Criminal Justice and Immigration Bill

Part of the debate – in the House of Lords at 7:00 pm on 3rd March 2008.

Alert me about debates like this

Photo of Earl Ferrers Earl Ferrers Conservative 7:00 pm, 3rd March 2008

I am fascinated to hear the argument of the noble Baroness, Lady Turner, and admire the way in which she puts it, so clearly and carefully, on something she obviously feels very strongly about. I would like to agree with her but unfortunately do not find that I can.

When the noble Lord, Lord Thomas of Gresford, said that my noble friend Lord Waddington's amendment would mean that somebody giving such-and-such an observation would be not guilty, I can only tell him that my concern is that people who are making certain observations which they are entirely entitled to make will find themselves guilty. I worry about freedom of speech. Of course we understand about people who are homosexuals and are that way inclined, but that should not prevent a priest or, indeed, a right reverend Prelate getting up and saying that the belief of his church is that that practice is wrong. A lot of people may think it is right and natural, but it is reasonable for a church to say that it is not right.

Annotations

Adam Hodge
Posted on 4 Mar 2008 12:06 pm (Report this annotation)

Thank you Earl Ferrers for speaking up for those in the Church who cannot, by virtue of the Bible, concur with the Laws perspective re the acceptability of gay practises. Whilst one likes Gays as people, God didnt/doesnt much approve of gay sexual practises as I understand it, or a lot of the more free sexual assumptions of today for that matter.
Is it not reasonable therefore for the Church to have the lawful opportunity to choose not to employ someone of a behaviour not acceptable to their precepts, without being accused of being sexist or whatever 'ist' seems popular.

david skinner
Posted on 27 Mar 2008 7:42 pm (Report this annotation)

Well might we be concerned for the freedom of speech but even more we should be concerned for the moral and physical safety of our children and grandchildren. The government is aggressively running a campaign to raise an awareness amongst children, as soon as they have hung their coats on their primary school pegs, of issues surrounding sex. Sex is an extremely emotive subject, one in which it is difficult remain objective. Even by discussing it the pituitary glands are likely to be stimulated.

Having aroused children, discussions are going to be crafted in such as way that they will not be allowed to arrive at conclusions of their own and even less to express them. This goes completely against the theory of education that has formed the foundations of western European civilisation for two thousand years. What is being proposed is nothing less than the elimination of categories, for the deconstruction of the whole system of natural and social order, authority, the family, community and ultimately society. Homosexuality is the weapon being used to destroy this greater system. If one dismantles the family, the whole of society unravels. If grown men are forced or threatened with Marxist, diversity brainwashing what chance have little children to withstand such political correctness? Will Baroness Turner want to see children and their parents appearing in court or even parents even having their children taken into care. As it is those who adopt or foster children and refuse to teach children about other kinds of love are being systematically removed.