Comments on: The 9th and 10th sittings of the Equality Bill Committee http://www.lynnefeatherstone.org/2009/06/9th-and-10th-sittings-of-equality-bill.htm Liberal Democrat MP for Hornsey and Wood Green Wed, 17 Mar 2010 19:55:44 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2 hourly 1 By: Lynne Featherstone MP http://www.lynnefeatherstone.org/2009/06/9th-and-10th-sittings-of-equality-bill.htm/comment-page-1#comment-2030 Lynne Featherstone MP Wed, 01 Jul 2009 08:46:55 +0000 http://localhost/wp28/?p=2255#comment-2030 No - I totally support the right that doctor's have under legislation to opt out of abortion. For obvious reasons - there is a fundamental difference between abortion and a for example conducting a civil partnership ceremony. And I have every respect for those who hold reglious convictions. What I was saying (or trying to say) in committee was that the world has changed radically in terms of equality issues and people are now confronted in their work with challenges that would not have been forseen. That means there are lots of jobs - like serving alcohol for a Muslim or marrying a gay couple if you are a Christian that now affect those who hold belief. Therefore there is an issue about which job you go into. No - I totally support the right that doctor's have under legislation to opt out of abortion. For obvious reasons - there is a fundamental difference between abortion and a for example conducting a civil partnership ceremony. And I have every respect for those who hold reglious convictions. What I was saying (or trying to say) in committee was that the world has changed radically in terms of equality issues and people are now confronted in their work with challenges that would not have been forseen. That means there are lots of jobs - like serving alcohol for a Muslim or marrying a gay couple if you are a Christian that now affect those who hold belief. Therefore there is an issue about which job you go into.

]]> By: Anonymous http://www.lynnefeatherstone.org/2009/06/9th-and-10th-sittings-of-equality-bill.htm/comment-page-1#comment-2029 Anonymous Tue, 30 Jun 2009 20:38:23 +0000 http://localhost/wp28/?p=2255#comment-2029 So by your argument Lynne, say Christian doctors or even non-Christian ones who refuse to participate in abortions or recommend them should perhaps be thinking about another career as they would not be providing a 'public service' for all? <br /><br />I have great respect for your integrity but I am disappointed that you seem to have so little respect for those with deeply held moral convictions who will be forced out of their jobs by the imposition of such chilling legislation. <br /><br />Iconoclast So by your argument Lynne, say Christian doctors or even non-Christian ones who refuse to participate in abortions or recommend them should perhaps be thinking about another career as they would not be providing a 'public service' for all?

I have great respect for your integrity but I am disappointed that you seem to have so little respect for those with deeply held moral convictions who will be forced out of their jobs by the imposition of such chilling legislation.

Iconoclast

]]> By: Anonymous http://www.lynnefeatherstone.org/2009/06/9th-and-10th-sittings-of-equality-bill.htm/comment-page-1#comment-2028 Anonymous Fri, 26 Jun 2009 20:40:26 +0000 http://localhost/wp28/?p=2255#comment-2028 Hi Lynne, you say "I just don't think you can have a job in public service and then select whom you will serve." <br />Christians are well known, perhaps above any other group, as being providers of care and compassion to many people, even those who others would consider untouchables, without discrimination. Christians are very tolerant it's just that they don't want to "promote" something they think is wrong. In many cases, the Christians being persecuted have had the rules changed on them suddenly. I really feel for them.<br />By the way, even the notion of "equality" is based in the Judaeo-Christian worldview. You are borrowing it and turning it around on Christians. <br />I think that you believe that you 're championing "equality" which is worthy cause, but, underneath all that, you may be promoting a cause which has a moral question over it. Hi Lynne, you say "I just don't think you can have a job in public service and then select whom you will serve."
Christians are well known, perhaps above any other group, as being providers of care and compassion to many people, even those who others would consider untouchables, without discrimination. Christians are very tolerant it's just that they don't want to "promote" something they think is wrong. In many cases, the Christians being persecuted have had the rules changed on them suddenly. I really feel for them.
By the way, even the notion of "equality" is based in the Judaeo-Christian worldview. You are borrowing it and turning it around on Christians.
I think that you believe that you 're championing "equality" which is worthy cause, but, underneath all that, you may be promoting a cause which has a moral question over it.

