The religious rallied by torchlight outside the British Houses of Parliament recently. Inside the House of Lords they were voting whether to strike out regulations in the new Equality Act that outlaw discrimination and harassment of gays, making it illegal to discriminate in providing any goods and services to anyone, from healthcare to hotel rooms.
It was a test of strength between the religious and the secular. But the peers backed the government and voted against the amendment to throw out the Act.
Christians, Muslims and Jews had been fighting against the sexual orientation regulations saying: ”Nothing shall force an individual to act against his or her conscience or strongly held religious beliefs.” Anyone could use his or her ”conscience” to discriminate against gays.
The law does not stop religions from banning gays from joining their congregations or becoming priests. But it does oblige organisations or businesses offering services to the public to do so equally.
Bizarre and repugnant ads in newspapers from Christian organisers spread outright lies about the law. Their campaign whipped up homophobia still lurking under an apparently tolerant surface. Gay rights group Stonewall said it was horrified at the resurgence of threats and obscene abuse.
In an attempt to make their case, the religious brought up extreme scenarios where the law might affect them. Each was proved wrong.
They claimed it will ”force all schools to actively promote homosexual civil partnerships to children [from primary-school age] to the same degree that they teach the importance of marriage”. The curriculum does not ”actively promote” homosexuality. It does not even make sex education compulsory.
They claimed the law will ”force a Christian printing shop to print fliers promoting gay sex”. No, it will not. Not unless the same printers promote heterosexual porn too. They claimed a family-run guest house will be forced to let a double room to a transsexual couple, even if the family think it in the best interests of their children to refuse such a situation in their home. The law says nothing about transsexuals.
The National Secular Society complained to the Advertising Standards Authority. But the prurient situations the religious homophobes dreamed up continued. The Christian Concern for Our Nation, petitioning the Queen, claimed they ”love their neighbours”, but ”Christians earnestly desire the repentance and salvation of homosexuals”.
None of this might matter if it were just about the private practices of religious bigots. But faith groups run and are bidding to take over more social services. If they had won the debate, they would have been free to discriminate as they pleased.
In an earlier debate a member of the House said hospitals should be allowed to discriminate if they had a Christian ethos. Does that mean they do that now? Do they turn away gay Aids patients? He said a pro-life Catholic hospital should be allowed to turn away a lesbian for fertility treatment.
The Catholic adoption society said it will shut up shop if it has to allow gay couples to apply. Churches say they will never let out a hall to a gay organisation. Christians running soup kitchens say they want to refuse gays shelter and soup.
A Catholic archbishop threatened to withdraw all cooperation over schools and charity programmes if the law was not amended. A bishop said it will damage church work in inner cities.
In a democracy public services paid for out of general taxes cannot be held to ransom by the sexual fantasies of unelected service providers. These faith groups showed exactly why they should not be running the ever-growing number of schools and academies. Homophobic bullying is rife in schools: 15 to 25 children kill themselves every year due to bullying, many, if not most, tormented because they are perceived to be gay. So why are state schools being put into the hands of organisations that openly preach homophobia?
Recently there was an organised upsurge of religions protesting at secularism. However, secularists are not threatening to deny services to the religious: it is they who want to discriminate.
Today the faiths use their greatest firepower not to challenge gross inequality. What ignites their excitement is other people’s sexuality. Given an ounce of power they abuse it to deny basic liberties.
Last year they rallied to refuse the right to die with dignity. Now they are harassing gays. Religion might appeal to some on the left yearning for moral certainty in a complicated world. But this debate was a sharp reminder of the intolerance and illiberalism that comes with it. — Â