Reader comments · Christian registrar Lillian Ladele refused leave to appeal to Supreme Court · PinkNews

Enter your email address to receive our daily LGBT news roundup

You're free to unsubscribe at any time.


Christian registrar Lillian Ladele refused leave to appeal to Supreme Court

Post your comment

Comments on this article are now closed.

Reader comments

  1. I really wish you would go away love there are far more important things for the courts to deal with than your homophobia.

    You was a public servant who refused to provide a service to gay couples but happy to take their financial contribution which went to make up your salary each month.

    I think you were misled when they said the missionary position is that how you had a child out of wedlock? Weren’t so religious then, having unprotected sex outside of marriage.

    You the sort of person who probably thought Free Willy was a adult sex film.

    I’m pleased you have been refused leave to appear to the Supreme Court. I hope you’re out of work for ages. Hopefully there will not be many employers willing to offer you employment with such vile disgusting views.

    The Christian Institute surely could spent their money on more productive causes such as youth centres?

  2. Why are the Christian Institute supporting her?

    They consider her to be the whore mother of a bastard child (Lilian has a child out of wedlock).

    I suppose Christians hate gay people more than whores.

    Not surprising. Religion is defined by hatred after all.

    Oh – and good luck at the ECHR – they’ll laugh you out of court.

  3. Great news but yet another Christian who wants their own right to hate and discriminate. So long as religion has the upper hand they will continue to feel that discrimination is their right, God forbid it should ever be to them mind!

  4. So by her reckoning, if someone who believes in the doctrines of the BNP work for the counci, they should be able to discriminate against black people like her – or is it just christians who should have the freedom to hate whoever they want?
    I hope her kid grows up to be gay.

  5. That kid ain’t half gonna grow up with some bitter, twisted views!

  6. Good. Apart from being discriminatory, her case is illogical and just plain stupid. She had no problem marrying other people disapproved of by the Bible (divorcees, for example), yet she couldn’t perform CPs? Yeah, right.

  7. Religious or other belief should give no dispensation from the law, especially to people paid by the tax-payer. Legal immunity to burn heretics or witches, anyone? I do wish these mad nuisances would just bugger off.

  8. Her again? I hope this is the last we hear of her.

    I was shocked when she won her first case and was very pleased to see this great injustice rectified in later verdicts. As someone has said before, if she won, who could stop her from refusing to marry divorcees, and what about those who’ve has sex before marriage? A verdict in her favour would potentially free these people to conduct their own religious witch-hunts in councils throughout Britain by denying services to anyone who doesn’t comply to their beliefs.

  9. Mumbo Jumbo 9 Mar 2010, 2:46pm

    “When the rights of different groups clash, as they have in my case, surely there must be a proportionate attempt to balance those competing rights.”

    Indeed. But mere beliefs (such as religion or racism) must always count for a smaller proportion than an intrinsic quality (such as sexuality or skin colour) – otherwise the BNP would be able to discriminate against you, Lillian.

    “In my case, one set of rights was trampled by another set of rights.”

    For the reasons above, you should be grateful that this basic principal has been upheld.

  10. Mihangel apYrs 9 Mar 2010, 2:49pm

    Two points:
    “Her lawyers have argued she was the victim of a witch-hunt and was shunned by her colleagues for refusing to carry out civil partnerships.”

    It seems they think that people she worked with had to pander to her bigotry

    CP isn’t marriage. It was specifically invented to avoid avoiding these religionist bigots, but she can’t even accommodate that.

    I’ll say again: public servants have to perform all their duties for eevery member of the public,not just the ones they approve of.

  11. A christian bigots, they never change.

    If she won the appeal – we’d be setting ourselves up for 10 kinds of hell. Discrimination laws would mean nothing – we could be denied services, goods, housing, even government services it seems on the strength that a Christian has a religious duty to hate us.

    That’s dangerous. And I doubt very much we would tolerate someone’s religious belief telling them they couldn’t marry black people – so why should we tolerate this woman’s bigotry?

