At Christian Concern, we welcome the Prime Minister’s comments that Christians should be able to speak about Christmas in the workplace; that we should be proud of our Christian heritage and endorse the position that free speech is a 'jealously guarded principle'. We want to encourage and support Theresa May in this and we must pray for her.
However, the comments come in a confusing context – an array of other things that don’t quite stack up. The Prime Minister’s comments were subject to the proviso that our speech must be respectful and responsible. Perhaps the Prime Minister was referencing her comments about the young gymnast Louis Smith when she refused to condemn the death threats against him, the abuse and hounding by individuals; and his suspension by his sporting association for his (irresponsible) exercise of free speech.
Christian Concern notes the Reports by the Equality and Human Rights Commission and ResPublica and there is much to commend in them. However, we at Christian Concern and the Christian Legal Centre, arguably the primary ‘go to’ body for the defence of Christian liberty in our nation, that has lived out the cases and experiences written about in the reports, has much to say about the reality of what happened in the cases. We have much to say about the reality of what it means to manifest faith today in the workplace in our nation. The Court processes, representation in Court including cost balancing, the definition of religious organisation and the interplay of freedom of religion and non-discrimination are topics too large to canvas in this short comment piece. However, structural reform of a substantive nature is needed.
In the week, when a schoolteacher was disciplined for expressing her private views on marriage, one is entitled to think there is something seriously wrong with the moral compass of this country. The Prime Minister may have in mind, I don’t know, a few Christians simply and 'respectfully' expressing their joy of Christmas, provided they don’t express the view that marriage is between a man and a woman, or any criticism of Islam, or any exercise of genuine free speech that the government decides is not 'responsible'. It is the Prime Minister who was David Cameron’s chief implementer of the same sex marriage legislation; it is the Prime Minister who was the chief architect of extremism proposals that would seriously undermine gospel freedom in our nation, continue to be a present and persistent threat.
Again, it would take too long to tell the true story of what happens in our Courts when Christians ‘fight back’ against the system that would silence them; but in many cases it is far from fair and balanced by the Judges. In our marriage registrar, counsellor, social work cases, the Court describes Christians as those that would 'pick and choose which duties to perform'; who refuse to carry out duties due to 'hostility' to same-sex couples and that Christians, in effect, ‘wrongly discriminate against gay people’; and who say that the Christian understanding of marriage ‘is not a core part of religion’. In the Eweida case (BA cross case), at points, Judges called such litigation as pursuing a ‘sectarian agenda’ and the Court appeared to advocate a ‘blanket ban’ on all religious rights in the workplace.
The language is harsh and sets the tone for lower Courts in our country when adjudicating on Christian freedom cases.
At Christian Concern and the Christian Legal Centre, we seek to proclaim the truth of Jesus Christ and that the Truth and the Law and the Love that flow from Him are good not just for us but for each member of our society.
We are here to continue to proclaim that Truth and to defend Christians who get into trouble for simply living out that Truth.
Related links:
Beyond belief: Defending religious liberty through the British Bill of Rights (ResPublica)
Religion or belief: Is the law working? (Equality and Human Rights Commission)