Last week we saw Blair and Kelly trying to put together a shoddy compromise in which the catholic church is allowed to continue discriminating beyond the April deadline for the new Equality legislation providing that they observe a "statutory duty" to refer gay couples to other agencies. By any reckoning, that is endorsing the continuation of discrimination for another 18 months.
BBC: No exemption for church over adoption
Even Blair's statement was mealy-mouthed. His statement is not watertight and actually provides a subtle escape. He said "And that way there can be no exemptions for faith-based adoption agencies offering public funded services from regulations that prevent discrimination." Now maybe I'm being picky but what about when the agency is not publicly funded? Does that mean if the catholic church raises the funds to replace the public funding, they can continue discriminating? No doubt some lawyers are already examining the possibilities.
It is clear that the Vatican is moving to get support from the catholics in parliament to attempt a watering down of the legislation but so far the MPs have understood the distinction between religious ideas and the law.
See the National Secular Society article.
In Scotland, it looks as though the church will be campaigning against certain MPs:
The Scotsman
It's clear that the church thinks it should have a say in what is to be discussed in political circles and in the past, the religious institutions have influenced massively what was possible politically. That irrational ideas should have such a sway in public life is offensive to many and clipping the wings of the church in these matters is a democratic responsibility.
Churches do not represent: they are neither elected nor accountable. Their message is based on irrational dogma not subjected to rational criticism and evaluation, and their institutions are devoted to spreading and maintaining myth. Even some church people are realising that the historical role of the church is no longer viable but it will use every device available to coerce and bully politicians into following the church rather than their political principles.
The irony is that in the UK, of the 2900 adoption agencies, only around 4% are run by catholics (but using state subsidy) and they are insisting on their right to discriminate. What has not been widely publicised is that many of their staff are non-religious and are not willing to discriminate. Although the church is making these statements it is not representative of the staff who work in the agencies. I stress - the church is not a democratic organisation. So it looks like the smallest and easiest change required to sort out this situation is to secularise the adoption agencies and tell the church where to go.
