Christian Sex Counselor Loses Antigay Appeal

Your perspective of Christianity is very narrow. Read the Song of Songs in the Bible. Sex was created by God for our enjoyment. The reason it was ordained between a man and a woman within the confines of marriage was for our protection. If we followed this plan, we would not have so many people with STD's and AIDS.

The point is that there is a law in Britain which prohibits people from refusing goods and services on the grounds of sexuality, the bill was delayed for several years by the religious right who wanted a lo0op hole to say that it was OK to opt out on religious grounds. There have been several cases that have come forward since the bill was passed that argue that it is discriminatory against religious people(so far only christian people) to force them to offer goods and services to gay people, these good and services include offering hotel rooms, performing civil partnership ceremonies (a completely secular ceremony which affords the same legal rights as mariage), and now sex councelling. So far all of these challenges to the law have failed, but I suspect they will keep trying. Religion should not be used as an excuse for bigotry, whether it's misogony, racism or homophobia.

If this case had not gone the way it did, this case would then had led to another case for Moslems. who God knows want this and that, and this and that. I'm sick of it all. Equality for all, and all for equality. The exception is the security of all. If someone dresses to hide their features, no matter their sex, is violating security laws and regulations. In this day and age we must all be very careful. I also guess that the comment abut " whites only" signs was tongue in cheek humor? As a resident of the U.S., I haven't seen it since about 1962.

Once this man realised he'd be required to counsel gay couples, he should have retired on principle. Would he refuse to counsel atheists or agnostics too? Or non-churchgoers? No, sorry, religion is subjective, a matter of personal opinion. Sexual orientation - however much people dislike to hear this - is fact. He should think for himself, not what some ancient book supposedly told him.

I do think that some of the previous comments made show that some of you are missing the point of this judgement, which I think has been best summed up by Terry Sanderson, president of the National Secular Society, said: 'This is the right outcome for this case. 'The law must be clear that anti-discrimination laws exist to protect people, not beliefs. 'The right to follow a religious belief is a qualified right and it must not be used to legitimise discrimination against gay people who are legally entitled to protection against bigotry and persecution. Here in the UK we now have laws that prohibit discrimination against many groups in society, gays being one. This counsellor thought that his religion offered him some exemption from UK discrimination laws, thankfully the Judge did not agree. This case underpinned our fight against discrimination of any kind and that is what it was about.

@Bobby, it isn't an issue of right of free association. You can "associate" with whomever you wish but In Britain it is illegal to discriminate on the basis of sexual orientation (etc) in the provision of goods and services. if you work in a bar, you can't just turn around and refuse to serve someone because they're black or gay or muslim… And sex therapy is no different. Besides, this man wasn't working for a Christian service so he has no right to impose his religion on his employer and its clients.

Christian sex counselor = easiest job in the world. No free thought needed or desired; in fact, all you have to remember are a couple of key phrases: "Sex is sinful... don't have it" and "If you insist on committing this vile sin, there's only one reason, position, etc. to do it so that god won't smite you". LOL

You're right, Bobby. Everyone chooses their clients. That's why you still see so many "whites only" signs.

@Bobby: Way to COMPLETELY misread this situation. By your own view, this man should have sought out a CHRISTIAN-ONLY counseling service. NO ONE forced this jackass to accept employment with the service. One's "religious" beliefs should NOT be allowed to trump employment requirements. You want to work somewhere that's going to accomodate your religious beliefs, go work for a facility operated by that particular religion. In the US, an employer covered by EEOC guidelines is only required to accomodate personal religious beliefs that do NOT unduly interfere with the operations of the business. Would you accept this man's refusal to counsel a Jewish couple or his insistence on trying to convert them to Christianity based on his "Christian beliefs?"

Here's a thought. During your initial job interview find out if your religion will get in the way of your job.