Updated
The European Parliament, meeting this week in Strasbourg, is scheduled on Thursday afternoon to debate the situation in Nigeria, with specific reference to the proposed ‘Same Sex Marriage (Prohibition) Act’.
This forms part of a session concerned with: cases of breaches of human rights, democracy and the rule of law in Guatemala, Cambodia and Nigeria.
Numerous motions have been filed: you can find links to them from this page (scroll down).
There is a news report here.
Jim N has pulled out the links to each of the motions here.
Update Friday
For what was agreed, see this EU press release: Human rights: killings in Guatemala and Cambodia, abuses in Nigeria.
10 CommentsThe Church of Sweden last December approved a Service of blessing for registered partnership.
You can read the English translation of this text, by going to Kelvin Holdsworth’s blog. (It’s a small PDF file.)
Here’s the news report from last December: Church of Sweden gives gay couples church blessing.
26 CommentsNo, not those faith leaders.
Matt Thompson reports here on this letter, Faith Leaders Condemn Repressive Nigerian Legislation and this HRW press release, Christian Leaders in US Condemn Nigeria’s Anti-Gay Bill.
Andrew Sullivan writes The Anglicans Out-Sharia Muslims.
An open letter to the Archbishop of Canterbury from LGCM about this is here.
21 CommentsUpdated and republished Tuesday evening
While the General Synod meets, Political Spaghetti continues to report on the progress of the legislation that is officially supported by the Church of Nigeria (Anglican Communion).
daily episcopalian reports the latest development affecting gay Anglicans in Nigeria here:
Pray for Davis, and write to Lambeth.
In a later report, Matt Thompson tells us that:
The Catholic Bishop Conference of Nigeria (CBCN) just announced their public support of Peter Akinola in a press conference in Abuja, condemning any group that might wish to make same-sex marriage lawful in Nigeria.
And in an even more recent posting, he reports that
The Nigerian Senate is expected to vote on the legislation this Thursday (less than 48 hours from now). The Nigerian House is ready to vote as well.
and provides a long list of contacts in Nigeria, the USA, and the UK (including Lambeth Palace) for those who wish to express their concern.
25 CommentsUpdated
Matt Thompson has comprehensive coverage of the pending Nigerian legislation at Political Spaghetti.
See his four five (so far) recent posts, One, Two, Three and Four; and now Five.
Passage Imminent III contains a detailed analysis of the Nigerian church’s position on all this, and notes that more than one Muslim legislator is reluctant to proceed.
According to the BBC:
The Christian Association of Nigeria (CAN), the umbrella body for Nigerian Christians, called for speedy passage of the law, describing same sex unions as “barbaric and shameful”.
And I saw no mention at all of this matter in the recent Communiqué from the Primates, or in any of the ensuing primatial statements so far.
Here is the most recent United Nations report:UN independent experts oppose proposed Nigerian ban on same-sex relationships.
12 CommentsA conference with this title was held last Saturday.
My own report of the conference appears in this week’s Church Times. The text of that report, on the CT website next week, is meanwhile reproduced here (with permission), below the fold.
A press release giving more details of the event is here. See also these pictures and audio files, the draft programme, and the full text of the statement made.
19 CommentsCardinal Murphy-O’Connor writes in today’s Telegraph that Regulation must not trump conscience.
This is presumably the first step in the campaign reported by Jonathan Petre Church to fight to defend role in public life.
As Ekklesia reports in Church accused of getting its facts wrong on faith-based welfare the National Secular Society is ready to respond.
The leader column in the Independent Leading article: New morality? If only… is unequivocal in its summary of the position:
… The affair has also shown how social attitudes have changed in most of Britain. A few decades ago, the prospect of officially sanctioned gay adoption would have caused outrage. But few people today take the view that gay couples should not be allowed to adopt. The debate has focused instead on whether Catholic[s] agencies have a right to exempt themselves from the law of the land.
But perhaps most significantly, the affair has shown the limits of organised religions to influence political power. Cardinal Cormac Murphy-O’Connor, the head of Catholics in England and Wales, wrote to every Cabinet minister to demand an exception for Catholic agencies. He was supported by the Church of England and the Muslim Council of Britain. It was a formidable coalition. But it failed.
