Reader comments · London Registrar sues for right not to “marry” gay and lesbian couples · PinkNews

Enter your email address to receive our daily LGBT news roundup

You're free to unsubscribe at any time.


London Registrar sues for right not to “marry” gay and lesbian couples

Post your comment

Comments on this article are now closed.

Reader comments

  1. Robert, ex-pat Brit 18 May 2008, 9:29am

    This woman needs to know that it is our tax pounds that pay her salary. If she doesn’t understand that, then she should lose her job. Her religious beliefs are personal and therefore should be left at home, not bring them to her place of employment. My advice to her and others like her, get a life, lady, and grow up.

  2. Robert, you display the usual fascist idea shown all too often in the gay community of aiming to destroy anybody who does not agree with you.

    Putting it quite simply – this woman should not be forced to do something that goes against her religious beliefs. Plenty of provision is made for Islamics, so why not also for Christians?

    Would you like to be married by someone who is bound not to be enthusiastic because she disagrees with your lifestyle, or by a willing participant?

    Food for thought.

  3. Martin - C of E Clergy Civil Partner 18 May 2008, 10:41am

    The registrar is employed to perform civil registrations of partnership, and nothing to do with any form of religion. In any post within government, personal religious convictions are not an excuse for refusing to do your contractually binding job. The next excuse could be to not to save the life of a gay person in A & E because of a religious belief. Such an abuse of her legal post as a registrar is a cause for diciplinary action against her and must be upheld by the council as part of their legal requirement to abide by law. If she has such a problem, then I am sure that she can be accomodated in another cleric posting withi the local council that does not pose a threat to her personal beliefs.

  4. It’s a fascist idea to insist that someone employed in a secular job to conduct themselves in a secular fashion, as per their job description? What a strange world you must live in.

    By the way who cares if she’s enthusiastic? She’s not the one getting married. If she doesn’t like not being allowed to discriminate in her job, she’s clearly in the wrong job.

  5. Bob – the woman is not being forced to do something that goes against her personal beliefs. She is merely being asked to do her job.
    A pacifist is not forced to take a job in the army. An anti-abortionist is not forced to take a job nursing in an abortion clinic. If Lilian Ladele really has conscientious beliefs let her do what we all try to do – take a job which she can perform properly and with a clear conscience. She can live by her own beliefs if they are important to her, but she has no right to tell others what parts of her duties she will and will not perform.

  6. Robert, ex-pat Brit 18 May 2008, 12:50pm

    Bob,so I’m a fascist? You know NOTHING about me or my political beliefs which most certainly aren’t fascist or right wing conservative either as some are who post here. Read Jason’s comment and maybe you will find some food for thought. Nobody’s religious beliefs and NO denomination should be exempt from or above the law. You want to call people fascists, then take a look at organized religion, all of them, they are all undemocratic and absolute with no margin of tolerance. One’s religious beliefs have nothing to do with the workplace, they should be kept in the home, where they belong and definitely out of the political arena.

  7. Robert, ex-pat Brit 18 May 2008, 12:56pm

    To the Staff Writer of this article…since when have UK gay couples been allowed to marry? I’m unaware of it. Should not you have said…”as she demands the right not to perform a civil partnershp?” These are most definitely not marriages and should not be referred to as such. So much for accuracy in reporting.

  8. Robert, ex-pat Brit 18 May 2008, 1:57pm

    Bob, further to your question, it would not bother me one iota if a registrar performing my own civil partnership disagreed with my “life”, NOT lifestyle…sexual orienation is NOT a lifestyle, or sexual orientation. They have a job to do, so they should do it, irrespective of their personal beliefs. I don’t think that’s very fascist of me either. As I said in a previous posting, there should be no provision for exemption based on one’s religious beliefs when it comes to the work place or public duty. NO RELIGION should be exempt or above the laws of the land, that is not how democracy works, everybody is subject to the law.

  9. Bob so where does this stop. A dying gay man not being treated because a doctor is relgious??? She is paid a wage to do a job for every one. I would like to have the option to stop dealing with relious people of all faiths , but I am not aloud and rightly so. We live in a fair and caring society, and this should transend throughout.

