Skip to main content

British Government Again Attacking Religious Freedom

The British Government is threatening to further undermine religious liberty by arguing that Christians do not have a right to wear a cross or crucifix openly at work. According to a March 10th article in the Daily Telegraph, ministers will fight a case at the European Court of Human Rights in which two British women will seek to establish their right to display the cross. 

They will argue that "because it is not a "requirement" of the Christian faith, employers can ban the wearing of the cross and sack workers who insist on doing so," the Telegraph reports.


It is the first time that the Government has been forced to state whether it backs the right of Christians to wear the symbol at work.

The Christian women bringing the case, Nadia Eweida and Shirley Chaplin, claim that they were discriminated against when their employers banned them from wearing a cross.. They want the European Court to rule that this breached their human right to manifest their religion.

Lord Alton of Liverpool told the Dignitatis Humanae Institute: "In the most subtle way, we in Britain are again seeing religious freedom - a liberty that underpins all the others - under threat. And again it is Christians who are being unjustly targeted, not members of other religions."

The Catholic peer, who heads the Cross Party Working Group on Human Dignity, added: "What makes this stance particularly strange is that only last month the leader of a British Government delegation on a visit to the Vatican warned that the UK was under threat from a rising tide of "militant secularisation" reminiscent of "totalitarian regimes." Is the Government therefore now consciously willing to lead the country down this path?"

Comments

  1. dear Leo,

    http://stop-terorism.blogspot.com/2012/03/legea-reparatiei-morale-pentru-batranii.html

    There is a problem in Republic Of Moldova,about laws that compensate the Nazi victims ,who sufferd persecutions,deportation during Nazi Germany opperation Barbarossa,in Transnistria and Moldova.

    Please tell me more about international laws that pays money for victims of Nazi Germany, by German state today,for those romanians, ukrainans,jews who suffered during 1941 to 1944 in Today Republic of Moldova.Is it enogh to go to a trial in Chisinau to prove that people sufferd during Nazi ocuppation,or is necessary to go to Hague,at international Court of Justice?

    Best regards,

    Puscasu Vlad Irimie

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Christmas Greeting

Corruption Scandal on the Sale of Schengen Visas in Malta discussed in the European Parliament

Ivan Grech Mintoff (leader of the ECPM-Member Party Alleanza Bidla) presented in the Maltese court  a transcript of the testimonies of several Libyans who claimed that in 2015, they bought an unknown number of humanitarian medical visas from an official in the Office of the of the Maltese Prime Minister. These medical visas are not supposed to be sold. Following an agreement between Malta and Libya, they are issued for free. The documents submitted in the court also claim that Schengen visas were illicitly sold at the Maltese Consulate in Tripoli over a period of 14 months (in 2013 and 2014). In this period, 88000 Schengen Visas (300 visas per day including Saturdays and Sundays) have been sold. This illegal scheme could have earned the perpetrators millions of euros.  Although the Consulate in Tripoli has closed, it is unclear if this practice has stopped or is still continuing via other countries or Malta up to today. On the 27th of June, ECPM invited Mr Mintoff to the E...

Biases Attack Pro-Life and Pro-Family Organizations

  The debate on abortion was stirred up again after the recent leak of the draft proposal of the US Supreme Court to overturn Roe v. Wade. Mainly negative reactions to this news circulated in the media. The debate on abortion has become increasingly subjective where, particularly, the pro-life arguments are marginalized and negatively framed. Last February, we saw this in the European Parliament as well where the FEMM committee (Committee on Women’s Rights and Gender Equality of the European Parliament) held a public hearing on the ‘Countering the anti-gender movement today to secure a gender equal Europe tomorrow’ , a side event of the Future of Europe Conference. As the title of the hearing suggests, this event was a one-sided story on the topic, seeking to invalidate other opinions and attacking several Christian organizations on their pro-life advocacy and promotion of Christian values. The hearing displayed the immaturity of the debate on abortion and gender issues. There is n...