ECHR Right In Three of Four Cases
The European Court of Human Rights has ruled on four cases brought by Christians. In two of the cases the issue was crosses, and in the other two cases the issue was homosexual relationships. The ECHR ruled in favour of one of the Christians. Three of the ECHR’s rulings were right.
Nadia Eweida is the only Christian who won her case. Though I think Christians should be able to demonstrate their Christianity without wearing crosses as Jesus did, Nadia Eweida’s cross didn’t put her or British Airways customers at risk. People who follow other religions are allowed by British Airways to wear clothing and jewellery associated with their religion, so Christians should be able to wear crosses. Members of the government have expressed their support for Nadia Eweida, but lawyers acting on behalf of the government opposed her. Had the government not chosen to continue fighting against Nadia Eweida wearing a cross, this case wouldn’t have gone so far.
Nurse Shirley Chaplin also wanted to wear a cross, but the hospital where she was employed objected to her cross on health and safety grounds. Had she worn a cross that she could successfully demonstrate would not put the health and safety of her, patients or other hospital staff at risk, she may have won her case had it gone as far as it did.
Gary McFarlane wanted to work for Relate, an organisation that offers relationship counselling. He objected to counselling homosexuals. He knew that Relate provided counselling to people regardless of their sexuality, so if he didn’t want to counsel homosexuals he shouldn’t have asked Relate to employ him.
Lillian Ladele was a registrar before homosexuals could have civil partnerships. After civil partnerships were legalised, Lillian Ladele was disciplined for refusing to conduct civil partnership ceremonies. Her employer should have offered employees new contracts which stated they would conduct civil partnerships, and made conducting civil partnerships a condition of contracts offered to new employees. Employees who didn’t want to conduct civil partnerships should have either been made redundant, or allowed to continue working until their contracts expired.