Following the story that by all accounts Priddis has congratulated a church organist on his forthcoming civil partnership (the celebratory party will be held in the church)
I do think there seems to be a little ...errr...confusion here
The fallout continues. The Church is clearly not happy, still spinning away, helped by its trusty band of conservative bloggers who hope that the issue of civil partnerships can be returned to, and what appears to be a misreading of the decision. I haven't read it, but if the conservatives are right, then Priddis would have won the case. The thing they appear to have overlooked is that its o nly because this case was deemed a probable lay post exempt from the regulations that all the other issues were taken into account at all. And they still lost - and the judgment stated that it would have been the case on indirect as well as direct discrimination
It really is about time they woke up and realised that their position is more akin to that of the racist - tolerated, even allowed in the private sphere, but certainly not approved of. Poor dears. Must be a terrible shock to them to realise that their brand of bigotry no longer holds sway
1 comment:
Exactly. There really is no difference at all between the bigot who uses their putrid vision of "god" to rally against homosexuals and those who used remarkably similar arguements to "prove" that darker skin was a sign of greater sinfulness, or that slavery was a-ok, or that God hates women or whatever. Absolutely none whatever.
Post a Comment