Comments on: Islington registrar denied right to appeal over civil marriages ruling http://www.pinknews.co.uk/news/articles/2005-11549.html/ PinkNews.co.uk Gay News (UK and world) from Pink News - all the gay news for the lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgendered community in the UK and beyond- thegaynews from Pink News Thu, 26 Nov 2009 04:55:27 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.6 hourly 1 By: Paul http://www.pinknews.co.uk/news/articles/2005-11549.html/comment-page-1/#comment-48750 Paul Fri, 10 Apr 2009 10:02:52 +0000 http://www.pinknews.co.uk/news/articles/2005-11549.html#comment-48750 The arguments of the Christian Right are ridiculous and their arguments do not stand up to scrutiny. The Equality laws do not stop christian believing what they want to believe, they simply stop people being treated differently becasue of a protected characteristic. Asking this worman to carry out Civil Partnerships never stopped her from believing homosexuality is wrong or that marriage should by reserved for heterosexuals. However, she chose to impose her beliefs on others and cause harm in doing so. The arguments of the Christian Right are ridiculous and their arguments do not stand up to scrutiny. The Equality laws do not stop christian believing what they want to believe, they simply stop people being treated differently becasue of a protected characteristic. Asking this worman to carry out Civil Partnerships never stopped her from believing homosexuality is wrong or that marriage should by reserved for heterosexuals. However, she chose to impose her beliefs on others and cause harm in doing so.

(Report comment to the moderator)

]]> By: Brian Burton http://www.pinknews.co.uk/news/articles/2005-11549.html/comment-page-1/#comment-47280 Brian Burton Wed, 25 Mar 2009 18:11:36 +0000 http://www.pinknews.co.uk/news/articles/2005-11549.html#comment-47280 I am a Civil Partnered Gay Christian. The Registra in Southampton welcoms Civil Partnerships and so should all other Registras or they should Quit. I am a Civil Partnered Gay Christian. The Registra in Southampton welcoms Civil Partnerships and so should all other Registras or they should Quit.

(Report comment to the moderator)

]]> By: AdrianT http://www.pinknews.co.uk/news/articles/2005-11549.html/comment-page-1/#comment-46225 AdrianT Tue, 17 Mar 2009 14:14:50 +0000 http://www.pinknews.co.uk/news/articles/2005-11549.html#comment-46225 No problem with using the word 'choice' for beliefs. No one is born with Christianity, or any other superstition. Furthermore, people can and do stop believing in god - as the 'converts' corner' section on richarddawkins.net, the empty Churches resembling the Marie Celeste, and the Committee of Ex-Muslims are testament to. She is welcome to have her opinions, but they do not deserve to count, least of all be in a position to disadvantage others. I am sure she can choose another more suitable job. If one group acts above the law, there is no reason to stop others wishing also to be above the law.... gay people refusing to serve Christians; muslims refusing to handle alcohol... the list goes on. No problem with using the word 'choice' for beliefs.

No one is born with Christianity, or any other superstition. Furthermore, people can and do stop believing in god – as the 'converts' corner' section on richarddawkins.net, the empty Churches resembling the Marie Celeste, and the Committee of Ex-Muslims are testament to.

She is welcome to have her opinions, but they do not deserve to count, least of all be in a position to disadvantage others. I am sure she can choose another more suitable job. If one group acts above the law, there is no reason to stop others wishing also to be above the law…. gay people refusing to serve Christians; muslims refusing to handle alcohol… the list goes on.

(Report comment to the moderator)