]]> By: Michael Petek http://www.lynnefeatherstone.org/2009/06/9th-and-10th-sittings-of-equality-bill.htm/comment-page-1#comment-2027 Michael Petek Thu, 25 Jun 2009 16:09:52 +0000 http://localhost/wp28/?p=2255#comment-2027 Lynne, the presumption is that in public service you have to serve everyone regardless. Where you draw the line is at the point where a public official is required formally to co-operate in evil: eg. to join two persons of same sex in a civil partnership; or to join two persons of different sex in a civil marriage, knowing that one or both of them are divorced from someone who is still alive.<br /><br />It's conflicts like this which identify the limits within which religions including secular humanism and relativism have to be treated as civil equals. You can't carry the discussion any further without asserting one religion as true, and true for everyone whether they like it or not.<br /><br />Granted, you can't have a job in public service and then select whom you will serve. Public authorities in the UK (and for that matter in Saudi Arabia as much as elsewhere) must serve God in concurrence with the morality of the Catholic religion and they don't have the option of doing otherwise.<br /><br />Upholding human rights and fundamental freedoms is, by the way, a religious obligation for Catholics. See Pope Benedict's address to the Address to the Pontifical Academy of Social Sciences on 4 May 2009.<br /><br />http://www.ewtn.com/library/PAPALDOC/b16socsci.HTM Lynne, the presumption is that in public service you have to serve everyone regardless. Where you draw the line is at the point where a public official is required formally to co-operate in evil: eg. to join two persons of same sex in a civil partnership; or to join two persons of different sex in a civil marriage, knowing that one or both of them are divorced from someone who is still alive.

It's conflicts like this which identify the limits within which religions including secular humanism and relativism have to be treated as civil equals. You can't carry the discussion any further without asserting one religion as true, and true for everyone whether they like it or not.

Granted, you can't have a job in public service and then select whom you will serve. Public authorities in the UK (and for that matter in Saudi Arabia as much as elsewhere) must serve God in concurrence with the morality of the Catholic religion and they don't have the option of doing otherwise.

Upholding human rights and fundamental freedoms is, by the way, a religious obligation for Catholics. See Pope Benedict's address to the Address to the Pontifical Academy of Social Sciences on 4 May 2009.

http://www.ewtn.com/library/PAPALDOC/b16socsci.HTM

]]> By: Anonymous http://www.lynnefeatherstone.org/2009/06/9th-and-10th-sittings-of-equality-bill.htm/comment-page-1#comment-2026 Anonymous Wed, 24 Jun 2009 12:54:50 +0000 http://localhost/wp28/?p=2255#comment-2026 So we must make 'reasonable adjustments' for people with disabilities but not for Christians. I assume this means there are more disabled voters than Christian ones in Hornsey and Wood Green. So we must make 'reasonable adjustments' for people with disabilities but not for Christians. I assume this means there are more disabled voters than Christian ones in Hornsey and Wood Green.

]]> By: Lynne Featherstone MP http://www.lynnefeatherstone.org/2009/06/9th-and-10th-sittings-of-equality-bill.htm/comment-page-1#comment-2025 Lynne Featherstone MP Tue, 23 Jun 2009 21:29:23 +0000 http://localhost/wp28/?p=2255#comment-2025 Michael Petek - and that is the point. I defend your right to be offended by my lack of belief in the Roman Catholic faith! I also defend the right of those in public service to hold to their beliefs and their conscience - I just don't think you can have a job in public service and then select whom you will serve. Michael Petek - and that is the point. I defend your right to be offended by my lack of belief in the Roman Catholic faith! I also defend the right of those in public service to hold to their beliefs and their conscience - I just don't think you can have a job in public service and then select whom you will serve.

]]> By: Anonymous http://www.lynnefeatherstone.org/2009/06/9th-and-10th-sittings-of-equality-bill.htm/comment-page-1#comment-2024 Anonymous Tue, 23 Jun 2009 18:27:58 +0000 http://localhost/wp28/?p=2255#comment-2024 Looks to me like Christianity is at the bottom of the pile in your opinion.<br /> I was aghast at the TUC calling for the resignation of Joel Edwards from the Equalities Commission,simply for being an Evangelical Christian.<br /> Where is our country heading? Looks to me like Christianity is at the bottom of the pile in your opinion.
I was aghast at the TUC calling for the resignation of Joel Edwards from the Equalities Commission,simply for being an Evangelical Christian.
Where is our country heading?