  10. elizabet veldon 18 May 2008, 5:23pm

    just why do the Christians come on hear and spread their hatefilled messages? Anyway…

    I see case after case being taken to court and, on the whole, won where Religious types (of any persuasion) seek to gain power and infulance over the Seculer State.

    Welcome to the death of the seculer state.

    We have to stand up against these people – even if the courts and laws of the land are being used to further their ends against us and other groups.

  11. Bill Perdue, RainbowRED 18 May 2008, 7:28pm

    I suppose this was inevitable given Boris’s election. Now all the right wing nuts and haters will come climbing up from the sewers to demand their “right” to be bigots. They have no right of course, except in the minds of a few cretins like “Bob” who are consumed by self loathing and internalized homophobia. We can feel sorry for pathetic people like “Bob” but we should never give an inch to their delusional homophobia.

    If “Bob” wants to find a real fascist he should book the next flight to the Vatican. Der Pope is an “ex” Nazi who joined the HitlerJugend and was rewarded with a plush assignment to a Luftwaffe flak unit, where he happily tried to shoot down allied aircraft. Or “Bob”: could look for fascism in the political descendents of the Tory Clivden Set. He wouldn’t have far to look.

    Please, “Bob” explain to us why you conservative types think you can get away with slandering honest activists. You raise the most outrageous lies and slanders against us, saying we’re racists (me), fascists (Robert), child molesters (those who protest police homophobia) and what you conservatives said about Omar Kuddus when he was giving his all to save Mehdi Kazemi was vile and meant to interfere with his work. Except for the occasional imbecile, no one believes you. You fail to impress, twit.

    The truth is that we’re queer (and militant) and we’re here and take my word for it, we’re not going away. Deal.

  12. If this woman has such strong Christian beliefs, the only thing she can do is gracefully resign her position. She clearly can no longer do her job.

  13. Re Bob’s comment: “Putting it quite simply – this woman should not be forced to do something that goes against her religious beliefs.”

    Bob, if that woman who refuses to officiate over same-sex unions wants to hold to a 2000 year old book as her excuse – and she has every right to – then she should be in the home, not out in a man’s world and a man’s work force…as the good book says, “a woman’s work, employment, or task is to be working in, and watching over the home”. In my opinion, she can’t cherry pick which dictums she wants to use from the bible and which she prefers to ignore. In other words, she can’t have it both ways.

  14. Please, religious types listen up. If I was a vegetarian, could I take a job in a slaughterhouse, and when asked to kill a few cows, say, “no, sorry, my personal beliefs do not allow me to kill animals, and I’ll go to court if you try to make me”.

    If this lady was being forced to work as a registrar, and was not allowed to do any other line of work, then yes, of course she would have a point, and I’d agree. But she does not have to work as a registrar, as I am sure there are many other jobs she could do. Besides, if I recall correctly, another council employee tried the same thing, was sacked, and LOST an appeal for unfair dismissal. This lady is free to choose what job she does, just as I can choose not to work in a slaughterhouse.

    Typical religious nonsense.

  15. This woman is NOT being FORCED to do anything. She is quite free to go work at something else. Performing civil partnership is part of the job of a registrar, if she doesn’t like it, she can do something else. No coercion of any kind is involved.

  16. She should not be forced. The only time she should be forced is if she is the only one able to perform the unions.

  17. We have this kind of nonsense in the Netherlands where “weigerambtenaren” have the right to opt out of performing civil marriages, and have the support of the Christian Democrats and fundamentalist Christian Union parties who are in the Dutch coalition.

    Religious fanatics like this silly woman should understand we are governed by English law and not the laws of the bible or any other holy book. Civil marriages are not marriages in the eyes of ‘God’, or any other fictional celestial dictator. If you cannot do your job according to the law of the land, because of childish superstitions – find another job. You are not forced to be a regsitrar after all. For instance, I do not feel discriminated against because my anti-theism precludes me from a job as a cleric.

    Stop all this self-pitying nonsense about being “discriminated against” because you cannot exercise your bigotry.

    It would be more than a watershed if this woman won her case: why stop at allowing christians exemption from performing gay marriages? Why not extend this to, say, muslim supermarket personnel from refusing to sell alcohol at the check-out, or pharmacists refusing to sell the morning after pill, or condoms?

