Results tagged “law”

Despite making a huge gaffe when it came to gay rights recently (as covered here), David Cameron has claimed his party now has a good record on gay rights.

Well.

Step forward Chris Grayling:

The Tories were embroiled in a furious row over lesbian and gay rightson Saturday after the shadow home secretary, Chris Grayling, was secretly taped suggesting that people who ran bed and breakfasts in their homes should "have the right" to turn away homosexual couples.

In a recording of the meeting of the Centre for Policy Studies, obtained by the Observer, Grayling makes clear he has always believed that those who run B&Bs should be free to turn away guests.

"I think we need to allow people to have their own consciences," he said. "I personally always took the view that, if you look at the case of should a Christian hotel owner have the right to exclude a gay couple from a hotel, I took the view that if it's a question of somebody who's doing a B&B in their own home, that individual should have the right to decide who does and who doesn't come into their own home.

He draws a distinction, however, with hotels, which he says should admit gay couples. "If they are running a hotel on the high street, I really don't think that it is right in this day and age that a gay couple should walk into a hotel and be turned away because they are a gay couple, and I think that is where the dividing line comes."

Now, if you think Grayling's distinction is a reasonable one then, bearing in mind he is in line to be the next Home Secretary, you're welcome to him. But the discriminatory position, let alone the intellectually and morally inconsistent one, he holds should be more than a major worry to every fair-minded citizen of this country.

Following my recent post on the Fiona Pilkington case, please do read this article by Tom Shakespeare (a well-respected disability academic) on the topic of disability hate crime. It is more powerful because Tom was previously skeptical about the specific issue of disability hate crime:

David Askew's tragedy follows the deaths of Raymond Atherton, Rikki Judkins, Steven Hoskin, Barrie-John Horrell. Kevin Davies, Fiona Pilkington, Christine Lakinski and Christopher Foulkes over the last few years. Each of these individuals was targeted because they were vulnerable and disabled, exploited, humiliated, and finally killed. Looking again at the evidence, and thinking more deeply about the problem, I realise how mistaken I was to trivialise hate crime. It's not just a matter of bullying. It's not something that people can just ignore or laugh off. It is a scourge on our society. We are members of a community where the most vulnerable people live in fear of their lives and where they are being terrified on a daily basis by the bored or the loutish or the dispossessed. I think my mental block arose because I did not want to believe that human beings could be so vile. I was wrong.

Unfortunately, though the church is clearly a hypocritical, sexist, homophobic institution which doesn't have any credibility, let alone moral authority, there are still some people who think it's lead is worth following.

The stories below demonstrate as much.

First, pharmacists:

Pharmacists across the UK have been told they can continue to refuse to prescribe items that might clash with their personal religious beliefs.A revised code of conduct from the new industry regulator will allow staff to opt out of providing items such as the morning-after pill and contraception.

Second, B&B owners:

A gay couple were turned away from a Berkshire guest house by the owner who said it was "against her convictions" for two men to share a bed. Michael Black and John Morgan, from Brampton, Cambridgeshire, had booked a double room at the Swiss B&B, Terry's Lane, in Cookham, for Friday night. But when they arrived owner Susanne Wilkinson refused to let them stay. She admitted she did turn the couple away because it was against her policy to accommodate same sex couples.

All I can suggest is that, if you provide any sort of service or come into contact with a religious person who holds the above sort of views, you withdraw any service you provide to them because it "clashes with your personal belief" or is "against your convictions".

As much as anyone can be pleased with anything to do with this case, I am pleased to see that officers from Leicestershire police are being investigated by the Independent Police Complaints Commission over the tragic Fiona Pilkington case.

I don't say this because I take comfort in any individual being hauled over the coals for what they have or haven't done, though I understand this is likely to be an outcome of the investigation. The key issues for me in this are (1) responsibility and (2) what we can learn from it.

So far as responsibility goes, with racially-motivated and homophobic crime, the various agencies involved in the criminal justice system are relatively good at doing what they should do to ensure cases are brought before the courts and defendants prosecuted. For some reason, the same cannot be said of disability hate crime. Thus, using the Pilkington case as a further opportunity to understand who, ultimately, is responsible for addressing the circumstances in this case (as in others), and communicating that to all relevant agencies, will represent a good outcome.

In terms of what we can learn from this particular case, some of the relevant authorities involved in the Pilkington case have apologised for the serious mistakes that were made. If this investigation can build on that apology and help us to understand more of why this situation was allowed to grow as it did, and to enable us to put in place measures to prevent as far as possible this happening again, then that will also be a good outcome.

Let's hope for everyone those two outcomes can be achieved as a result of the IPCC's investigation.