]]> By: Iris http://www.pinknews.co.uk/news/articles/2005-11549.html/comment-page-1/#comment-46000 Iris Fri, 13 Mar 2009 16:22:50 +0000 http://www.pinknews.co.uk/news/articles/2005-11549.html#comment-46000 I agree with your last sentence, Paul :)To answer your question - yes, in my opinion I did CHOOSE to amend my belief that it was Wednesday. It wasn't compulsory that I change my belief - as you say, I could have continued to irrationally insist it was Wednesday in the face of all evidence. I chose to change my way of thinking - yes, changing was an act, but the initial motivator of that change was my choice, not something that just happened to me automatically. I think some (some, I emphasise) people with religious beliefs ignore evidence and persist in an irrational belief. To me, they have chosen to 'stick their fingers in their ears' to stop themselves hearing things that might contradict their long-held belief. I consider that to be their choice - they won't hear the evidence that may prove them wrong. So they chose to persist in a belief that could be irrational/incorrect. I understand that some Christians genuinely believe homosexuality is wrong, but, in my opinion, they are a minority, and most who object to it do so for other reasons like their own fear, ignorance, incomprehension or wish to victimise/bully others who are 'different'. I agree with your last sentence, Paul :) To answer your question – yes, in my opinion I did CHOOSE to amend my belief that it was Wednesday. It wasn't compulsory that I change my belief – as you say, I could have continued to irrationally insist it was Wednesday in the face of all evidence. I chose to change my way of thinking – yes, changing was an act, but the initial motivator of that change was my choice, not something that just happened to me automatically.
I think some (some, I emphasise) people with religious beliefs ignore evidence and persist in an irrational belief. To me, they have chosen to 'stick their fingers in their ears' to stop themselves hearing things that might contradict their long-held belief. I consider that to be their choice – they won't hear the evidence that may prove them wrong. So they chose to persist in a belief that could be irrational/incorrect.
I understand that some Christians genuinely believe homosexuality is wrong, but, in my opinion, they are a minority, and most who object to it do so for other reasons like their own fear, ignorance, incomprehension or wish to victimise/bully others who are 'different'.

(Report comment to the moderator)

]]> By: Paul Brownsey http://www.pinknews.co.uk/news/articles/2005-11549.html/comment-page-1/#comment-45991 Paul Brownsey Fri, 13 Mar 2009 15:25:04 +0000 http://www.pinknews.co.uk/news/articles/2005-11549.html#comment-45991 Iris, did you really CHOOSE to discard your previous belief (as you might, say, choose to take a cheese salad rather than a ham salad onto your cafeteria tray), or did your belief merely *change* once you had checked the calendar, etc? In rational people that's what happens when they check the evidence: their belief changes if the evidence consulted is contrary to their belief. Could you really have CHOSEN to continue to believe it was Wednesday? Of course, you could have chosen to continue to ACT as though you believed it was Wednesday when you didn't really believe it, but that's a different matter. And you could have chosen not to perform those acts that would have checked your belief it was Wednesday - could have turned down the corner of the newspaper so that you didn't see it, etc. And you (I don't mean to say this is true of you personally) might have been so irrational that though you did look at the calendar, etc, your belief that it was Wednesday didn't change. That's serious irrationality. But I don't think any of this means that we choose our beliefs. I'll concede this, though: our beliefs are at least partly the consequences of the choices we make as regards consulting (or not consulting) evidence (these latter being acts and so genuinely matters of choice). Iris, did you really CHOOSE to discard your previous belief (as you might, say, choose to take a cheese salad rather than a ham salad onto your cafeteria tray), or did your belief merely *change* once you had checked the calendar, etc? In rational people that's what happens when they check the evidence: their belief changes if the evidence consulted is contrary to their belief. Could you really have CHOSEN to continue to believe it was Wednesday? Of course, you could have chosen to continue to ACT as though you believed it was Wednesday when you didn't really believe it, but that's a different matter. And you could have chosen not to perform those acts that would have checked your belief it was Wednesday – could have turned down the corner of the newspaper so that you didn't see it, etc. And you (I don't mean to say this is true of you personally) might have been so irrational that though you did look at the calendar, etc, your belief that it was Wednesday didn't change. That's serious irrationality. But I don't think any of this means that we choose our beliefs. I'll concede this, though: our beliefs are at least partly the consequences of the choices we make as regards consulting (or not consulting) evidence (these latter being acts and so genuinely matters of choice).