    Freedom of religious belief is one thing – but that must be matched with the right to freedom from it. Keep your religion inside your church, and stop imposing your superstitions on others who want nothing to do with it. Zero tolerance for intolerance!

  18. Said Adrian:”Freedom of religious belief is one thing – but that must be matched with the right to freedom from it.”

    Nicely put, Adrian.

  19. This story reminds me of a friend of mine who is a waiter, and a vegan. He has decided that he doesn’t eat any animal products, wear leather, etc., but the restaurant where he works serves many animal products–meat, cheese, milk, butter, etc.

    Does he threaten not to serve animal products to people who order them because it goes against him conscience. Of course not! Would he be able to sue the restaurant if it fired him over this? Ugh. That’s ludicrous.

    That would be ludicrous. He’s not down with meat, but because he needs a job he keeps his mouth shut and his opinions to himself. He has a right to think whatever he wants, and to do his job as is required of him.

  20. In my opinion, Chris’ comment about the vegan waiter really sums it up and although it makes commenting on my part superfluous, I couldn’t resist a “Hear! Hear!” :)

  21. Sounds like you’re the fascist there Bob, not Robert. The choice of words like “lifestyle” is the give-away.

  22. Let me guess Bob, you’re one of these “Christian” twits who thinks everyone should do everything you say to validate your own petty belief system? The word like “lifestyle” gave it away. Do you really think we “choose” this life? Coffee-smelling-moment for you here Bob, we’re born gay. Its not a lifestyle. Rather like the way you bigots I assume were born idiots. Now, as we tolerate your ignorance, its time you started doing the same, no?

  23. Robert, ex-pat Brit 19 May 2008, 10:46am

    A big thank you to Bill, Michael, Jason, Anon, Ciaran, Adrian T and to everyone who commented on Bob’s misguided view even though I respect his right to say what he believes, please or offend. That’s what democracy is all about.

  24. I’m one of the many Christians whose understanding of their faith tradition mandates them to promote the human rights of all people, including LGBT sisters and brothers. Please don’t associate Christianity in general with the fears and prejudices of those who decline to bring historical or cultural criticism to their reading of the Bible. There are plenty of Churches that openly challenge discrimination against persons on the grounds of sexual orientation. See Inclusive Church at

  25. Robert, I am delighted to hear about your includive church. Though, I wish you more enlightened Christians would be a bit more aggressive in getting your message out. And above all, clearly explain how homosexual relations are fine from a theological, rather than a humanitarian, perspective. Not in gay times, but in rags like the Catholic Herald or the Daily Mail etc.

    I have to take my hat off to Christian Voice and others for their media relations skills, always offering press releases and comments to the newspapers etc, and making themselves look bigger and more influential than they are, in the process. Who needs richard dawkins, when you’ve got the likes of stephen green, joel edwards, cormac murphy o’connor and the bishop of carlisle, to put rational thinking people off religion?

  26. Hold On! This lady is only asking that her Council respects her faith in the way they share ceremonies between registrars. As a retired officer who conducted over 10,000 ceremonies I would have expected the same condieration. Discrimination on religious grounds is illegal – unless I misread it and Christians are not included.

  27. “Discrimination on religious grounds is illegal”

    And, Ed B, so is discrimination of gay people in relation to services, or are you saying that its okay to pick and choose the laws that suit you? This small woman is just being asked to do her job within the confines of the law. If she can’t so that job, she should quit. Using the bible and “faith” as a means to discriminate is not a valid argument, no more then using the bible to discriminate against black people or women. Time to grow up Ed and realise that your brand of bigotry is illegal, no matter what warped view you think you have of the bible.

  28. I note with interest that the registrar is black. Maybe we ought to tell her to wear a bag over her head so we can’t see her “blackness”. Maybe then she will understand what it is like to be discriminated against. Honestly, this sort of santimonious attitude makes me feel so angry.

  29. Kevin in USA 13 Jul 2008, 1:59am

    It really bothers me when a black woman is a bigot! Maybe the white registrars need to sue not to marry blacks. See how that sits with her!

These comments are un-moderated and do not necessarily represent the views of PinkNews. If you believe that a comment is inappropriate or libellous, please contact us.