Now the Cardinal accuses ministers of trying to impose a “new morality” in Britain. If this new morality means it will henceforth be impossible for religious groups to discriminate against people simply because they happen to be homosexual, we fail to see the problem with that.
Two links to the past that may be helpful to put all this in context:
First, this solution to the RC adoption agency problem is not original: see this report dated August 2006 from the San Francisco Chronicle SAN FRANCISCO Catholic agency finds way out of adoption ban Alliance with other groups gets around same-sex parent issue.
Second, this July 2006 Ekklesia report: Redeeming Religion in the Public Square.
Addition: Jonathan Bartley had this Thought for the Day on the radio this morning.
13 CommentsUpdated Tuesday morning
The Prime Minister has announced his decision.
BBC No exemption from gay rights law.
There appear to be potential difficulties about this in Scotland, BBC No exemption for church adoption.
Other reports in the Telegraph, Times and Guardian, and from Reuters.
Ruth Gledhill has a lot more on this, including exclusive, extensive comments from the Bishop of Durham: Durham damns Blair as ‘deeply unwise’.
Ekklesia has Blair confirms that Catholic adoption agencies will not be able to discriminate.
Later reports:
Guardian Catholic agencies given deadline to comply on same-sex adoptions
Independent Blair announces deal on adoption
Telegraph Church loses opt-out fight over gay adoptions
The Times Gay adoption laws will have no exemptions, Blair tells Catholics and Bishop scorns ‘arrogance’
Scotsman Church accuses Blair of ‘thought crime’ in row over gay adoption
Updated Thursday daytime
Following the initial report by Gary Gibbon on Channel 4 News that:
After meeting Labour backbenchers, the programme understands that Mr Blair won’t now be pushing for Catholic adoption agencies to be allowed an exemption from the law which will require them to place children with gay couples.
Downing St said Mr Blair would be seeking a “pragmatic solution” to the matter.
He would look to find agreement on how long they would have to wind up their operations after new gay rights regulations came into force.
The proposals, which result from last year’s Equality Act, are reported have caused a split in the Cabinet.
Mr Blair and Communities Secretary Ruth Kelly – a prominent Catholic – favouring an exemption, and colleagues including the Lord Chancellor, Lord Falconer, insisting that the rules should apply equally to everyone.
The regulations, being drafted by Ms Kelly’s Communities and Local Government department, must be approved by a vote of both Houses of Parliament before coming into effect.
other news sources have now confirmed this story:
Daily Mail Blair caves in over adoption laws
The Times Catholics get time to adjust to gay rights. Also this leader: Adopt a Compromise and this cartoon.
Guardian Cabinet rejects exemption on gay adoptions and this leader: Principle under pressure. And this comment by Madeleine Bunting Retreat on adoption and the Equality Act will crumble.
Stephen Bates has also written on this topic, both in the paper, The loving gay family and the archbishop next door and on Comment is free in Adopting the wrong attitude. Also, Two churches, one view and a question of conscience.
Telegraph Blair retreats over opt-out for gay adoption
Faith or career – the choice facing Kelly by Graeme Wilson and Jonathan Petre
BBC ‘No opt-out’ for Church adoption (has link to video report from last night’s TV news). There is also an audio clip from the Today programme here.
Independent Blair backs down over gay adoption law.
37 CommentsSee previous entry for the letter from Rowan Williams and John Sentamu and earlier press reports, including The Times today.
Dr Sentamu was interviewed on the BBC Today radio programme: listen here, about 6 minutes long.
Should Catholic adoption agencies be able to refuse to place children with gay couples? We speak to the Archbishop of York, Dr John Sentamu
Further press coverage:
Telegraph Churches unite against gay laws by Jonathan Petre and George Jones
Telegraph leader Sexual disorientation.
Guardian Archbishops back Catholic stance on adoption rights for gay couples by Will Woodward and Stephen Bates (another version of this story here).
Independent Cherie Blair ‘split Cabinet in Catholic adoption row
Independent Leading article: When the interests of child and church collide
and a report from last Sunday, Faith & Reason: Ruth Kelly, her hard-line church and a devout PM wrestling with his conscience.
Magnus Linklater in The Times Kelly must face her tragic end – to resign on principle.