(Report comment to the moderator)

]]> By: Iris http://www.pinknews.co.uk/news/articles/2005-11549.html/comment-page-1/#comment-45977 Iris Fri, 13 Mar 2009 13:19:03 +0000 http://www.pinknews.co.uk/news/articles/2005-11549.html#comment-45977 I don't want to get involved in a complicated semantic argument here, and I do get both sides of what you're saying, Paul and Robert. However, in my opinion, Ms Ladele believes something that is incorrect (just like your example of the grass being red). I think that she's letting her own personal emotions cloud her judgement. Yesterday I genuinely believed it was Wednesday - however, when I saw the news and checked the calendar, etc, I saw that my belief was mistaken and it was, in fact, Thursday. Therefore I CHOSE to discard my previous belief and replace it with a more logical one based on evidence. I think that's what most people do in their lives - beliefs are constantly being 'updated'. If a person chooses not to revise their belief in the face of overwhelming evidence (or overwhelming censure, I guess too), then I consider that to be a deliberate decision on their part. Patient people could explain to those like Ms Ladele that people are born gay, show her all kinds of evidence and examples and explain why her behaviour/beliefs/whatever need some personal examination from her, and, I'd hope, some revision, but she can still choose to ignore all that and stubbornly persist in an outdated, cruel (in my opinion) belief which even other Christians don't hold. Beliefs can change (for better or worse) because we are not fixed machines, we are living, thinking, intelligent organisms. I hope some of that made sense. I don't want to get involved in a complicated semantic argument here, and I do get both sides of what you're saying, Paul and Robert. However, in my opinion, Ms Ladele believes something that is incorrect (just like your example of the grass being red). I think that she's letting her own personal emotions cloud her judgement. Yesterday I genuinely believed it was Wednesday – however, when I saw the news and checked the calendar, etc, I saw that my belief was mistaken and it was, in fact, Thursday. Therefore I CHOSE to discard my previous belief and replace it with a more logical one based on evidence. I think that's what most people do in their lives – beliefs are constantly being 'updated'.
If a person chooses not to revise their belief in the face of overwhelming evidence (or overwhelming censure, I guess too), then I consider that to be a deliberate decision on their part. Patient people could explain to those like Ms Ladele that people are born gay, show her all kinds of evidence and examples and explain why her behaviour/beliefs/whatever need some personal examination from her, and, I'd hope, some revision, but she can still choose to ignore all that and stubbornly persist in an outdated, cruel (in my opinion) belief which even other Christians don't hold.
Beliefs can change (for better or worse) because we are not fixed machines, we are living, thinking, intelligent organisms.
I hope some of that made sense.

(Report comment to the moderator)

]]> By: Paul Brownsey http://www.pinknews.co.uk/news/articles/2005-11549.html/comment-page-1/#comment-45963 Paul Brownsey Fri, 13 Mar 2009 11:33:38 +0000 http://www.pinknews.co.uk/news/articles/2005-11549.html#comment-45963 I see that Robert has not lost his old habit of quick contempt for other posters. No, Robert, it's *you* who don't get the point. I'm talking about *beliefs* not *behaviour*. Behaviour is or can be chosen; beliefs can't be, though you can choose to act on those beliefs or not act on them. Much of what you say is about chosen *behaviour* not chosen *beliefs*. You say, for instance, "She deliberately chooses to live that way." Nothing I said is remotely inconsistent with that, because living in a certain way is *acting* in a certain way, and acts can be chosen. Again, you say that religion is learned "behaviour". I wasn't talking about behaviour but about belief. I can't choose to believe in God or not to believe but I can choose to go to church or not to and I can choose to beat you up for not believing and I can choose not to beat you up for not believing. If you think beliefs can be chosen, try choosing to believe that grass is red from 11 a.m. on Monday, March 16th. You can't. You can, for whatever reason, choose to *act as though* you believed it, and you might even post fiery messages on this board saying that people who don't believe grass is red are stupid, bigoted, or don't get the point. Yes, you can choose to do those things because they are *acts* and you can choose what acts you perform. But you can't choose to believe that grass is red. I see that Robert has not lost his old habit of quick contempt for other posters. No, Robert, it's *you* who don't get the point.

I'm talking about *beliefs* not *behaviour*. Behaviour is or can be chosen; beliefs can't be, though you can choose to act on those beliefs or not act on them. Much of what you say is about chosen *behaviour* not chosen *beliefs*. You say, for instance, "She deliberately chooses to live that way." Nothing I said is remotely inconsistent with that, because living in a certain way is *acting* in a certain way, and acts can be chosen. Again, you say that religion is learned "behaviour". I wasn't talking about behaviour but about belief. I can't choose to believe in God or not to believe but I can choose to go to church or not to and I can choose to beat you up for not believing and I can choose not to beat you up for not believing.

