Victorious Registrar

[flip_flop]

Opinions.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/2280484 /Christian-registrar-who-refused-to-conduct-ga y-weddings-wins-case.html

[WaldoMcFroog]

Oh, and another point, she won on a technicallity regarding the way she was treated by her colleagues, not because the court agreed that it was right she should be able to refuse to perform gay weddings because of her religious bias.

[DrFilth]

ethel if you red all the thread gromit brought muslims into it, thank you for your answer

[DrFilth]

read even

[BertiWooster]

The court was not considering a point of law - so even if the court agreed or disagreed with her stance , does not mean that she is in the wrong

This afterall, is about individual opinions

[jake-the-peg]

A company can change an employees terms and conditions in this country and if they can't stomach them the company can make them redundant.

Given that the law was passed to permit gay marriages it sounds as if such a change in the terms could be considered reasonable.

Sounds as if the council lost because of incompetant HR procedures - ridiculing and hectoring your employees is not the way to do it.

Keyplus there are legal rights that married people have that single people do not. This is why they've fought so hard for them.

[scotstone]

For once the human rights of a decent, normal, law abiding individual were upheld instead of those of every deviant ,tearaway, terrorist and criminal. Lets hope that this is the return of common sense in the application of this mess called human rights.

[paranoidus]

and the moon is made of cheese

[rov1200]

Gays cannot marry I believe. Marriages are made in heaven. I think these are civil partnerships. If you substitute sex for love they are just like rampant bunnies looking for the next hole.

[jno]

spot on, Mani.

[Oneeyedvic]

Ironic that a lot of the complainers and defenders of religious rights would argue completely the opposite if this was a Muslim as opposed to a Christian.

eg if a shop that was selling groceries started selling alcohol and a Muslim refused to sell it, but was happy to sell all the other products, do you think most people would be sympathetic to them?

[Kromovaracun]

I don't know where to stand on this.

I'm not convinced the grocery-store analogies are apt because it would cause visible and consistent inconvenience (person would have to run off and find someone else who was willing to sell alcohol), whereas in this registrar's case, the problem could be averted simply by a small management decision - "we won't give Lillian civil partnerships". Plus there are plenty of other registrars willing to do so, so nobody's rights are really being infringed.

On the other hand, it's still her job. And I can see that if she objects to carrying out her job, then she should resign (and become jobless...). But it isn't unreasonable of her employers to expect her to just do her job.

And yes, I would be saying the same thing if she refused to marry mixed-race couples.

[Paul22118]

I think one should separate servants from public and commercial.
If a shop keeper chooses not to sell French cheese because he does not like it himself, then so be it. Or if a travel agent chooses not to nmarket a particular holiday company because he disagrees with their policies that's fine with me. eg The Cooperative Bank not investing in some Countries.

However, we should all expect public servants to abide by what is legal regardless of their personal tastes or beliefs. I personally have no problem with gay 'marriages' but the fact is that in the UK they are legal. I would not expect to be turned away from my GP's surgery because a new doctor didn't like to treat firemen, teachers, builders or whatever.

It is this selective issue on the part of a public servant that bothers me. Nothing more.