]]> By: Michael Petek http://www.lynnefeatherstone.org/2009/06/9th-and-10th-sittings-of-equality-bill.htm/comment-page-1#comment-2023 Michael Petek Tue, 23 Jun 2009 12:06:01 +0000 http://localhost/wp28/?p=2255#comment-2023 I am a Liberal Democrat and by religion a Roman Catholic. It is a religion I take as seriously as can be.<br /><br />I am also a tolerant man who has no difficulty in getting on with others who aren't Catholics, upholding their right to religious freedom whatever they may believe, and respecting their honest consciences.<br /><br />But, having read your remarks that Christians ought to get another job if they are called upon in public service to act against their consciences, I am willing to make an exception in your case, Lynne.<br /><br />Lynne Featherstone, I find it insulting and offensive that you do not believe and profess the Roman Catholic religion, and that you refuse to use your position in Parliament to structure public life according to its precepts. I am a Liberal Democrat and by religion a Roman Catholic. It is a religion I take as seriously as can be.

I am also a tolerant man who has no difficulty in getting on with others who aren't Catholics, upholding their right to religious freedom whatever they may believe, and respecting their honest consciences.

But, having read your remarks that Christians ought to get another job if they are called upon in public service to act against their consciences, I am willing to make an exception in your case, Lynne.

Lynne Featherstone, I find it insulting and offensive that you do not believe and profess the Roman Catholic religion, and that you refuse to use your position in Parliament to structure public life according to its precepts.

]]> By: dreamingspire http://www.lynnefeatherstone.org/2009/06/9th-and-10th-sittings-of-equality-bill.htm/comment-page-1#comment-2022 dreamingspire Tue, 23 Jun 2009 07:26:25 +0000 http://localhost/wp28/?p=2255#comment-2022 Lynne, with respect there is a considerable difference between my text "The test at the moment seems to be that all reasonable steps must be taken to provide that access" and your response "the most basic 'reasonable' adjustment". Maybe there is evidence of widespread avoidance of compliance - if so, I would like to see references to it - maybe also evidence that operators of premises can too easily ignore the requirements, and certainly I have seen in my area a number of shop refurbishments where the result has been unsatisfactory (doorways with a step at the threshold, for example), but should not it be left to local authorities to police that under existing regulations?<br />Yesterday I was in the M&S at High St Kensington. The merchandise was laid out in such a dense fashion that it was difficult for an able-bodied person to get round the shop or see where the exits are, and impossible for someone with a child in a buggy - the local authority should deal with that under public safety regulation as well as disability discrimination legislation. Lynne, with respect there is a considerable difference between my text "The test at the moment seems to be that all reasonable steps must be taken to provide that access" and your response "the most basic 'reasonable' adjustment". Maybe there is evidence of widespread avoidance of compliance - if so, I would like to see references to it - maybe also evidence that operators of premises can too easily ignore the requirements, and certainly I have seen in my area a number of shop refurbishments where the result has been unsatisfactory (doorways with a step at the threshold, for example), but should not it be left to local authorities to police that under existing regulations?
Yesterday I was in the M&S at High St Kensington. The merchandise was laid out in such a dense fashion that it was difficult for an able-bodied person to get round the shop or see where the exits are, and impossible for someone with a child in a buggy - the local authority should deal with that under public safety regulation as well as disability discrimination legislation.

]]> By: Anonymous http://www.lynnefeatherstone.org/2009/06/9th-and-10th-sittings-of-equality-bill.htm/comment-page-1#comment-2021 Anonymous Mon, 22 Jun 2009 23:54:04 +0000 http://localhost/wp28/?p=2255#comment-2021 I very much hope this bill is going to help do away with more discrimination that it creates.<br /><br />We already have men banned from using certain public services - eg Libraries, not to mention the corresponding sex discrimination in employment in order to fulfil such bans.<br /><br />Will the equality bill stop libraries from banning people on the basis of their gender? I'd guess if Harman ha anything to do with it it'll cause more such discrimination rather than less. I very much hope this bill is going to help do away with more discrimination that it creates.

We already have men banned from using certain public services - eg Libraries, not to mention the corresponding sex discrimination in employment in order to fulfil such bans.

Will the equality bill stop libraries from banning people on the basis of their gender? I'd guess if Harman ha anything to do with it it'll cause more such discrimination rather than less.

]]>