If you think beliefs can be chosen, try choosing to believe that grass is red from 11 a.m. on Monday, March 16th. You can't. You can, for whatever reason, choose to *act as though* you believed it, and you might even post fiery messages on this board saying that people who don't believe grass is red are stupid, bigoted, or don't get the point. Yes, you can choose to do those things because they are *acts* and you can choose what acts you perform. But you can't choose to believe that grass is red.

(Report comment to the moderator)

]]> By: Merseymike http://www.pinknews.co.uk/news/articles/2005-11549.html/comment-page-1/#comment-45931 Merseymike Thu, 12 Mar 2009 22:39:31 +0000 http://www.pinknews.co.uk/news/articles/2005-11549.html#comment-45931 Many of these cases are backfiring on the religious fringe, and creating a sympathetic bank of supportive caselaw for our side of the argument. Not what they wanted to achieve! As for this case, she is a hypocrite, since she is involved with civil not religious marriages, and whether she 'agrees' with civil partnerships or not is not the issue. Many of these cases are backfiring on the religious fringe, and creating a sympathetic bank of supportive caselaw for our side of the argument. Not what they wanted to achieve!

As for this case, she is a hypocrite, since she is involved with civil not religious marriages, and whether she 'agrees' with civil partnerships or not is not the issue.

(Report comment to the moderator)

]]> By: Robert, ex-pat Brit http://www.pinknews.co.uk/news/articles/2005-11549.html/comment-page-1/#comment-45862 Robert, ex-pat Brit Thu, 12 Mar 2009 14:44:19 +0000 http://www.pinknews.co.uk/news/articles/2005-11549.html#comment-45862 Paul, you don't get the point. NOBODY comes into this world religious. We do choose if wish to be and many of us are raised with a religious tradition, in other ways, learned behaviour. I don't care what people believe in, the point is, one's religious beliefs should have absolutely no place in or relevance to one's employment or ability to work, especially when its in the public sector. I may not like working with homophobes or providing services to them, but we do because we know if we don't, we face the consequences of losing our jobs or worse, prosecution. Why should this hypocrite be any different just because she thinks religion must trump everybody else's rights and freedoms. She deliberately chooses to live that way and she has no right forcing her religious "lifestyle" on the rest of us who pay her salary out of our taxes. Where did this behaviour come from if she wasn't raised religious or didn't choose that path? Paul, you don't get the point. NOBODY comes into this world religious. We do choose if wish to be and many of us are raised with a religious tradition, in other ways, learned behaviour. I don't care what people believe in, the point is, one's religious beliefs should have absolutely no place in or relevance to one's employment or ability to work, especially when its in the public sector. I may not like working with homophobes or providing services to them, but we do because we know if we don't, we face the consequences of losing our jobs or worse, prosecution. Why should this hypocrite be any different just because she thinks religion must trump everybody else's rights and freedoms. She deliberately chooses to live that way and she has no right forcing her religious "lifestyle" on the rest of us who pay her salary out of our taxes. Where did this behaviour come from if she wasn't raised religious or didn't choose that path?

(Report comment to the moderator)

]]> By: Paul Brownsey http://www.pinknews.co.uk/news/articles/2005-11549.html/comment-page-1/#comment-45853 Paul Brownsey Thu, 12 Mar 2009 12:18:42 +0000 http://www.pinknews.co.uk/news/articles/2005-11549.html#comment-45853 Several posters speak of people *choosing* their religious beliefs. Really? I don't think what you believe is a matter of choice. I believe today is Thursday but I haven't made a choice that that's what I shall believe - I just do believe it. I believe that my boyfriend is at this moment at a meeting but I haven't *chosen* to believe that - I just do. I believe Labour is too timid about criticising capitalism - but I don't believe that in consequence of a choice - I just do believe it. So why should we think people choose their religious beliefs? Sure, they can choose whether or not they *act on* those beliefs and they can choose to act *as though* they believe this or that. But neither of those means they chose to believe what they believe. Perhaps the thought is that if they don't choose what they believe they can't rightly be criticised. Oh yes they can. We can still say that beliefs are false, barbaric, silly, unjustifiable, and productive of dreadful consequences. Several posters speak of people *choosing* their religious beliefs. Really? I don't think what you believe is a matter of choice.

