It's been another excellent day for LGBT rights in the United Kingdom.
The "Christian" (I'll explain the inverted commas in a moment) guest house owners who refused to allow a gay couple to stay, in clear contravention of the law, have lost their case in the Supreme Court. They were
funded by the homophobic Christian Institute in their lengthy struggle to have the right to discriminate against the gay couple, in case you wondering. They lost in the County Court, they lost (unanimously) in the Court of Appeal, and now they've lost (unanimously) in the Supreme Court. You'd hope they've got the quite clear message by now.
One of the most heartening aspects of this case were the words of Baroness Hale, the Deputy President of the Supreme Court, and as such the most senior woman judge in the country. She went way beyond simply rejecting the guest-house owners' spurious arguments, with this passage right at the end of her judgment:
"Sexual orientation is a core component of a person's identity which requires fulfilment through relationships with others of the same orientation... [Homosexuals] were long denied the possibility of fulfilling themselves through relationships with others. This was an affront to their dignity as human beings which our law has now (some would say belatedly) recognised. Homosexuals can enjoy the same freedom and the same relationships as any others. But we should not underestimate the continuing legacy of those centuries of discrimination, persecution even, which is still going in many parts of the world."
These are beautiful words, coming as they do, from someone so very senior in the judiciary. When I studied law (at the same Cambridge college as Baroness Hale, no less!) I remember sitting in a supervision in 1994 reading the words of the Law Lords in the recently handed down R v Brown case. It followed a homophobic witch-hunt by the Police, and the overtones of the judgement were extremely unpleasant. How times change, and so very rapidly.
 |
| The wonderful Baroness Hale of Richmond |
The owners of the guest-house in this case have taken every opportunity to portray themselves as reasonable, simple Christian believers. It is actually hard not to see them as are hard-nosed zealots, determined to take their alleged right to discriminate as far as they possibly can. They have chosen to open a business and simply can't expect to get away in 2013 with the equivalent of hanging a "No Blacks, No Irish" sign on their door. They do not even share the part of the building that was used as a commercial guesthouse with their private living quarters, nor is their any evidence they asked straight couples for proof of marriage: quite the contrary.
They will continue to portray themselves as a persecuted minority in the ilk of the early Christian martyrs. There is a certain group, like them, who seem to revel in their status as long-suffering Joan of Arc types. Being thrown to the lions in ancient Rome is nothing compared to what they suffer. They were after all simply
"following God's word" in discriminating against the gay couple. After today's judgement they said they preferred to disobey the law of the land if it meant obeying "the law of God". They forget that it's
their interpretation of the law of God, and there are certain huge flaws in their argument
as I've pointed out before with a quick look at Leviticus.
For any straight readers, imagine the personal offence and damage to your basic dignity at being told that cannot stay somewhere because of your relationship. It happened to my friend Henrietta and her girlfriend in an expensive boutique hotel one Easter, before this legislation existed, which wasn't that long ago. The aggressive hotel owner told her he "wouldn't have any of that going on under his roof" and literally threw their bags out of the reception.
Of course there are amusing elements to this case too. I love the assumption that sharing a double bed means you're going to have sex (or will be tempted to). It's positively Victorian: hands above the sheets, boys and girls! How about the times I've shared a double-bed with sundry male and female friends, with my mother, and indeed with my dog, without feeling even the
slightest need to shag my bed-fellow in the middle of the night. Moreover, who needs a double-bed if you do actually fancy your bedroom mate? Do these people have no imagination? :-)
Christian HomophobiaI still encounter homophobia on a regular basis on Twitter. A common theme arises: by no means all Christians are homophobes, but almost all homophobes I come across seem to be Christians.
There's the zealot Catholic stalker of mine who talks not about gay people, but of people who "have SSA" (same-sex attraction) as if it were an affliction or a temporary disorder that can be "cured". I didn't chose my sexual orientation, honey - you however chose your faith.. and your nasty, bigoted views. Then there are the random men, often from America and Australia, who just hurl out violent homophobic abuse to strangers. It's a very odd straight man who spends all his time thinking about gay sex and gay men. You don't need to be Dr Freud to take a guess at what's going on here.
 |
| Who you trying to kid?! |
As ever, the hollow vessels make the most noise, however, and it's important to remember that the bulk of Christians I interact with don't share this type of view point. In fact several I know are embarrassed, at pains to disassociate themselves from these attitudes, and are genuinely some of the kindest people I know. It's a constant task to remind yourself of them, but it would make me guilty of the same prejudice I deplore not to. Aside from anything, they're a delight to talk to.
I therefore deliberately put the word "Christian" in inverted commas at the start of this blog post because my understanding is that the type of people who would shut people out, discriminate, judge and behave spitefully to others based on Jesus' teachings are about as far away from "salvation" as it gets. It's just such a shame they have such enormously big gobs and make you forget about the good guys.
Going ForwardGay men, in particular, were often accused in the past of being unable to forge lasting relationships and commitment. Imagine the effects on their relationships if for a chunk of their life they were at risk of being arrested for having private, consensual sex in their own home. Imagine what it would be like to live through Mrs Thatcher's government introducing the
most spiteful piece of hate-legislation parliament has probably ever passed, with words in it like "pretend family relationships". Imagine hearing as recently as 2012 from
the most senior Catholic in Britain (who as it turned out sexually assaulted young male priests), and half the Tory party in Parliament, that your relationship was in no way worthy of being put on the same footing as heterosexual marriages. Imagine not knowing for sure until 27 November 2013 whether you could go away for a break together and risk having a guest-house shut you and your partner out for being gay.
All of that has a massive knock-on effect. Everyone wants their loving relationships affirmed and their love for one another honoured by friends, family and society at large. When the law allows the discrimination it has done, it places an enormous strain on things. The fact that so many LGBT people have worked through all this and led happy, fulfilling lives with contented relationships is a real testament to them. As the legal and societal position continues to improve, so I believe will the lives and relationships of those in the LGBT community. This a wonderful, wonderful thing.
So it's been another great day, just like the day Parliament finally passed the Same Sex Marriage Bill. Thank you, Baroness Hale, and your learned colleagues. You have no appreciation of the ripple effect your splendid words and sentiments may come to have.
