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 Fri, 10 Feb 2012 14:02:44 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.1.3 By: Alanlionheart http://www.lynnefeatherstone.org/2009/06/9th-and-10th-sittings-of-equality-bill.htm/comment-page-1#comment-8053 Alanlionheart Fri, 14 Jan 2011 19:09:38 +0000 http://localhost/wp28/?p=2255#comment-8053 Quote 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. End Quote I missed this prize piece. No the world hasn't changed, these issues have always been around in one form or another and people have dealt with them appropriately. Muslims don't have to serve alcohol ordinarily but if they work for Tesco then perhaps they shouldn't be on the checkout. Similarly Christians don't have to be involved in marrying homosexual couples if another is willing to do it. Most employers accommodate these kinds of things very well without government interference. Quote
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.
End Quote
I missed this prize piece.
No the world hasn’t changed, these issues have always been around in one form or another and people have dealt with them appropriately. Muslims don’t have to serve alcohol ordinarily but if they work for Tesco then perhaps they shouldn’t be on the checkout. Similarly Christians don’t have to be involved in marrying homosexual couples if another is willing to do it. Most employers accommodate these kinds of things very well without government interference.

]]> By: Alanlionheart http://www.lynnefeatherstone.org/2009/06/9th-and-10th-sittings-of-equality-bill.htm/comment-page-1#comment-8052 Alanlionheart Fri, 14 Jan 2011 19:02:43 +0000 http://localhost/wp28/?p=2255#comment-8052 What a load of rubbish this spurious leigislation is. I was hoping that the new government were going to ditch it. What the government does not seem to understand is that there is no such thing as equality. People are different. It is not a question of people being equa or inferiorl because that is an impossible concept and this is why the legislation is so flawed. Lynne has said that there is a fundamental difference between abortion and homosexual "marriage". No there isn't. BOTH are wrong. Marriage has always been between a man and a woman for the purpose of both honouring God, having children, remaining faithful to each other and promoting family life. Abortion is just plain murder. BOTH are not allowed by God and both are a disgrace on the nation. And since when has it been wrong to discriminate? We all do this every day when we make choices between right and wrong or who we will do business with or who we will vote for, who our friends will be etc. When will the government legislate against this I wonder. I worked for the Prison Service for a year and we had some people seconded to carry out Lesbian & gay responsibilities nonesense. They were prison officers for goodness sake and should have been gainfully employed in that profession NOT side tracked into this ridiculous pastime that had little or no impact on anyone other than give those involved something different to do to pass the time of day. Government should not be employing people because they belong to certain minority groups, they should be employing people for their skills and aptitiude for the job. What a load of rubbish this spurious leigislation is. I was hoping that the new government were going to ditch it.
What the government does not seem to understand is that there is no such thing as equality. People are different. It is not a question of people being equa or inferiorl because that is an impossible concept and this is why the legislation is so flawed.
Lynne has said that there is a fundamental difference between abortion and homosexual “marriage”. No there isn’t. BOTH are wrong. Marriage has always been between a man and a woman for the purpose of both honouring God, having children, remaining faithful to each other and promoting family life. Abortion is just plain murder. BOTH are not allowed by God and both are a disgrace on the nation.
And since when has it been wrong to discriminate? We all do this every day when we make choices between right and wrong or who we will do business with or who we will vote for, who our friends will be etc. When will the government legislate against this I wonder.
I worked for the Prison Service for a year and we had some people seconded to carry out Lesbian & gay responsibilities nonesense. They were prison officers for goodness sake and should have been gainfully employed in that profession NOT side tracked into this ridiculous pastime that had little or no impact on anyone other than give those involved something different to do to pass the time of day.
Government should not be employing people because they belong to certain minority groups, they should be employing people for their skills and aptitiude for the job.

]]> By: Anon http://www.lynnefeatherstone.org/2009/06/9th-and-10th-sittings-of-equality-bill.htm/comment-page-1#comment-8049 Anon Fri, 14 Jan 2011 11:08:51 +0000 http://localhost/wp28/?p=2255#comment-8049 So, by the very nature that the new equalities bill will require to treat some people than others, for example saying that a Christian cannot disagree with the homosexual lifestyle, while it's OK for a homosexual to disagree with Christianity, means that the whole equalities bill is not very equal. Epic fail IMO. So, by the very nature that the new equalities bill will require to treat some people than others, for example saying that a Christian cannot disagree with the homosexual lifestyle, while it’s OK for a homosexual to disagree with Christianity, means that the whole equalities bill is not very equal.

Epic fail IMO.

]]> 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?

]]>