  12. Sparky’s right
    doesn’t she see that she had a job that she was paid to do and that she can’t trample on others rights just cos she cherry-picked to support homophobia using a mistranslated, re-edited and misunderstood book

  13. Personally, I hope she takes it to Europe, because apart from putting the final nail in the coffin with a ruling comparable to this one, the longer the christian institute have to shell out a shed load of money to pay for it all, the less they’ll have to fund other cases and I reckon whoever is behind their funding, will only put so much in the coffers before saying enough is enough.

  14. It will only serve to reinforce the impression that Christians are being pushed to the sidelines of public life.

    GOOD, it is just a chain of thoughts that can be changed whenever. People are born gay. If we make allowences for her relgion , what about other relgions, those that have the right to kill if they disagree with anything. Do we make allowences for those as well.

  15. This woman is a pure idiot. Shouldnt we take her to court for taking money(salaries) without fulfilling the responsibilities thereof?

    She hated gay people so and still survived on our hard earned tax which funded her salary? But what do you expect, even her God kills for no reason and do not have any record of fair trial other than jungle judgement. Thrash.

  16. Meanwhile the CI has had its days in court, squandered its donors’ money and Ms Ladele has made herself unemployable. Imagine next job she worked at was in John Lewis and she refused to sell a double bed to a gay couple! The woman is a pitiable pawn in the hands of the homophobic CI fronted by Mike-I-have-gay-friends-Judge.

  17. Erroll Clements 9 Mar 2010, 5:01pm

    She’s like a NASTY bad smell, she just doesn’t go away !!! All these desperate needy people who’ve just been involved in two earthquakes, why don’t the people funding this b***ch, rather use their money where it is really needed.

  18. As has been said before – religion is a choice – being gay is not! Anyone else unable to do the job they are paid for would be sacked. Maybe some kind soul could give her a job polishing the pews and arranging the flowers in church. There would be an outcry if she had refused to marry mix raced couples or divorcees! Let her take her prejudices elswhere.

  19. douglas in canada 9 Mar 2010, 5:02pm

    I wonder what all was part of her job, even before CP’s. Surely there must have been people coming in to ask for marriage licenses or other services that were ‘against’ her beliefs. Did she discriminate against them, too? As a civil servant, her duty is to the government she represents. If that government comes up with new rules, rules which she may or may not like, she has two options – stay or leave.
    Can you imagine a sign painter on gov’t salary who doesn’t like “new speed limits”, so he continues to paint signs listing the old limits?
    Can you imagine a gov’t alcohol retailer [alcohol is sold in gov’t run stores in Canada] who chooses NOT to sell to certain people?
    This woman has every right to her beliefs, but not at the expense of other people’s rights, especially when it is a registrar’s job to work on behalf of the GOVERNMENT, not on behalf of any religious institution.
    If she has an internal conflict between her beliefs and her job, and the job isn’t going to change, she either has to modify her own thinking or get out.

  20. human being + christianity = blind fool

  21. Hmmmm nothing to do with this new item!!! which quite frankly is boring now.

    But what’s happened to Brian Burton? he was a very regular contributor until quite recently, hope he’s ok!! come back Mr Burton.

  22. She really needs psychiatric help with some sort of attention seeking disorder. She was even mentioned during a recent debate in the House of Lords; even that hasn’t satisfied her.

    If she doesn’t like it, her coat’s not nailed to the wall. She can emigrate. (I assume her family did so sometime in the past.)

  23. All I can say to her is: Ha ha b*tch, you lost – even if it might be immature to say so

  24. Isn’t civil marriage against her religion also?

    I mean ‘god’ hasn’t blessed civil marriages so straight couples with a civil marriage should also be against her religious beliefs.

    Ladele is anb annoying dullard.