Ekklesia Call for Kelly’s head as Blair ponders and C of E backs Catholics and Sentamu seeks to defend church against charges of discrimination.
Updated Wednesday evening
The Hansard record of debate starts here.
You can read what Lord Eames said here.
You can read what the Bishop of Southwell and Nottingham said here.
The following bishops voted in favour of the motion: Chester, Rochester, Southwell and Nottingham, Winchester. Also the cleric Lord Pilkington.
The following bishops or former bishops voted against the motion: Harries of Pentregarth, Worcester.
The Division list is here
Update Wednesday evening
Newspaper leader columns:
Minority Report in The Times
In praise of… the sexual orientation regulations in the Guardian
Updated Tuesday afternoon
The BBC and the Telegraph have extensive coverage this morning.
Telegraph Jonathan Petre Religions united in opposition to gay rights law
and James Mackay Should religious beliefs bow to gay rights?
BBC Faith rally over gay rights bill. Also the Today radio programme interviewed Lord Morrow, and Lord Mackay with Angela Eagle.
Press Association Protest over gay discrimination law
More significant politically perhaps than any of the above, the Trades Union Congress has published a press release and a detailed briefing paper.
Update In the Guardian, opinion columnist Polly Toynbee has Homophobia, not injustice, is what really fires the faiths.
The Evangelical Alliance has issued this curiously softly worded press release.
Update Tuesday afternoon
The Board of Deputies of British Jews has issued this statement:
On 4 January, the Daily Mail carried a story under the headline of “Muslims and Jews to join gay-laws protest”. The article referred to a statement by the Board of Deputies of British Jews and the inference, given the headline, was that the Board of Deputies had been working in concert with groups opposed to the proposed regulations.
The headline – together with the article – unfortunately misrepresented what was a very clear and balanced statement. The Board of Deputies would like to confirm that we have not campaigned with any other groups in relation to this matter and the statement that was given to the Daily Mail (reproduced below) was made solely in response to their request for a comment.
The Sexual Orientation Regulations will provide a further platform to combat discrimination in this country. It must be possible for people to live their lives in the manner in which they choose as long as it does not impinge upon the rights of others. We hope that to this effect the regulations will be framed in such a way that allows for both the effective combating of discrimination in the provision of goods and services whilst respecting freedom of conscience and conviction. These regulations are currently being debated and will be afforded due scrutiny before passing into law.
The Board of Deputies opposes discrimination on any grounds and recognises that the rights of those within our community and in wider society should not be infringed on the grounds of ethnicity, gender, sexual orientation, age, disability, religion conviction or for any other similar reason.
Another report now on the Telegraph website: Gay rights law protesters branded ‘hypocrites’.
And on The Times website: Gay rights laws draw religious protest.
At the Guardian the Press Association report is Church groups to march against sexuality law.
The latest Reuters report is Faith groups protest against gay rights bill.
The BBC has added Discrimination law controversy and Head-to-head: Gay rights law.
Ruth Gledhill has posted on her blog, Christians ‘torch’ SORs.
Ekklesia has published Faith groups are misrepresenting sexual equality rules, say critics. Also Evangelical leader attacks ‘aggressive’ opposition to SORs, and Northern Irish church heads unite in call to end bigotry.
The BBC story linked at the start of the day has been rewritten and headlined Gay rights laws challenge fails:
64 CommentsNew rules outlawing businesses from discriminating against homosexuals have been upheld in the House of Lords.
A challenge led by Lord Morrow of the Democratic Unionist Party failed by a majority of three to one.
Statement from Rev Malcolm Duncan, leader of the Faithworks Movement
8th January 2007
The Sexual Orientation Regulations: an alternative Christian perspective
For all those Christians and churches who are planning to demonstrate their opposition to the proposed Sexual Orientation Regulations (SORs), to be discussed in the House of Lords tomorrow, we want to voice concerns about this kind of virulent and aggressive approach:
1. There is misunderstanding of the SORs and their application
We are concerned that there is widespread misunderstanding of the SORs. They apply to the delivery of goods, facilities and services, but some Christians have misinterpreted the word ‘services’ to include religious ceremonies and rites such as baptism and blessing of same-sex unions, when this is clearly not the case. Churches will not be forced to ‘marry’ gay people. Likewise, youth groups and schools will not be prosecuted for not promoting a homosexual lifestyle.
