Christian registrar who refused to perform civil partnerships wins Tribunal

janet burton
Member - 49 posts

I think Lilian Ladele is a hypocrite. She is a Registrar. This means she marries people who for one reason or another cannot, or do not want to, marry in Church. Therefore, ipso facto, she has married many people of different faiths and persuasions to hers.
The only difference now is that the gay couples have their different beliefs on display.
She should do her job for all, not those select few she deems worthy because they look right.
I think Ms Ladele should be made to see the difference between her faith and her job.
I agree she should not have been bullied or badly treated by her employer;
But I would not call the council's behaviour indirect discrimination due to her faith, when she does not follow that faith. If she did, she would either not have taken the job (believing that her faith came before other peoples beliefs) or would have married gay couples (believing that just as her faith is private to her, other peoples faith is a matter for them). She has a very selective faith if she is trying to use it as an excuse for her discriminatory behaviour.

Pasc Ruggiero CFIOSH, FIIRSM
Member - 45 posts

Lillian followed her conscience and was able to demonstrate that she was not treated IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE LAW OF THE LAND. She was clearly disadvantaged in a number of ways and only deserves praise for standing up to ‘PR rules overall’.

One cannot justify immoral acts – which is what she believed she would be condoning - by “I was only doing my job/ I was obeying instructions”. This was tried following the last world war (and probably every other war)!

janet burton
Member - 49 posts

You seem to have missed my point.
The council were guilty of bullying and harassment. I agree that the tribunal was correct in finding them at fault.
However, they cannot have been guilty of discriminating due to her faith, when she is picking and choosing which bits of that faith she chooses to follow.
The council could validly have taken her to court for discrimination; instead they chose to harass her. I agree they were wrong.
But I do not agree her faith was a reason for her to do what she did. She is using it as an excuse to cover her blatant discrimination - and it is a very poor fig-leaf.
It is discrimination because she has married other people who according to her Christian faith are wrong to marry - but because she could not 'see' their beliefs, she went ahead. That is like serving a person with diabetes but refusing to serve someone in a wheelchair, and it is against the law.

Dale M. Curtis CMIOSH MIIRSM
Member - 5 posts

I agree whole heartedly with you Janet.
There's no arguement with the fact that the council were in the wrong in how they treated Lillian. However, this was a civil ceremony and can be used by anyone, atheist, different faiths, divorcees, etc. She would still be discriminatory in my view if she refused to marry any one other than her own faith and beliefs. What if her 'faith' was as an atheist and thought it immoral to marry 'religious people'?
I believe that Lillian was 'immoral' and not the council.

Robert Hacon Williams
Member - 67 posts

There is no doubt the Council and its staff were discriminating in a blatant fashion.

However, one thing that has been missed. She was a Registrar for many years and married many persons of the opposite sex and of various religeons or non religeon at all without problems.

The Law changed and she was now faced with a civil ceremony for persons of the same sex or persons who had changed sex; a fact contrary to her religeon. This problem would also be faced by members of other Religious beliefs, especially those of the Muslim faith, had they been Registrars befoe the Law changed.

It also means that her Terms of Employment had changed but her Terms of Contract remained the same.

The Council had two choices:
a. To allow her to continue as before and be excluded from same sex ceromonies.
b. To allow her to retire on full pension.

The ruling on this case does not extend to Registrars appointed after the Law changed to allow same sex and sex change persons to have a civil ceremony. Thus if those of a faith that opposes same sex relationships wish to become a Registrar then they most officiate at all types of marriage ceremony and civil partnership.

In addition the Appeal Courts decision will make that decision a Case Law and thus be binding on all ETs in the future.

Noel George
Member - 11 posts

This is the sort of thing that is bringing about the collapse of society. There is marriage for the prolification of the human species and there is a civil partnership. These are two different things and any attempt to distort that truth is an attack on the integrity of our entire social system. Dancing around the situation trying to be more PC than someone else is a farce.

Linda Weston
Member - 1 post

I agree with those who have pointed out the legal framework which the council did not adhere to and that is surely what the forum is for.

It is not a place for hypocrites to make simplistic comments offering no value to a discussion.

Phill S
Member - 35 posts

I can see the point that Miss Ladele was unfairly treated due to her beliefs, but I cannot understand why an orthodox christian was a registrar.
That vocation would surely put her in a position of marrying couples that possibly didn't follow her beliefs.
Or maybe she just jumped on the anti-pc bandwagon as so many people do these days, without regard for the actual truth or the bigger picture.

Pasc Ruggiero CFIOSH, FIIRSM
Member - 45 posts

There will always be people who try and hide behind statute law. No one should sell their conscience because they do a job. A surgeon has every right to refuse to undertake an abortion if HE (sorry I should also have stated SHE even though every reader would know that this is what I meant) considers this to be immoral – irrespective if this is at 4 or 24 weeks.

Lillian is entitled to keep her job and refuse to preside over ceremonies which she finds immoral. I guess that there are very few examples where she would apply this.