”. They do not involve stoning to death (even by implication) other citizens going about their lawful occasions, celebrating civil partnerships, and getting divorced, among others.
SEAN MCGOURAN
Tollington Way, N7
• I read with distaste your coverage of the registrar and her battle with Islington Council.
As a registrar, her duty is to register and preside over civil and non-religious ceremonies of marriage for heterosexual couples and civil partnership for homosexual couples – the word marriage being very deliberately omitted in the latter.
These civil marriages and partnerships have never been religious; they have only legal value. That is precisely why couples who do not choose to practise archaic religions have chosen the non-religious route for many years.
If this woman is so devout she presumably has always objected to this form of heterosexual marriage in that Christian marriage can only be a union of a man and a woman in the sight of God. However, she has apparently been happy to perform such ceremonies in the past.
We can only imagine then that her issue with civil partnerships – which are not actually termed marriages anyway – is her personal distaste for homosexuality.
This has nothing to do with her religion and everything to do with her personal prejudice and refusal to do the job she is employed to do.
The clergy – as represented by the Rev PD Johnson – will always rely on obscure biblical passages to justify their bigotry. Many passages deny women a voice, commanding them to be silent and utterly obedient to men, to either be veiled or shave their heads and to not hold positions of authority over others.
Logically therefore, according to Mr Johnson’s learned sources, this lady should not be in such a post in the first place.
NEIL HERBERT
N1
• THE Rev PD Johnson is entirely free to believe that unrepentant homosexuals, unmarried mothers, atheists or anyone who does not hold his particular sectarian beliefs will go to hell if he so wishes. The question is: do his deeply-held beliefs put him above the law?
It seems ironic that, while the sinners he refers to in his letter are legally bound to behave themselves in the workplace, he seems to reserve for himself and those who share his faith the right to flout them.
JAMES GEARY
Caledonian Road, N1
q I welcome Islington Council’s encouragement of cohesiveness and diversity, but surely the essence of diversity is to allow freedom of conscience. Among the 11 registrars employed by the council, there must surely be a place for the registrar who has (apparently) given satisfactory professional service for 10 years, but who now wishes (in the light of recent legislation) to refer civil partnerships to one of her 10 colleagues who would, it seems, be happy to officiate. From the practical point of view this must be perfectly feasible.
Freedom of conscience and diversity are being put at very serious risk by the council’s stance. What I believe is an appropriate acceptance of civil partnerships could quickly become intolerance and persecution of those with sincere religious convictions. Over the last century or two many of the most profound and beneficial changes in British society have come through campaigning and conscientious objections by those who did not conform because they were motivated (very often) by Christian faith and convictions. I urge Islington Council to think again.
PADDY MARSH
Canonbury Park South, N1
|
 |
|
| |
| Your Comments : |
| |
| |
| |
|
|
|
