A preview of what’s to come in U.S. jurisprudence?

 

It isn’t often that The Motley Monk finds himself agreen with an Archbishop of Canterbury.  But, in this instance, the former and 103rd Archbishop of Canterbury, George Carey, hit the nail on the head when he challenged the “reigning orthodoxy of diversity and equality.”

Why?

This orthodoxy allows for neither diversity nor equality.

According to the BBC News, four British Christians were discriminated against in the workplace because of their Christian values.

The cases aren’t new, going back seven years:

  • Two lost their jobs because they believe that homosexual relationships are contrary to God’s law.  In addition, they believe that homosexual relationships are incompatible with their religion and it’s immoral to do anything that condones homosexuality.  One, a registrar, objected to officiating at civil partnership ceremonies between homosexuals.  The other, a therapist, did not wish to provide counselling to homosexual couples.
  • The other two, one worked for British Airways and the other was a nurse, wore necklaces with crosses at work.  Both lost their jobs, they believe, because of wearing those necklaces.

In what is nothing other than hypocritical reasoning, British employment tribunals and the British Supreme Court ruled against the four.

Why hypocritical?

In Britain—where there is an “Equality Law”—no workplace restrictions are placed upon other religious symbols, including the Sikh turban or the Muslim hijab.

According to AFP, Carey thought the four should “have earned widespread respect” for their witness.  Now, their cases have prompted him to “question whether…faith is a bar to public service.”  He added:

In the past, there was space for negotiation between individuals and their employers, but the burden of ever-increasing regulation has meant that questions of conscience and freedom are neglected in favour of conformity.

The lawyer representing the UK government, James Eadie, argued that expressions of belief “were not absolute rights, or rights without limits.”  He added:

Employers cannot be forced to accommodate (the) religious beliefs of employees who do not wish to provide services to the public or a section of a public.

Carey called the four the “new heretics,” adding:

Indeed, it seems the secular equivalent of the Inquisition will brook no dissent from the reigning orthodoxy of diversity and equality.

The Motley Monk is wondering if this is a preview of what’s soon to come in U.S. jurisprudence?

 

 

To read the BBC News article, click on the following link:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-19472438

To read the AFP article, click on the following link:
http://uk.news.yahoo.com/british-christians-case-european-court-114646467.html

3 Responses to A preview of what’s to come in U.S. jurisprudence?

  • “The Motley Monk is wondering if this is a preview of what’s soon to come in U.S. jurisprudence?”

    Count on it. And in the not-too-distant future.

  • Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts has said that it is not the Supreme Court’s job to protect the sovereign soul of the citizen, but it is. Obama has said that it is the Department of Justice’s job to do what he tells them to do. “-EXECUTIVE ORDER 11310 grants authority to the Department of Justice to enforce the plans set out in Executive Orders, to institute industrial support, to establish judicial and legislative liaison, to control all aliens, to operate penal and correctional institutions, and to advise and assist the President”, except that as constituents of Obama, what happens to one person happens to all persons. Liberals think that they are safe, as one said: “I got mine”, but not for long. The disparity and class warfare engendered by Obama’s policies for the sake of class warfare cannot amalgamate the people as one nation under God, as One from Many. E Pluribus Unum.

    We must now have a religious test to be a citizen.

Follow TAC by Clicking on the Buttons Below
Bookmark and Share
Subscribe by eMail

Enter your email:

Recent Comments
Archives
Our Visitors. . .
Our Subscribers. . .