We welcome the SORS as an attempt to ensure that goods and services are delivered inclusively and in non-discriminatory ways. It is right that any organisation receiving public funding should deliver services to genuine public benefit.
The delivery of goods and services can relate to situations such as hiring out of rooms, something many churches have voiced their concerns over. A commitment to diversity through doing this does not mean losing your faith identity: it actually presents an opportunity to develop a dialogue and put the Gospel into action through demonstrating love and service.
Government ministers have publicly answered questions of concern over the scope of the proposed legislation, and this information is freely available on Hansard, the record of proceedings in Parliament. The Government also made it clear in the consultation period that it would listen to the voices of religious groups. The Northern Ireland regulations already contain exceptions for religious organisations.
It is also important to remember that the measures contained in the SORs will not replace existing legislation on discrimination. Thus the protection from discrimination on the grounds of religion and belief that Christians currently enjoy will continue.
2. Double standards
Many Christians are very clear in their stance on the SORs as they relate to homosexuals. However, they have not articulated themselves so clearly when it comes to heterosexual relationships outside of marriage, which is something on which the Bible also contains clear teaching. Many opponents of the SORs have stated concerns that a Christian hotel owner would be forced to let out rooms to gay couples, but would they be as vociferous about letting out a room to an unmarried heterosexual couple? Why this inconsistency? It brings the Church into grave danger of sounding homophobic.
3. The SORs work both ways
The SORs do not refer exclusively to discrimination against homosexuals but to discrimination against people on the grounds of any sexuality. Just as a heterosexual could not discriminate against a gay person, neither could a gay person discriminate against a heterosexual person on grounds of their sexuality.
4. This legislation is an opportunity to demonstrate grace, inclusiveness and love
Christians are called to follow Jesus’ example, and he says remarkably little about sexuality in scripture. Rather, he treats all people he comes across with love and acceptance, and does not refuse his service to anyone, even if he does not agree with their lifestyle. Would it really be ‘Christian’ to refuse bereavement counselling to a gay man, or to exclude a gay person and their child from a parent-and-toddler group? We believe that Christian community organisations, and those of other faiths, can maintain their distinctive faith identities while still serving the needs of their whole communities. We do not interpret the new Sexual Orientation Regulations as a threat to that.
The Faithworks Movement is committed to inclusion and transformation. Thousands of members up and down the UK are working to build a better world by delivering services to their communities on this inclusive and non-discriminatory basis. The reality is that on a daily basis millions of Christians across the UK engage holistically, compassionately and inclusively with people in their communities.
The proposed SORs are an opportunity for Christians to demonstrate the love and grace of Christ. However, vociferous opposition, a lack of constructive dialogue, and threats of civil disobedience mean that the Church is in danger of sounding homophobic and is doing little to give itself a credible voice.
Rev Malcolm Duncan
Leader of the Faithworks Movement
115 Southwark Bridge Road, London, SE1 0AX
Tonight there will be an hour long debate in the House of Lords to consider Democratic Unionist Party peer Lord Morrow’s motion to annul The Equality Act (Sexual Orientation) Regulations (Northern Ireland) 2006, which came into force on 1 January, and which will also be the subject of a High Court case in March.
