The Church Taliban get their way again

When Tony Blair and his small band of ‘New’ Labour modernisers swept into power in 1997 they had all sorts of wild and wonderful plans for Britain. In one area though, Tone and the Gang were decidedly conservative in their promises. Despite all the pledges to ‘modernise’ Britain, our democracy was still going to contain an outdated and illogical second chamber. The ‘modernisation’ of the House of Lords was simply going to remove the rights of hereditary Peers. That was it. All the rest of the stuff on the House of Lords was the usual Blairite flim-flam about having a wide-ranging review of possible further change.
And so it came to pass, that 12 years later, an attempt to introduce measures to prevent the Church discriminating against gay and transsexual people in employment floundered in the wake of opposition from the Christian Taliban and old duffers appointed on the basis of political patronage and grace and favour appointments.
With no hint of irony, John Sentamu, the Archbishop of York was able to tell the assembled Peers that although the population may think the Church was barking mad in it’s Victorian attitudes on sexuality….

“But, if religious freedom means anything it must mean that those are matters for the churches and other religious organisations to determine for themselves in accordance with their own convictions.”

What Sentamu was telling them was, we should be allowed to discriminate if we want to…. because discrimination is at the heart of our beliefs. I suspect his attitude might have been distinctly different if the discrimination took the form of blokes with sheets over their heads placing fiery crosses on the lawn outside his cathedral. I await Sentamu’s defence of the BNP’s racism on the grounds that they should have the right to discriminate because racism is “in accordance with their convictions, is central to their beliefs and they really, genuinely believe it in a heartfelt way.”

This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

5 Responses to The Church Taliban get their way again

  1. Brian Hughes says:

    Imagine, if you will, a country newly liberated from a despot. Its new democratic system is unveiled. Its second chamber is to consist of 92 sons and daughters of former warlords and robber barons, 24 leaders of one of the local religious groups and several other fine people appointed by party leaders. None of these representatives may be sacked whatever they do.
    The US or we’d send a gunboat to knock some sense into them…

  2. newmania says:

    Can we make the practice of all male Imams illegal as well ? That would be fun or do you think their sensitivities would be ruffled poor dears

  3. Paul Martin says:

    I understand that there was no challenge to “discrimination” re gender or sexual orientation of clergy. This clergyperson feels no desire to defend discrimination on these matters. What was at stake was discrimination re other employees such as say teachers at a church school etc. I do not find it in any way defensible to allow the gospel to be so twisted as to allow discrimination on these matters. I hope the government sees its proposals through. Many of us within the Christian community would be delighted.

  4. David Duff says:

    “Church Taliban”!
    Is it any wonder, Councillor, that no one takes you very seriously? Perhaps I might write a post on ‘national socialists’.
    ‘With what smear ye mete it shall be smeared to you again’!

  5. Steve says:

    The twenty first century eh?

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

*

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>