  25. It is a good idea for her to emigrate, perhaps returning to her family’s country of origin.

  26. Ms Ladelle is no Christian, she is a bigot. Likewise the commentators here who label all people of faith as hateful. There are plenty of us who reference the Bible in our daily lives to validate love, compassion and equality not the garbage she speaks. There are over 3,000 verses in both Testaments that talk to the issue of poverty, only 11 on human sexuality. Interesting where people like Ms Ladele choose to selectively interpret the Bible and focus their energies. By labeling her as “Christian” the media perpetuates the falsity that faith and being gay are incompatible. We need stronger condemnation from the Churches themselves on this attack on equality.

  27. Jesus had a chance to save a slave. Only he didn’t, simply telling him to be the best slave he can. Oh slavery is allowed in the bible.

  28. I’m ashamed to think there are still public servants of color who are outrageously bigoted. Oh, I forgot, she must be a Jehovah’s Witless. D’oh….
    Score: 1 for Human Rights, 0 for bigotry.

  29. BrazilBoysBlog 9 Mar 2010, 7:42pm

    @26 “By labeling her as “Christian” the media perpetuates the falsity that faith and being gay are incompatible. We need stronger condemnation from the Churches themselves on this attack on equality. ”

    Indeed, but the churches themselves are the problem. Look at the catholic church. I have no problem with people reading, gaining comfort from, and even trying to live their lives along with the teachings of a BOOK… (even though I think it a work of complete fiction) What I do object to is when these idiots decide that everyone else should also do the same. When these idiots decide to take gay peoples tax dollars in salary, yet decide they are going to refuse them the services and same protections in law… All because their little magic book tells them to. (as far as they read into it).

    I think this woman should be sued for some back pay because she clearly thought she could selectively apply her labours on our behalf, again, because her little book told her so.

    Personally, I worship the great and all powerful Jeffrey Archer.

    I try to live my life according to the valuable lessons and scriptures in his books..

    And, let´s face it, his books have exactly the same claim to accuracy and fact that the other best seller on the fiction list has! (The bible)

  30. Why does the Christian Institute continue to fund and push Lillian Ladel’s case ???

    Come and find out about the Christian Institute by joining a group of us who challange the Christian Institute’s presence on face book.!/pages/The-Christian-Institute/78436661801?ref=mf

  31. Check out what the Telegraph are saying about the Lillian Ladele case.

    Tell me what you think of the comment from the Christian Institutes spokes person “Mike Jude” quoted in this article

  32. Surely, if the bible has anything to do with it, she would be shunned, probably even worse, for having a child out of wedlock. I mean to say, what would be Pope say. I bet a few years down the line you’ll probably read she’s converted to Islam and demanding to wear a burqa at work. Mind you, it would probably suit her.

  33. The woman is deluded! Civil Partnership is a civil contract between two qualifying adults, and whilst the rights and responsibilities that attach to it are identical to those of civil marriage, they ahve nothing to do whatsoever with marriage in its religious understanding. LL is mistakenly leaning on her freedom of religious belief to justify her homophobia. She’s welcome to – I don’t expect we’ll change her mind. But that’s no reason why the state should finance her prejudices by giving her a job. Simple.

  34. Rev Laurie Roberts 10 Mar 2010, 12:38am

    On the other hand — NO WAY would I want her or anyone like her officiating at MY Civil Partnership.

    No way Hosey !

    But straying into racism is no remedy for her anti-gay BS

  35. Shouldn’t that be José ?

  36. friday jones 10 Mar 2010, 1:06am

    Hey, what if there was a Shiite Muslim on the Council who disapproved of her uncovered hair and her apparent extramarital sex, could he chuck some stones at her or would telling him he can’t do that be “oppressing his religious beliefs?”

  37. This week is looking like mostly a good news week…. one self loathing @anti-gay’ senator admits he’s gay, and now this hateful wretch has been refused permission to appeal.

    And quite right too… if this woman can’t do her job within the confines of the law, then she has one obvious choice:- resign.

  38. In my youth we were taught to sing `And they’ll know we are Christians by our love, by our love’ now the song is `They will know we are Christians by our hate, by our hate.’ I am delighted by the Court’s ruling.