I believe today is Thursday but I haven't made a choice that that's what I shall believe – I just do believe it.

I believe that my boyfriend is at this moment at a meeting but I haven't *chosen* to believe that – I just do.

I believe Labour is too timid about criticising capitalism – but I don't believe that in consequence of a choice – I just do believe it.

So why should we think people choose their religious beliefs?

Sure, they can choose whether or not they *act on* those beliefs and they can choose to act *as though* they believe this or that. But neither of those means they chose to believe what they believe.

Perhaps the thought is that if they don't choose what they believe they can't rightly be criticised. Oh yes they can. We can still say that beliefs are false, barbaric, silly, unjustifiable, and productive of dreadful consequences.

(Report comment to the moderator)

]]> By: Paul Brownsey http://www.pinknews.co.uk/news/articles/2005-11549.html/comment-page-1/#comment-45852 Paul Brownsey Thu, 12 Mar 2009 12:09:54 +0000 http://www.pinknews.co.uk/news/articles/2005-11549.html#comment-45852 Some of the posters here say that people *choose* their religious beliefs. Really? Think about the things you believe: do you really believe them in consequence of a *choice*? I believe my boyfriend is at this moment at a meeting, but I haven't chosen to believe that - I just *do* believe it. I believe today is Thursday, but I haven't made a choice that this is what I shall believe - I just *do* believe it. I believe Labour is far too timid about criticism capitalism, but I haven't opted to believe this - I just *do* believe it. So why all this talk about people choosing to believe in God, etc? I don't think they do. Perhaps the thought is that unless they choose to believe in God they can't be criticised. Oh yes they can. Paul Brownsey Some of the posters here say that people *choose* their religious beliefs. Really? Think about the things you believe: do you really believe them in consequence of a *choice*?

I believe my boyfriend is at this moment at a meeting, but I haven't chosen to believe that – I just *do* believe it.

I believe today is Thursday, but I haven't made a choice that this is what I shall believe – I just *do* believe it.

I believe Labour is far too timid about criticism capitalism, but I haven't opted to believe this – I just *do* believe it.

So why all this talk about people choosing to believe in God, etc? I don't think they do.

Perhaps the thought is that unless they choose to believe in God they can't be criticised.

Oh yes they can.

Paul Brownsey

(Report comment to the moderator)

]]> By: neil http://www.pinknews.co.uk/news/articles/2005-11549.html/comment-page-1/#comment-45841 neil Thu, 12 Mar 2009 11:08:23 +0000 http://www.pinknews.co.uk/news/articles/2005-11549.html#comment-45841 I've been following this story from the outset (I live in Islington & I'm naturally concerned that my council tax is paying for civil servants who would potentially refuse to serve me on the basis of my sexuality). It seems to me quite clear that the Christian Institute has used this as a test case to establish that religious rights "trump" gay rights. This is outrageous & INCREDIBLY DANGEROUS. Look at this from another perspective. Klan members / white supremacists refusing to serve black & minority ethnic people on the basis of their fervently held beliefs (trust me if you look hard enough you'll find a biblical reference you can spin to your own ends - in this case I believe the basis for black "inferiority" comes from the 'story' regarding the sons of Noah). Is this acceptable? Hardly. I think in this case Ladele is a pawn in the Christian Institutes wider agenda. If we need to vent or focus on a "villain" lets get with the programme & realise exactly who the bad guys are here. I've been following this story from the outset (I live in Islington & I'm naturally concerned that my council tax is paying for civil servants who would potentially refuse to serve me on the basis of my sexuality).

It seems to me quite clear that the Christian Institute has used this as a test case to establish that religious rights "trump" gay rights. This is outrageous & INCREDIBLY DANGEROUS.

Look at this from another perspective. Klan members / white supremacists refusing to serve black & minority ethnic people on the basis of their fervently held beliefs (trust me if you look hard enough you'll find a biblical reference you can spin to your own ends – in this case I believe the basis for black "inferiority" comes from the 'story' regarding the sons of Noah). Is this acceptable? Hardly.