Equality Act (Sexual Orientation) Regulations (Northern Ireland) 2006
Lord Morrow to move that a Humble Address be presented to Her Majesty praying that the Regulations, laid before the House on 24 November, be annulled. 3rd Report from the Merits Committee (Dinner break business, 1 hour)
Written Answers in the House of Lords on this topic on 13 December were as follows:
7 CommentsEquality: Sexual Orientation
Lord Lester of Herne Hill asked Her Majesty’s Government:
Whether the Equality Act (Sexual Orientation) Regulations (Northern Ireland) 2006 would require all schools actively to promote homosexual civil partnerships to children from primary school age to the same degree that they teach the importance of marriage. [HL447]
Lord Rooker: No. The regulations are not concerned with what is taught in schools. That is rightly a matter for the Department of Education, Northern Ireland.Lord Lester of Herne Hill asked Her Majesty’s Government:
Whether the Equality Act (Sexual Orientation) Regulations (Northern Ireland) 2006 would require a printing shop run by a Christian to print fliers promoting gay sex.[HL448]
Lord Rooker: No. It would be entirely within the spirit of the regulations for a printing shop run by a Christian to refuse to print fliers promoting gay sex, so long as that printer also refused to print fliers promoting heterosexual sex outside the realm of marriage.Lord Lester of Herne Hill asked Her Majesty’s Government:
Whether the Equality Act (Sexual Orientation) Regulations (Northern Ireland) 2006 would require a family-run bed and breakfast to let out a double room to a transsexual couple, even if the family consider it to be in the best interests of their children to refuse to allow such a situation in their own home.[HL449]
Lord Rooker: No.Lord Lester of Herne Hill asked Her Majesty’s Government:
Whether the Equality Act (Sexual Orientation) Regulations (Northern Ireland) 2006 would make it illegal for a heterosexual police officer, fire fighter or member of the Armed Forces to refuse to join a Gay Pride event promoting the homosexual way of life.[HL450]
Lord Rooker: No.Lord Lester of Herne Hill asked Her Majesty’s Government:
Whether they have received representations from Coherent and Cohesive Voice, a network of Christian leaders about the Equality Act (Sexual Orientation) Regulations (Northern Ireland) 2006 (SI 2006/439); and, if so, when; how many representations have been received; and in what form.[HL451]
Lord Rooker: We have received no representations from this group.
An attempt by religious groups to delay the introduction of The Equality Act (Sexual Orientation) Regulations (Northern Ireland) 2006 on 1 January was rebuffed in the High Court. See this BBC report, Gay rights objectors lose action, and this earlier: Go ahead for gay rights challenge.
Last week, an attempt in the Northern Ireland Transitional Assembly to pass a motion calling on the government to withdraw the regulations was defeated by the narrowest of margins. See the earlier BBC report, Assembly clashes over gay rights.
For more background, read William Crawley’s blog, Will and Testament, in particular these articles:
21 Dec New Gay rights law gets the go-ahead
20 Dec Church leaders meet the minister over new gay rights law
18 Dec Christian groups challenge equality legislation
13 Dec The Equality Act
There is also this rather odd press release from the Church of Ireland.
The government’s analysis of the many responses to its consultation can be found in html format here.
Further links to government material here.
My earlier analysis of the religious exemption provided in the regulations is here.
6 CommentsAccording to the Independent this morning, in Kelly rejects call to extend Ulster gay rights to the rest of Britain:
A row has broken out in the Cabinet over how far the Government should go in outlawing discrimination against gays, lesbians and bisexuals.
Peter Hain, the Northern Ireland Secretary, has pushed through regulations in the province that will be tougher than the Government plans for England, Wales and Scotland. He has defied a call by Ruth Kelly, the Cabinet minister responsible for equality, to hold fire until a common approach has been agreed…
Meanwhile, the Tablet has a news report (only available to subscribers) about what the RC bishops in Northern Ireland said, and a leader column which you can read in full here: When tone matters.
According to Anglican Mainstream government telephones are besieged with phone calls from people concerning these proposals.
The Lawyers Christian Fellowship has published a press release concerning a survey of public opinion which it commissioned, and another press release summarising their view of progress: Opinion Poll Results Show Widespread Opposition To Sors; Annulment Of Sors Sought In Commons And Lords
51 CommentsThe Sun newspaper came to the support of the Bishop of Rochester: Gay law is bashed by bishop.
Two columns on Comment is free do not support the bishop’s point of view:
Andrew Brown The view from the inside (the URL is more descriptive than the title) and the strap is:
When religions discriminate against a minority group, they are also fighting for something fundamental about the freedom of religion.
and Theo Hobson Divine judgment on religion
The church is meant to signify unity between Christians, but the gay crisis has completely undermined this concept.
Meanwhile, the Evangelical Alliance has issued a Call for consultation, Andrew Marr interviewed Cardinal Cormac Murphy O’Connor on BBC TV on Sunday, and the Christian Institute issued this briefing on the Northern Ireland regulations (PDF file).
The latest statement from the Lawyers Christian Fellowship is here and also here. This Word document here is slightly older but is the source of some material attacking the regulations seen elsewhere, such as the Christian bookshop and Christian printshop examples of alleged difficulty.
