I believe that this nasty homophobe shouldn’t get anywhere near a court, unless of course he’s the defendant! Good riddance to bad rubbish I say.
Am glad McClintock didn’t get his way, the bigot that he is and he calls himself a christian? Hardly! More of a hypocrite than anything, as are most of them who use the bible to excuse their behavior and homophobia. Nobody is above the law, not even religious denominations, nor should they be, ever.
Actually, what McClintock fails to mention is that NARTH had already been discredited publicly by the American Psychological Association. Gay orientation was removed from the list of mental disorders as far back as 1973. It has provided no scientific evidence or published any of it in the scientific or medical journals either. It claims it has “cured” many but has never been able to produce anyone who can categorically state that they are straight. Its the biggest con game of all, fleecing a lot of vulnerable, deeply closeted gay people of thousands, if not millions of dollars and all they end up with is a life of misery and self-loathing.
The wind bag McClintock and people of his ilk should be put on notice, that we as gay and lesbian taxpayers should demand that our taxes not support any religious denomination, their charities and businesses. He wants the right to appeal the decision, then we too should be allowed to have our pink tax pounds exempt from supporting any institution that chooses to discriminate against us.
When are Civil Servants in the UK going to realise that they no longer have Crown Protection and are subject to Misfeasance in Public Office and the same EURH and Statutory Parliamentary rules that govern “their” judgments, APPLIES JUST AS MUCH TO THEM as the rest of us.And as pointed out by the tribunal “Gay couples have human rights too,”.
OO just reread the article:elements of his case wern’t confined to his christian faith, but he wanted to include expert “opinion” that gay people weren’t suitable to adopt. That this was even allowed as evidence is questionable; if the tribunal had found in his favour it would have accepted (formally at least) this argument.I wonder what his attitude would have been (on the bench) to anyone else being dimissed from a post held at the Crown’s pleasure on the grounds of sexuality?
Right on Robert, about the taxes, and that goes for here in the states too!
Dominick, thank you!As for the issue of providing health care to that infamous cleric, we can differ on that one. As a comparison, I doubt if any survivor of the holocaust would be comfortable providing health care to a former death camp nazi though.I find it extraordinary that these fundamentalist clerics can’t find adequate health care in their oil rich nations and I can’t believe they don’t have acess to some of the best doctors and facilities in their own societies. Israel is by far a poorer nation than Saudi Arabia and other OPEC nations, yet it has some of the best health care facilities in the world. To be cynical, I suspect this is beyond health care, more about politics and better access to the vast oil reserves. In politics, business comes first not human rights.