It is now an archive for my newspaper and magazine pieces. My blog can now be read at: www.spectator.co.uk/stephenpollard
Politics, economics and culture from the master. Unmissable.
Melanie Phillips home page
Melanie Phillips' peerless blog. Read, and learn.
Daniel Finkelstein's Times Comment Central
A daily must-read.
Tim Worstall
Lots of interesting nibbles - and a ruthless swatter of economic gibberish.
Harry's Place
Must-read left of centre blog from writers who understand the threat to the West.
Clive Davis
Always interesting selection of culture and politics, from an Anglo-American bent.
Samizdata
Libertarian blog, packed every day.
Norm's blog
The thoroughly sensible thoughts of renowned left-wing academic Norman Geras, Professor of Government at Manchester. And cricket, too.
Public Interest
Peter Briffa's inimitable take on The Yazzmonster and other assorted demons.
Reform
The public sector reform group; their website is an invaluable source of data and ideas.
Centre for the New Europe
The leading European public policy think tank.
Developed by:
| January | 29 |
| 2007 |
I was in my sick bed as the debate raged over Cormac Murphy O'Connor's stance on the Equality Act and gay adoptions.
My own take is that there is one crucial inconsistency on the part of those who say Catholics should be allowed to discrimnate against homosexuals. And that inconsistency exposes the flaws in their argument.
It is hypocritical to argue on the one hand, as do many of those protesting for the right of Catholics to be able to discriminate, that Muslims must conform to the law, or even just the cultural norms, of the land, and then to argue at the same time that it’s perfectly fine for Catholics to put their private morality ahead of the law of the land. If as a society we reject bigotry and discrimination then that has to apply to all of us, Catholic, Muslim, Jew or Anglican.
So those who say make an exception for Catholics must also be saying that we should let Muslims run their own affairs, too. Yay to Sharia Law!
MessageSpace
Assume this comment is made to stir up debate Stephen ?!
Let us remember that the UK is built on c1700 years of Judaeo-Christian tradition. Our laws, education and values have been drawn from this foundation. I understand also that around 75% of the population see themselves as Christian, and that homosexuals make up 0.5% and Muslims around 2%. Therefore there is clear difference in history and majority between the muslim and Christian view
How on earth can we justify allowing children to be "adopted" by homosexual partners ? A family is a man, woman and children.
One of the root-cause issues of society breakdown is the erosion of the traditional family unit. This legislation, supported by all 3 major parties, shows how far we have slipped away from what is right and normal, and how inappropriate is the political leadership and media that "represent" the British people
Oh for a champion for common sense and traditional Christian values ! The UK faces imminent destruction from the 3 foes of the EU, radical Islam, and militant homosexuality. Now, more than ever in our history, we need a politician who will stand against these issues
Good to see the Pollard blog attracting its usual measured, sane commentary and not, for instance, a parodic melange of Simon Heffer and Mel P's craziest notions.
"The UK faces imminent destruction from... militant homosexuality" even though, we learn, homosexuals, presumably not all of whom are militant, "make up 0.5%" of the population.
Keep it up Neil. We'll stop them yet.
Depends on the law, n'est ce pas? After all, the law doesn't just happen, it is passed by people. Duh. Therefore, it can be passed in some other way. For instance, there is no absolute need for the law to deny a religion's right to define sin or to decide how they want to deal with children who have to be adopted. It is called freedom of conscience and has, until recently, been something this country is rightly proud of. No longer. We are now told that obeying the law, any law is the most important duty on anyone. When we talk about Muslims obeying the law we mean small matters like honour killings or female circumcision. Or are you going to argue that freedom of conscience must allow honour killings.
Incidentally, are there any Muslim adoption agencies and will they allow gay couples to adopt children?
Arguments for granting Catholic adoption agencies excemptions from the law because they are religious are wrong and should be rejected out of hand.
That said I think all adoption agencies should be able to discriminate in any way they wish regardless of whether the motivation is religious or not. Presumably no one has a monopoly in the adoption world so if anyone objects tot he behaviour of some agencies they can go to others in the field.
On the issue of putting 'private morality ahead of the law of the land', did anyone notice Rowan Williams' ridiculous assertion that "rights of conscience cannot be made subject to legislation"? If by "rights of conscience" we take him to mean "the right to act in accordance with one's own moral judgement", then it's obvious that this can't be absolutely protected from legislative interference. People's consciences tell them to do all sorts of things that are directly 'other-regarding' and which are therefore a proper province for legislation, even where the individual firmly and honestly believes their actions to be right.
http://follyandignorance.blogspot.com/
Stephen, there is absolutely no debate about if the Catholics this, then why not that? It's a simple enough matter. In Catholic eyes, it's perversion. Full stop. End of discussion. No ifs and but ifs.
Interesting that you should mention O'Connor, by the way and Stuart A reappears. You remember the last time? Four days it raged on your blog.
Dear Stuarta
Firstly, apologies for my late response, but I've been away so picked up your comments late. I'm not even sure whether you'll read this as it's now archived....
It's difficult to perceive from your prose but I do detect a whiff of sarcasm from your response. I actually agree that of the half a percent homosexuals, not all are militant, and you make a good point here. However, lets say 0.1% are miltant. They have a disproportionately loud voice, and, taken together with the miltant muslims, have our polititically correct media and politico's dancing to their tune.
In the process, they are being allowed to undermine, destroy our traditional British Christian values. This affects freedoms to speak, what's taught in the classroom, our laws, and fundamentelly, the family. This WILL eventually destroy Britain.
When the will of a militant minority is elevated over that of the passive and silent majority we had all better watch out
And by the way, your right to free speech would not be tolerated in most muslim states.