Freedom of religion in the United Kingdom
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Freedom of religion in the United Kingdom varies across the countries of the United Kingdom, as the three legal systems (see English law, Scots law and Northern Ireland law) encompass religious freedom in different ways, reflecting the nature of religion in the United Kingdom.
The head of state also heads the established church in England, and the status of the Church of Scotland in Scotland is laid down in law.
The United Kingdom is a signatory of the European Convention on Human Rights which provides a right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion. Article 9 guarantees "the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion; this right includes freedom to change his religion or belief and freedom, either alone or in community with others and in public or private, to manifest his religion or belief, in worship, teaching, practice and observance" and that "freedom to manifest one's religion or beliefs shall be subject only to such limitations as are prescribed by law and are necessary in a democratic society in the interests of public safety, for the protection of public order, health or morals, or for the protection of the rights and freedoms of others".
Contents |
[edit] Act of Settlement
The Act of Settlement 1701 decrees that that the monarch of the United Kingdom "shall join in communion with the Church of England". This act was specifically designed to prevent a Catholic monarch from ascending to the throne, but in effect discriminates against all religions other than Anglicanism. Members of the Royal family in line of succession who marry a Roman Catholic (though not adherents of other denominations or faiths) are excluded from the succession.
[edit] Blasphemy
The crime of blasphemy was retained until 2008. The last person to be imprisoned for blasphemy in the UK was John William Gott in 1922, for comparing Jesus Christ to a clown. The next blasphemy case was in 1976, when Mary Whitehouse brought a private prosecution (Whitehouse v. Lemon) against the editor of Gay News for blasphemous libel after he published a poem by James Kirkup called The Love That Dares Speak Its Name. Denis Lemon was given a nine month suspended sentence and a £500 fine for publishing the "most scurrilous profanity" which portrayed the sexual love of a Roman centurion for the body of Christ on the cross. The sentence was upheld on appeal.
In this appeal case, Lord Scarman held that the modern law of blasphemy was correctly formulated in Article 214 of Stephen's Digest of the Criminal Law, 9th edition (1950). This states as follows:
- Every publication is said to be blasphemous which contains any contemptuous, reviling, scurrilous or ludicrous matter relating to God, Jesus Christ or the Bible, or the formularies of the Church of England as by law established. It is not blasphemous to speak or publish opinions hostile to the Christian religion, or to deny the existence of God, if the publication is couched in decent and temperate language. The test to be applied is as to the manner in which the doctrines are advocated and not to the substance of the doctrines themselves.
In 1996 the European Court of Human Rights (case #19/1995/525/611) upheld a ban on Visions of Ecstasy, an erotic video about a 16th century nun, based on the video infringing on the blasphemy law. The Court estimated that a limited ban on vulgar or obscene publications that would be offensive to believers, while keeping legal the criticism of religion, was compatible with the principles of a democratic society.
On May 8, 2008 the crime of blasphemy was abolished. [1].
[edit] Adoption agencies
The Equality Act[2] is applied equally to religious-based and secular adoption agencies. The Catholic adoption agencies unsuccessfully attempted to negotiate a compromise that would include an exemption for religious-based agencies, which would have allowed them to continue to facilitate adoption for traditional opposite-sex parents only.
[edit] Education
Several university student associations have implemented rules that require affiliated groups to allow "anybody, regardless of faith, ethnicity or sexuality, to sit on their ruling committees and to address their meetings."[3] However some Christian Unions say they should be allowed to require that their ruling committees share their beliefs.
[edit] Service provision
In May 2008, Lillian Ladele, a registrar from Islington, London, took her employer, Islington Borough Council, to the London Central Employment Tribunal, with the financial backing of the Christian Institute[4]. Ladele had refused to conduct civil partnerships on religious grounds, and following complaints from other staff she was disciplined under the Council's Fairness for All policy. Ladele claimed she had been subject to direct and indirect discrimination, and harassment in the workplace, on grounds of her religion.[5] In July 2008, the tribunal found in Ladele's favour, however this ruling was overturned by the Employment Appeal Tribunal in December, 2008. [6]
[edit] See also
[edit] Footnotes
- ^ [1]
- ^ No exemption for church adoption, BBC News, 29 January 2007
- ^ Bishops back student fight for religious freedom on campus, TimesOnline, 24 November 2006
- ^ Christian registrar 'threatened with sack' after refusing to conduct gay marriages | Mail Online
- ^ BBC NEWS | England | London | Registrars 'in fear' over beliefs
- ^ Landmark rulings strengthen gay rights in workplace. The Guardian, December 20, 2008
