Anglican Mainstream

From Herald Scotland

FREEDOM of religious expression is a cornerstone of a liberal and civilised society, as is equality.

When equality for one person erodes the religious freedom of another, clear moral thinking is required.

A referendum is not the best way to achieve that but in calling for a public vote on the legalisation of same-sex marriage (which attracted three times the number of submissions to the consultation as that on the independence referendum), Cardinal Keith O'Brien, Scotland's most senior Roman Catholic, has crystallised the dilemma facing Alex Salmond and his cabinet ministers on the issue.

They were expected to publish yesterday the response to the consultation on same-sex marriage and their decision on whether to proceed with legislation. Instead, the matter has been remitted to a cabinet sub-committee with a commitment that a decision will be announced and the responses published by the end of this month. That particular details require further consideration seven months after the consultation closed indicates that the political stakes are higher than first thought and that a legal minefield has to be crossed. It also suggests that the SNP – confident that a free vote at Holyrood could overcome the problems of religious conscience of MSPs and assuming that a relaxation of social attitudes following the civil partnership legislation in 2005 would carry the legislation – had not done its homework on the legal consequences. For an administration in a parliament that from its inception had compatibility with human rights in its legislative DNA, that is a worrying omission.

Read here

By Nile Gardiner, Telegraph

By Jerome Taylor, Independent

The Christian group behind the recent attempt to place "gay cure" adverts on London buses have instructed lawyers to sue both the Mayor of London and the company that initially agreed to host the adverts after they were banned at the last minute, the Independent can reveal.

Aughton Ainsworth, a Manchester based law firm with a long track record of taking on controversial religious cases, have been hired by Anglican Mainstream to issue legal proceedings against both Boris Johnson and CBS Outdoor.

The adverts were meant to begin running next week and mimicked a recent campaign by the gay-rights group Stonewall which used the strapline “Some people are gay, get over it!”.

Read here

From eChurch Websites

The European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) currently has before it an unprecedented number of cases relating to abortion. Because the principles established by the Court in its case are binding on the 47 member states, the next few months will be decisive for the respect of human life and dignity.

In the coming months, the European Court will have responsibility for defining, for the 47 member states, much of the legal framework of abortion and family issues such as eugenics and conscientious objection.

By David Lindsay

"The European Convention on Human Rights does not require member states’ governments to grant same-sex couples access to marriage."

But if same-sex "marriage" is lawful, then religious organisations that refuse to perform them do face litigation or prosecution under existing anti-discrimination legislation, irrespective of any statutory exemptions.

So there.

So much for just letting Quakers, Unitarians, Reform Jews and some Anglicans, Methodists and members of the URC get on with it, because no one was ever going to force it on Catholic churches (or on the Catholic Church, as such), on most Anglican churches (or on the Church of England and the Church in Wales, as such), on many or most Methodist or URC chapels, on Baptist chapels, on Orthodox synagogues, on mosques, and on churches attended by the growing number of black Pentecostals or by that sixth of the world's Greek Cypriots which lives in Britain.

Oh, yes, they are.

Read here

by Donna Bowater, Telegraph

Judges in Europe have ruled member states do not have to grant same-sex couples access to marriage, it was reported.

The ruling follows the launch of a consultation over gay marriage in the UK, in which the Equalities Minister promised a change in the law.
 
The European Court of Human Rights reached the decision in the case of a lesbian couple in a civil partnership in France, who complained they would not be allowed to adopt a child as a couple, according to the Daily Mail.
 
The court heard how one of the women had her application refused to adopt her partner's child.
 
The pair, Valerie Gas and Nathalie Dubois, had tried to establish marriage rights under anti-discrimination laws but the judges said there had been no discrimination.
 
Judges also said that if same-sex unions became lawful, any church that refuses to marry gay couples could be charged with discrimination.

Read here
 

From Cranmer

As the Government launch their not-a-consultation on 'gay marriage', it transpires that even the fons et origo of the equality industry are washing their hands of the proposal. Judges in the European Court of Human Rights in Strasbourg have said: "The European Convention on Human Rights does not require member states’ governments to grant same-sex couples access to marriage."

BUT they warn (as everyone really knows and His Grace has been warning for years) that if same-sex unions became lawful, any church (and synagogue, mosque and gurdwara) that refuses to marry gay couples could be charged under existing anti-discrimination legislation, irrespective of any statutory exemptions. Ergo, the Coalition’s assurance that no religion will be compelled to conduct the weddings is worthless: Parliament will be forced to amend its legislation to conform to the judgement of the courts to which it is subject. We all know and fully understand that European law (that which emanates from both Strasbourg and Brussels) overrides any rule of national law found to be in conflict with any directly enforceable rule of European or EU law.

Read here

By Steve Doughty, Mailonline

Same-sex marriages are not a human right, European judges have ruled.

Their decision shreds the claim by ministers that gay marriage is a universal human right and that same-sex couples have a right to marry because their mutual commitment is just as strong as that of husbands and wives.

The ruling was made by judges of the European Court of Human Rights in Strasbourg following a case involving a lesbian couple in a civil partnership who complained the French courts would not allow them to adopt a child as a couple.

The ruling also says that if gay couples are allowed to marry, any church that offers weddings will be guilty of discrimination if it declines to marry same-sex couples.

