In an unexpected turn of events, Supreme Court Deputy Baroness Hale has said that she “may have been wrong” in her earlier ruling against Christian bed and breakfast owners who refused a double bed to a homosexual couple.
The UK’s senior female judge called for a re-think concerning her decision to condemn Peter and Hazelmary Bull of discrimination against homosexuals. In addition, she said that the law has done little to protect Christian beliefs.
Baroness Hale’s remarks,which have come more than six months after the Bulls’ final appeal was refused, call into question the relationship between gay rights and religious rights
In 2008, the Bulls refused to rent a double bed to a homosexual couple in their Marazion Bed and Breakfast called Chymorvah House. The same-sex couple, Steven Preddy and Martyn Hall, took the Bulls to court, where Lady Hale and four other judges eventually ruled that the rights of the gay couple trumped the religious freedom of the Bulls.
Lady Hale declared that the Bulls will not have to pay Preddy and Hall’s legal costs for the case, which was in the original sentence. In addition, she said that laws which ignore the consciences of Christians will not be and may need to be adjusted to include a “conscience clause” for Christian business owners like the Bulls.
Speaking to Irish lawyers, Hale used the Bull case as one example among many recent cases that may have been unfair to Christian beliefs. In this speech she asked: “Should we be developing an explicit requirement upon providers of employment, goods and services to make reasonable accommodation for the manifestation of religious beliefs?”
“It is fascinating that a country with an established church can be less respectful of religious feelings than one without”, Hale was quoted in the Telegraph as saying. “It is not difficult to see why the Christians feel that their religious beliefs are not being sufficiently respected.”
Mrs. Bull was glad to be relieved of the case costs, and hoped that her case would pave the way for other Christians in similar situations.
“It is too late for us, which is a shame, but at the same time I hope her comments will restore some kind of balance back to the issue,” Bull said. “I am glad that something positive looks as though it will come out of this although I would not call it a victory.”
The Bulls nearly closed their B&B because business had declined, and they could no longer keep up their advertising. However, thanks to financial support from different supporters they were able to stay in business.
Mrs. Bull added that she had no hard feelings toward anyone, but thinks that the Supreme Court “missed a big opportunity to put something right.”
“We are certainly not homophobic but hopefully the pendulum is being corrected. I have never been able to understand why two different lifestyles cannot live together harmoniously,” Bull added.
Mrs. Bull’s comments touch on issues of concern in cases like these. Christians have been given the blanket reputation of “homophobe,” while gay people have refused to allow others to disagree with their lifestyle at the expense of their own convictions.
Christians do not call non-Christians “Jesus-phobes” or some other nonsensical term. Contrary to popular belief, it is indeed possible for Christians to have different views and to still treat other people as humans created in the image of God.
While gay rights activists are very fond of calling Christians “homophobes,” in reality they are usually even more intolerant of Christians than Christians are intolerant of homosexuals.
It is hoped that the courage shown by Peter and Hazelmary Bull, together with Lady Hale’s recent remarks, will pave the way for rulings in the favor of Christians to practice their beliefs.
. “I have never been able to understand why two different lifestyles cannot live together harmoniously,”
says Mrs Bull.
She must try and understand it in the light of not being able to serve God and Mammon.
For homosexuals, knowing that there are people in existence who disapprove of their lifestyle – not because they take a personal, subjective view but because they take a moral, objective view as to how God the Creator of all sees it – I say, the knowledge that these people exist is a goad to their conscience. As Goebbels said, truth is the enemy of the lie so the lie can only be maintained for as long as the truth is repressed. This is why the homosexual lobby is all out to squash the truth, which is that God condemns sodomy as a sin.
Incidentally, the Telegraph today reports that schools will be expected to challenge ‘extremist views of parents’ as part of the drive to instil British values. This includes ‘homophobia’ – what have we come to when an education system pioneered by the C of E will not tolerate British Christians. Since when was sodomy a British value?? I prefer to operate to the much higher standards of British virtues.
I rather like the idea of the word “jesuphobe”, in the right mouths and criticising those who really do hate the very idea of Jesus. It has a ring to it, and is not at all the same as “atheist”. Extreme Muslims could well be labelled “jesuphobes” , and to their great annoyance, as they theoretically honour him as a great prophet. This could lead to fruitful discussions, with the Muslim extremists actually praising Jesus !
American preachers in my town recently told anyone within earshot of their loudspeaker, and me personally when I argued about it , that none of our “neighbours love God”. They seemed to think that everyone except themselves was a deophobe although not an atheist (because as I pointed out I have a whole convent of nuns as neighbours, and there was an Anglican vicar in their audience). Theirs was an extraordinary position, to label the whole world except for a few dozen Americans “deophobes”, to use my new word.
Yes, deophobe and jesuphobe are useful words ! Thank you for inspiring them.
Christianophobia is just as misleading as all the other phobias! Being afraid of God and Jesus (the light of the world) is perfectly rational if you consider John 3 v 20. ‘For every one that doeth evil hateth the light, neither cometh to the light, lest his deeds should be reproved.’
what do these people always find so funny (see picture of Baroness Hale)? I suppose they’ve got much to be happy about, their PC, secular-humanist agenda is advancing nicely, they have even taken over large parts of the “church”. Oh well, as I said in another post, they should enjoy their time in the sun, cos Islam is coming!