The head of British Catholics wrote to Tony Blair recently to ask for an excemption for Catholic adoption agencies so there wont have to give children to Gay couples but it seems it was refused. So Christians have been forced to to accept the States Secular liberal morality is this really democratic?
2007-01-23 03:58:28 · 11 answers · asked by jack lewis 6 in Politics & Government ➔ Government
Many are missing the point what im arguing is that the state is taking away the church 's right to follow its conscience and morals . Its impossing its secular values on Christians Jews and Muslims. This also effects private B&Bs so Christians will have to accept gay couples . So in my opinion this does undermine Religious Freedom . In public services like the NHS of course there should protection agaisnt discrimination and what people do in there homes is there affair but the state should not dictate who private B&Bs let in.
2007-01-24 01:33:10 · update #1
Yes it is and brings back awful memories of the suppression of the Church in Stalinist Russia. There really is no need for this heavy handed treatment. The RC church is not so much anti gay as pro children. The Church believes that the best upbringing for a child is with a mother and a father. Whilst it will not allow gays to adopt children from Catholic agencies it does refer them to agencies that will accept gay applicanrts. It is time that the gay movement accepted the considerable it progress and acceptance that it has achieved and put a stop to telling the mainstream community what to do.
2007-01-24 23:59:09 · answer #1 · answered by Beau Brummell 6 · 1⤊ 1⤋
Religion does not control the law in the UK, thats part of our culture - we have a secular government.
Having a Secular Government actually promotesd religious freedom.
If one certain religion - Protestantism, Catholicism, Islam etc controlled law that would in turn mean oppression and removal of rights to other religions as they would in theory be "breaking the law" by belonging to a different religion (hence the reason most British people would be horrified at the idea of introduction of Muslim law into British law).
By keeping law secular it means that everyone has a right to beleive what they want - the law is a separate thing altogether! Gone are the days 100s of years ago when people could be burned at the stake as "heretics" for being of the "wrong" religion (Protestant when a Catholic was on the throne, Catholic when a Protestant was on the throne etc) .
That is why the British Catholic adoption agencies cannot have special arrangements made for them. If you live in the UK you follow our laws. You can beleive/worship what and how you like - Protestant, Muslim, Jewish, Catholic etc - but you obey the law. The law is independent of religion.
Otherwise we'd have to give would-be Islamic Suicide bombers the "right" to blow up packed Underground trains as they could argue it tells them to do so in the Koran so doing so is part of their "religious freedom".
2007-01-23 04:07:43 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 1⤋
Yes this is democratic. Are you seriously suggesting the government should pass a law saying you shouldn't be allowed to discriminate unless you really, really feel you must.
The law should apply equally to everyone. Religion is not an excuse to follow different rules.
EDIT:
Sorry we are not missing the point. If something is deemed wrong in law, it is wrong for everybody no matter what they believe, or are you claiming religious beliefs somehow trump other beliefs?
Take the Hashashin sect of Islam. They followed a version of Islam that was heavily into assasination. Using your logic they should have an opt out for the murder laws.
2007-01-23 10:30:36 · answer #3 · answered by Bob-bob 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
i do no longer understand a lot approximately Cherokees, yet there are various of Navajos and Paiutes the place I stay. whether i think of there could nonetheless be Cherokees in Oklahoma (I on no account truly dealt with any of the interior of sight American inhabitants on a similar time as there yet there's a city named Cherokee for the inhabitants that a minimum of as quickly as grow to be compelled there.) so which you're able to desire to come to the Americas and discover out somewhat greater approximately them. :) we've the comparable subject with the FLDS human beings in Texas remarkable now. Everyones like, the "Mormons" this the "Mormons" that. whilst truly - those human beings are not "Mormons". they seem to be a injury off - like Catholicism is to Judaism & Roman paganism, or like the Lutheran church is to Catholicism - geneology clever. those human beings do no longer even have the comparable thought device in any respect.
2016-11-26 21:09:26 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Your argument collapsed when you lapsed to 'christians' and not 'catholics'. Not all christians are homophobic. The catholic church may be officially so but it does not mean that the rest of the country has to be so as well.
2007-01-23 04:54:54 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
Must admit I haven't a clue what SORS is all about, I know I have SORS as a system on my new TV?
Having said that , I would much prefer the elected Govt to curb religious freedom than have it the other way round, imagine religion curbing Govt, they already have haven't they, and who voted them into power? (Please don't tell me God)!!!
I would be very happy to see all religion completely 'curbed' out of business altogether.
2007-01-23 04:32:50 · answer #6 · answered by budding author 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
speaking as a (lapsed) catholic i see this as perfectly democratic. the government was voted in using a democratic process and this is legislation thats been passed in the lords (ok not so democratic). we as a society really have to make a stand against religious dogma overuling secular values. you do it for one religion you have to do it for all...and the last thing we need is a bunch of fanatics running the country. check out the taliban and their contribution to world culture
2007-01-23 04:05:30 · answer #7 · answered by Pilgrim 2 · 3⤊ 1⤋
It will be interesting to see Blairs response. He has already stuffed the Country with his muti culturalism and to place innocent children with weirdos will only serve to confirm his journey to Hell.
2007-01-23 04:38:58 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 2⤋
It's as democratic as Thatcher's anti-homosexuality laws.
2007-01-23 04:12:22 · answer #9 · answered by Stammerman! 5 · 1⤊ 2⤋
New McLabour curbs freedom wherever it can.
2007-01-23 22:53:51 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