  39. Rev Laurie Roberts 10 Mar 2010, 11:20am

    Shuldn’t that be José ?
    Comment by arfur — March 10, 2010 @ 1:00
    Oh, yes, thanx Arfur ! I was strugglin …

  40. Waste of court time; she should be made to pay costs.

    The Bible doesn’t support homophobia anyway; numerous theologians have debunked the so-called “clobber” passages. And even if it did support homophobia, many of its social and sexual mores (apart from the ones about being nice to other people) are irrelevant in the 21st century. As is often said, I do hope these people avoid wearing clothing of mixed fibres, and sowing seeds of two different kinds in the same field…

    Homophobia is not a core value of Christianity, so these people are out of step even with their own religion!

  41. This is no surprise, Europe has turned into a cesspool of non-believers. Turning churches into bars!! Really is anyone surprised the courts don’t care about the freedom to practice ones religion.
    What a pitiful life homosexuals have, their entire identity based where they put their penis.

  42. Bobby – the freedom to be religious doesn’t mean you can push it on others or claim you shouldn’t do the duties of the job you are employed for
    homosexuals don’t define self by where the penis goes unlike he homophobes/bigots

  43. Robert Halfhill 16 Mar 2010, 3:46am

    First, in a democratic society with freedom of religion, the government does not discriminate against some religions. It does, however, forbid the various religions from trying to murder or commit other criminal acts against members of other religions. This means that the government must make employment freely available to members of all religions but it also means that no government employee may use the authority their government position gives them to refuse to provide government services to or make negative remarks about members of other religions. If that were not the case, the government could violate their religious rights through government employees who belong to other religions refusing to provide government services to them.

    We had a similar situation in my own country, the United States, in the 1950’s and 60’s when inhabitants of the U.S. southern states complained that their states rights were being violated when the federal government finally begin to forbid them from discriminating against Black people.

    And in Minneapolis, Minnesota, when it emerged that Christian employees of the City’s correctional institution were telling Lesbian inmates that being a Lesbian was wrong and a homophobic psychiatrist involved in traing the city’s police was using his position to promote his homophoc views, the Christians bleated like martyrs. “Is there any position where Christians are not excluded in Minneapolis city government?” one of them whinned. Well, yes, there are many positions for you and the city and state human rights departments will come to your defense if you are ever discriminated against because of your religion. But you may not use your position in government to discriminate against others, and, if you do, there is no and should be no place for you in government.

    Bigots always make themselves objects of such well deserved conempt when they whine and bleat like martyrs that their rights are being violated when they are no longer allowed to discriminate and persecute!

    And lastly, I reject the charge by another commenter that we are “going into racism” because many commenters pointed out that she could be discriminated against because of her race if government employees could discriminate against and claim that their rights would be violated if they were not allowed to continue discriminating.

    In fact, it is in order for me to go even further. Both Blacks and Gays have been discriminated and persecuted by the same people, the members of the capitalist class who were at the head of the expanding Euro/American mercantile and then industrial system. As victims of the same people, we should be allies. But, unfortunately, Blacks tend to be the most fervent adherents of the same Christian religion that has persecuted Gays for two thousand years and defended the enalaving of Blacks. If I WERE a racist, which I am not, I could say, “See, I can prove to you that Black people are intellectually inferior to whites. They are so stupid that they even bought into and became the most fervent converts of the religion of the very people who enslaved them!”

    That would not be a valid argument because lower class whites make as big a fools of themselves as members of those Pentacostal churces. And my own community, the Gay community, provides many fervent adherents of the Metropolitan Community Church and other Christian groups. Sometimes, when I see Gays clinging to the religion that spent the better part of 2000 years burning us alive at the stake, its enough to make you think those homophobis psychiatrists, Bieber and Soccarides, who say there is something wrong with our minds are right. But I do not think that. It is precisesly the groups for whom things are bad in this world, such as Gays and Blacks and Women, who spend most of their energies anticipating the joys of an immaginary better world. But, still, someone needs to point out the absurdity of Blacks who have been victims of Christianity having their bigotry against a group of fellow victims ot that same religion, Gays, aroused and justified by that very same religion.