I think in this case Ladele is a pawn in the Christian Institutes wider agenda. If we need to vent or focus on a "villain" lets get with the programme & realise exactly who the bad guys are here.

(Report comment to the moderator)

]]> By: Dave http://www.pinknews.co.uk/news/articles/2005-11549.html/comment-page-1/#comment-45835 Dave Thu, 12 Mar 2009 09:33:15 +0000 http://www.pinknews.co.uk/news/articles/2005-11549.html#comment-45835 It is all about money; just a ploy to get an enhanced redundancy package from Islington Council, or an award for compensation from the Employment Appeals Tribunal. Let hope she gets neither. All the best. It is all about money; just a ploy to get an enhanced redundancy package from Islington Council, or an award for compensation from the Employment Appeals Tribunal. Let hope she gets neither.

All the best.

(Report comment to the moderator)

]]> By: Jamie http://www.pinknews.co.uk/news/articles/2005-11549.html/comment-page-1/#comment-45818 Jamie Thu, 12 Mar 2009 00:41:22 +0000 http://www.pinknews.co.uk/news/articles/2005-11549.html#comment-45818 If you're paid out of the public purse you have an obligation to serve all members of the public, regardless of your personal beliefs. Lillian Ladele and the Christian Institute do not believe this is the case. They seem to feel that it's alright to be paid out of the public purse (a purse everyone - gay, bi, straight, whatever pays into), and that they should pick and choose which members of the public they serve. That at the very core is discrimination - no two ways about it. They can dress it up in what ever beliefs they want, but the hard fact is Lillian Ladele refused to serve members of the public she was required to serve as part of the terms of her employment. Rather than stand up and be honest about the fact she felt she had a given right to practice discrimination she chose to hide behind her faith. She feels that she has been discriminated against because of her beliefs which she feels should allow her to discriminate against others. I wonder if she's realised the irony in that. Discrimination is discrimination, doesn't matter how you dress it up or colour it, it is what it is - and it's wrong. It's a real shame that civil rights for the LGBT community isn't going to benefit from the lessons learned from the civil rights movement for the Black community - or even from the Suffragette momvement. LOL, I wonder how many people don't realise that women, in the UK, have only been able to vote since 1918 - that's not even 100 years... and hey, many would say that equality for women still hasn't happened. Many would say that racial equality still hasn't happend yet either. Funny that both those groups have full legal protection though - and 99.9% of people agree to the hilt with them having it. I wonder if Lillian Ladele, a black woman, actually realises the irony of what she has done, and how she has spit on the faces of all those who faught for her equal rights in the past. If you're paid out of the public purse you have an obligation to serve all members of the public, regardless of your personal beliefs. Lillian Ladele and the Christian Institute do not believe this is the case. They seem to feel that it's alright to be paid out of the public purse (a purse everyone – gay, bi, straight, whatever pays into), and that they should pick and choose which members of the public they serve. That at the very core is discrimination – no two ways about it. They can dress it up in what ever beliefs they want, but the hard fact is Lillian Ladele refused to serve members of the public she was required to serve as part of the terms of her employment. Rather than stand up and be honest about the fact she felt she had a given right to practice discrimination she chose to hide behind her faith. She feels that she has been discriminated against because of her beliefs which she feels should allow her to discriminate against others. I wonder if she's realised the irony in that.

Discrimination is discrimination, doesn't matter how you dress it up or colour it, it is what it is – and it's wrong. It's a real shame that civil rights for the LGBT community isn't going to benefit from the lessons learned from the civil rights movement for the Black community – or even from the Suffragette momvement. LOL, I wonder how many people don't realise that women, in the UK, have only been able to vote since 1918 – that's not even 100 years… and hey, many would say that equality for women still hasn't happened. Many would say that racial equality still hasn't happend yet either. Funny that both those groups have full legal protection though – and 99.9% of people agree to the hilt with them having it. I wonder if Lillian Ladele, a black woman, actually realises the irony of what she has done, and how she has spit on the faces of all those who faught for her equal rights in the past.