30 CommentsDespite the extensive scope of the “religious exemption” provided in the Northern Ireland regulations, attacks on this legislation, and on the presumed extension of it into the mainland UK, continue from the Daily Mail, from the usual conservative Christian lobby groups, but also from various Christian leaders.
The paid advertisement in The Times yesterday can be seen in full here (PDF file). The group that sponsored this is Coherent and Cohesive Voice. This is an alliance of Black church leaders (“a network of hundreds of Christian leaders in the UK representing hundreds of thousands of voters”) including many names which can be found here.
Complaints about this advertisement can be made to the Advertising Standards Authority.
This group also issued a Briefing Paper last July which can be read here. Both documents contain statements about the effect of these regulations which are just not true.
Tomorrow’s Times carries several letters to the Editor about this matter. One of them is from the Minister for Equality, Meg Munn:
Sir, The Government is seeking to strike a balance between protecting the rights of religious groups and preventing discrimination against lesbian, gay and bisexual people.
This is a Government, and country, that has a proud record of tackling discrimination wherever it exists. But it is also a country that has a proud record of respecting people from all faiths and none.
No one is proposing that schools will have to promote homosexuality or that a priest will have to bless same-sex couples. But at the same time, it is wrong for gay teenagers to be refused emergency accommodation after being thrown out of their family home on the ground that they had chosen to tell their parents about their sexuality, or for lesbian and bisexual people to be denied access to essential healthcare.
MEG MUNN
Deputy Minister for
Women and Equalities
And in an interview, Meg Munn said:
16 Comments“It is right that there should be a public debate on these complex and difficult issues, but that debate should be conducted in a calm and measured way rather than through inaccurate and wild speculation.”
Update
There is an Anglican angle too: Daily Mail Steve Doughty Anglican bishop threatens to close youth clubs in protest at gay rights. And sidebar Seven out of 10 say beliefs should not be abandoned over gay rights
The bishop is Michael Nazir-Ali of Rochester.
There are several reports of what RC archbishop Vincent Nichols has been saying about what he perceives as the government’s intentions in bringing in the proposed new regulations discussed here previously.
Daily Mail Steve Doughty Don’t impose your morality: Catholic Archbishop attacks gay rights bill and editorial comment Blair and the moral backlash
Telegraph Jonathan Petre Archbishop warns of gay rights backlash
Universe Church Fires Broadside Over Government’s Moral Neutrality
Catholic Herald Gay rights law threatens Catholic adoption agencies
It’s rather difficult to see what justification exists for most of these concerns. The Northern Ireland regulations are clear in providing religious bodies with an exemption from almost all the requirements placed on everybody else. The effect is that discimination by a religious organisation, in respect of sexual orientation. is permitted:
(a) if it is necessary to comply with the doctrine of the organisation; or
(b) so as to avoid conflicting with the strongly held religious convictions of a significant number of the religions followers.
which should be easy for the Roman Catholic church to meet. Charitable bodies, whether or not religious, are also exempted, provided their actions are taken by reason of or in pursuance of their charitable instrument.
The two principles from which there is no exemption provided in Northern Ireland are:
Postscript: there was a full page advertisement in The Times today placed by a group called Coherent and Cohesive Voice, self-described as “a network of hundreds of Christian leaders in the UK representing hundreds of thousands of voters”. Follow this link to read the text of the advertisement. Several claims made in the advertisement are quite false.
79 CommentsAnother item from the BBC Sunday radio programme:
New think tank for animal rights opens
What rights, if any, do animals have? What’s described as the world’s first academy, to enhance the ethical status of animals, opens in Britain tomorrow. The Oxford Centre for Animal Ethics will act as an international think tank with its own online course, research initiatives and publications. It’s focusing in particular on the relationship between animal abuse and human violence. More than 100 academics from ten countries have agreed to become advisers in an attempt to put animals on the intellectual agenda. But, with many conflicting views on such issues as experimentation and organic farming, how effective will the centre be? Mike Ford reports from Oxfordshire.
Listen (6m 9s)
BBC Religion & Ethics – Animal ethics
The Oxford Centre for Animal Ethics
Evening Standard Think tank aims to spark animal ethics debate
There is also a Church Times report about this which I will link when it becomes public.