    Robert Halfhill

  44. So as a white supremacist can I refuse to marry a black couple simply because it is my belief?

    Beliefs don’t only come from the church; they are within all of us. Civil law has to over-rule church law or there would be serious consequences. Actually I am a gay man and quite frankly this woman’s argument is ridiculous; I would also be interested to know whether this lady ate shell fish for lunch during her working life too…

    In the King James Version, Leviticus 18:22 is translated: “Thou shalt not lie with mankind, as with womankind: it is abomination.” I presume this is the alleged homosexual reference she disagrees with…whereas (this is my lunch reference) from the King James Version, Leviticus 11:12 is: “Whatsoever hath no fins nor scales in the waters, that shall be an abomination unto you.”

    Somewhere you have to draw the line and differentiate between common sense and something that borders on the ridiculous in a distortion of reality…

    Please go to the European Court of Human Rights; you will be laughed all the way outta there…get over it already…if this is what you believe then quit and get a new job, not moan about it, life is too short.

  45. Marcus Rose 24 Jan 2011, 12:36am

    There is no organization or institute on earth that benefits the community more than the Christian faith.
    Have you heard of the Street Pastors giving backup to the Police helping to keeping our cities peaceful.
    I have good friends who spend time late Friday and Saturday nights in some of the most dangerous places helping drug addicts in our area,
    I support an organization called Teen Challenge that over a year changes the lives of many drug addicts and society dropouts, Not funded in any way by the Government because it is a Christian organization.
    Orphanages, Schools, Hospitals, youth clubs all over the world run and funded by Christians.
    The Salvation Army in about 127 countries. Church of England, Roman Catholic, Baptist, Methodist, Free Evangelical to mention a few, all working hard in the UK and abroad.
    Most of the work done is done on a voluntary basis the rest is funded by Christians.
    At this point it has to be said; that homosexuality brings shock and sadness to most families. To some it brings shame. I have spoken to several mothers, whose son or daughter claims to be homosexual, and their first reaction has either been revulsion or sadness, but they have eventually come to a form of acceptance because they love their children.
    There is a difference between being judgmental and being honest. At the end of the day no one is perfect but most people know the true meaning of natural marriage. Homosexuality is unnatural and very unhealthy, you can love and care for your relatives of the same gender, and even your best friends without climbing into bed with them. We don’t need a great education to understand which parts of us are designed for what, and why.
    Marriage and sex isn’t something to play with; it has a serious purpose.
    The facts of life are very stubborn; it has to be male and female to produce children. Having a marriage register allows us to discover our roots. Most people like to know their natural mum and dad.
    The departure from the one-man, one-woman (till death do us part) has had a bad effect on the nation’s health and wellbeing.
    Look at Africa where up to 5000 people die of AIDS every week.
    Sexually transmitted diseases doubled from 1995 to the year 2000. Incident of AIDS increased by about 10,000 sufferers from 2000 to 2001.
    The cost to the National Health Service runs into billions of pounds each year.

    1. Leviticus 18:22 is “unnatural and very unhealthy”:

      “As a result of this serious research, Rabbi Steinberg-Caudill is completely convinced that THE ORIGINAL HEBREW TEXTS OF THE TORAH (the Hebrew Chumash – the Five Books of Moses) HAD ABSOLUTELY NOTHING TO SAY CONCERNING HOMOSEXUALITY AS WE UNDERSTAND THE TERM “HOMOSEXUALITY” TO MEAN IN TODAYS WORLD!

      Sadly, the reality of our human history is that the texts of Leviticus (and Deuteronomy) which were utilized by the teachers and rabbis of the Jewish tradition to condemn homosexuality, were so employed under a direct and constant danger and THREAT from the dominant and controlling Christian governmental and ecclesiastical authorities who needed to have the “perceived” Jewish interpretation of the texts, as taught by the Jewish rabbinical authorities, to be in accordance with their own Christian commentaries and teachings on homosexuality…”

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.