(Report comment to the moderator)

]]> By: John http://www.pinknews.co.uk/news/articles/2005-11549.html/comment-page-1/#comment-45798 John Wed, 11 Mar 2009 20:54:47 +0000 http://www.pinknews.co.uk/news/articles/2005-11549.html#comment-45798 A triamphe for reason over the foil hat bregade A triamphe for reason over the foil hat bregade

(Report comment to the moderator)

]]> By: Simon http://www.pinknews.co.uk/news/articles/2005-11549.html/comment-page-1/#comment-45792 Simon Wed, 11 Mar 2009 20:11:42 +0000 http://www.pinknews.co.uk/news/articles/2005-11549.html#comment-45792 Hats off to Islington London Borough Council for taking on this squalid excuse for blatant discrimination on the part of Ladele. I hope that she is landed with an enormous legal bill for wasting everyones time. I also hope that the "Christian Institute" f**k off to the hinterland of obscurity they so richly deserve Hats off to Islington London Borough Council for taking on this squalid excuse for blatant discrimination on the part of Ladele. I hope that she is landed with an enormous legal bill for wasting everyones time. I also hope that the "Christian Institute" f**k off to the hinterland of obscurity they so richly deserve

(Report comment to the moderator)

]]> By: Robert, ex-pat Brit http://www.pinknews.co.uk/news/articles/2005-11549.html/comment-page-1/#comment-45778 Robert, ex-pat Brit Wed, 11 Mar 2009 17:00:38 +0000 http://www.pinknews.co.uk/news/articles/2005-11549.html#comment-45778 So Alex, what if a gay person refused services to straights because of homophobia or a gay registrar refused to perform a civil marriage because his or her sexual orientation precludes them from having the same right to marry? How would you deal with that? You can bet he or she would lose their job without further ado and similarly be advised to look elsewhere for employment and probably would not have a right to appeal as this stupid bigot did. So Alex, what if a gay person refused services to straights because of homophobia or a gay registrar refused to perform a civil marriage because his or her sexual orientation precludes them from having the same right to marry? How would you deal with that? You can bet he or she would lose their job without further ado and similarly be advised to look elsewhere for employment and probably would not have a right to appeal as this stupid bigot did.

(Report comment to the moderator)

]]> By: Erroll Clements http://www.pinknews.co.uk/news/articles/2005-11549.html/comment-page-1/#comment-45776 Erroll Clements Wed, 11 Mar 2009 15:48:37 +0000 http://www.pinknews.co.uk/news/articles/2005-11549.html#comment-45776 I just love it, the Islington Council 'OVER' reacted to her not doing her job...what a gem ! HULLO!..'Public Service' where you don't/ can't choose whom you serve. Should we be so lucky especially in London with a very diverse community. Silly Cow, wrong job in the first place, obviously she has her nose stuck up her gods bum hoping for divine intervention from above !Or more likely the Christian Institute whom are coughing up for her fees, think how many NEEDY people that money could have helped !!!!!! I just love it, the Islington Council 'OVER' reacted to her not doing her job…what a gem ! HULLO!..'Public Service' where you don't/ can't choose whom you serve. Should we be so lucky especially in London with a very diverse community. Silly Cow, wrong job in the first place, obviously she has her nose stuck up her gods bum hoping for divine intervention from above !Or more likely the Christian Institute whom are coughing up for her fees,
think how many NEEDY people that money could have helped !!!!!!

(Report comment to the moderator)

]]> By: zazou http://www.pinknews.co.uk/news/articles/2005-11549.html/comment-page-1/#comment-45775 zazou Wed, 11 Mar 2009 14:46:20 +0000 http://www.pinknews.co.uk/news/articles/2005-11549.html#comment-45775 If she wins - all the new regulations on equality are invalid !! If she wins – all the new regulations on equality are invalid !!

(Report comment to the moderator)

]]> By: Andrew Q http://www.pinknews.co.uk/news/articles/2005-11549.html/comment-page-1/#comment-45773 Andrew Q Wed, 11 Mar 2009 14:04:10 +0000 http://www.pinknews.co.uk/news/articles/2005-11549.html#comment-45773 She's not even British ! She's not even British !

(Report comment to the moderator)

]]>