It means that if MPs legislate for same-sex marriage, the Coalition’s promise that churches will not be compelled to conduct the weddings will be worthless.

Read here

by Martin Beckford, Telegraph

David Cameron’s plans to curtail the powers of the European Court of Human Rights have been dismissed by its British president.

Sir Nicolas Bratza, appearing before Parliament for the first time, offered a strong defence of the much-criticised institution and insisted it was not interfering with British courts or policies.
 
He claimed that last year it only found fault with Britain on eight occasions in almost 1,000 cases, and very rarely prevented the deportation of criminals or terror suspects.
 
And he brushed aside most of the suggestions made by the Government to rewrite the rules that underpin the Strasbourg court, in a blow to David Cameron’s calls for reform.
 
Sir Nicolas said some of the proposals would be “extremely difficult” to carry out while others would be “fraught with difficulty” and risk “friction and divisiveness” in the 47 states that have signed up to the European Convention on Human Rights.
 
The Government has had reform of the ECHR in its sights following a series of embarrassing rulings, such as the case brought by a convicted killer that requires prisoners to be given the vote, and the ban on the deportation of the radical preacher Abu Qatada.

Read here 

Read also:  There is no longer any possible reason to remain in the ECHR by Daniel Hannon
  

by Paul Goodman, Conservative Home

By Bishop Pierre Whalon, Huffington Post

By Dave Landrum, Guardian

It should concern us all that today's human rights industry exists as a totalising creed for a secular humanist agenda

By Alexander Boot

By Albert Mohler

Columnist Nicholas Kristof of The New York Times has emerged as one of the most influential journalists and public intellectuals of our times. He has been the voice of conscience on many issues of human rights and foreign affairs, and he has won two Pulitzer Prizes for his reports, books, and commentaries on world affairs.

A graduate of Harvard University and a Rhodes Scholar, Mr. Kristof sees the world from an elite point of reference, and his column in The New York Times is mandatory reading for anyone concerned with human rights and human dignity.

His keen sensitivity to human rights concerns is what makes his column published in the February 12, 2012 edition of the paper so perplexing — and so offensive.

Read here

By Andrew Hough, Telegraph

The courts are endangering religious freedom because the judiciary are giving it a lower priority than equality, a leading philosopher has claimed.

Prof Roger Trigg of Kellogg College, Oxford, said that judges increasingly “curtail” the religious views of people in favour of other “social priorities”.
 
After studying a series of judgments throughout Britain, Europe and North America, he concluded there was a “clear trend” of judges favouring equality and non-discrimination over religious freedom.
 
Prof Trigg, a member of the university’s faculties of theology and philosophy, argued this was proof of how religion was coming under threat from the judiciary as part of a “hierarchy of rights”.
 
Prof Trigg, the founding President of the British Society for the Philosophy of Religion, said that as a result the courts were “limiting human freedom itself”.
 
“Religious freedom and the right to manifest religious belief is a central part of every charter of human rights,” he said on the eve of the launch of his book on Wednesday.
 
“But in recent years there has been a clear trend for courts in Europe and North America to prioritise equality and non-discrimination above religion, placing the right to religious freedom in danger.

“There should not be a hierarchy of rights, but it should be possible to take account of all of them in some way.”

He added: "No State can be a functioning democracy unless it allows its citizens to manifest their beliefs about what is most important in life."

Read here

By Gary Isbell, TFP

If the elaborate funeral ceremonies were not enough, it appears that North Korea is now sending in the “emotion police to chastise those who have not sufficiently mourned the late communist despot, Kim Jong-il.

by Dale O'Leary

From Christian Today

Christian groups are among the signatories of an open letter to the new North Korean leader appealing for an end to human rights abuses in the country.

The letter says that the 24.5 million people in North Korea are “living in fear” of arbitrary detention, disappearance, torture or death.

The groups condemn the decades-long mistreatment of North Koreans at the hands of the regime, including the detention of an estimated 200,000 men, women and children for political reasons in prison or labour camps.

They ask for an end to the incarceration of relatives of political prisoners because of ‘guilt by association’.

The political elite are condemned by the groups for living “like royalty” while millions of North Koreans suffer in the face of widespread hunger, malnutrition and a lack of healthcare.

The human rights groups call upon North Korea to meet its obligations under international treaties.

Read here

By Dale O'Leary

Hillary Clinton in a speech on Dec. 6 insisted that “gay rights are human rights.” It may be a good slogan, but it is a flawed concept. Those pushing so-called ‘gay rights’ calculated that they could win acceptance of their demand for radical social change if they presented their agenda as ‘rights’ and likened their struggle to that of women or blacks. They reasoned that using the word ‘rights’ would intimidate their opposition. They should not be allowed to succeed in this ruse.

It is true that persons who self-identify as gay, lesbian, bisexual or transgendered (GLBT) are human beings. They are, therefore, entitled to those rights with which we are all endowed by our creator. However, human rights are based on the truth about the human person. No one has a human right to do that which is impossible, to change the truth about the human person, to lie or deceive others. The so-called ‘gay rights’ being promoted by GLBT activists are not based on the truth about the human person.

Read here

From The Christian Institute

• Silence Christian street preachers;
• Prosecute Ben and Sharon Vogelenzang over a religious debate with a Muslim hotel guest;
• Threaten a teenage protester for calling scientology a "cult".