What are the odds of getting Christians, Jews and Muslims to agree on something? With one single piece of ill conceived legislation the Government have achieved what years of inter faith dialogue have failed to accomplish. But that’s not as encouraging as it sounds.

Consider the following three statements.

The Bishop of Durham, Tom Wright

“This completely fails to take into account the views and beliefs of all those involved. …the idea that new Labour can come up with a new morality which it forces on the Catholic Church after 2,000 years; I am sorry, this is amazing arrogance on the part of the Government.” The Times, 30 January 2007

The Muslim Council of Britain

“The Muslim Council of Britain fully supports the principled stand taken by the leaders of the Catholic and Anglican churches on the Sexual Orientation Regulations (SORs). The right to practise one’s faith… is a cornerstone of our society…” MCB Press Release, 25 January 2007

The Federation of Synagogues

“This legislation is forcing religious groups to operate against their convictions and that sets a very dangerous precedent.” The Jewish Chronicle, 2 February 2007

Spokesmen for all three faiths have identified the threat to religious belief posed by the Sexual Orientation Regulations [SORs]. Now, religious leaders are not known for straight talking, perhaps especially Anglicans! So when someone like Tom Wright uses the word ‘arrogance’ and aims it at the Government we ought to sit up and take notice.

I have written on the SORs elsewhere http://richardperkins.blogsome.com/2007/01/02/sexual-orientation-regulations/. I wrote to several Peers in anticipation of the forthcoming debate this Wednesday http://richardperkins.blogsome.com/2007/03/14/sors-letter-to-house-of-lords/ . I’d encourage you to read the material from the links to the Christian Institute and Christian Concern for our Nation.

In essence, these regulations will make it illegal for anyone who provides goods, services, facilities, premises, education or public functions to discriminate against a person on the grounds of their sexual orientation. Therefore, under these regulations Christians would be compelled to be involved in promoting behaviour the Bible teaches is immoral or face litigation and prosecution. In balancing the freedom of people to exercise their own sexual ethics and the freedom of people of the Christian faith to exercise their religious conscience the pendulum has swung well and truly in the favour of sexual activity.

There are four main areas that will be impacted by these regulations

1. Provision of teaching on sexual ethics in Schools

The curriculum must comply with these regulations regardless of what the Government claims. Both the Joint Committee on Statutory Instruments [the Parliamentary Lawyers] and the Joint Committee on Human Rights stated that though the SORs are unclear they ought to apply to what is taught in schools. Therefore, the teachers in our congregation would be required to teach that homosexual relationships are just as acceptable as married relationships. If they failed to do so and a parent felt that a pupil had been disadvantaged by the homosexual position not being advocated he or she would have been deemed to have acted illegally.

2. Provision of advice in the medical profession

Within the SORs there is no protection for individuals to guarantee their freedom of conscience. Therefore, a Christian GP would not be able to refuse to give a reference recommending homosexual parents as suitable for adopting because the GP did not consider it would be right or in the best interests of the child to be raised without a father and a mother.

3. Provision of goods or services by our self employed personnel

If any of our self employed personnel are approached by a homosexual group wanting to employ their services they are obliged by the SORs to quash their Christian convictions. They could therefore be required to be involved in promoting activities that he or she believes to be immoral.

4. Provision of Bible teaching on the issue of sexual ethics

It will be illegal for Church Pastors to teach a congregation that they should follow the Bible’s teaching on sexual morality even when it conflicts with the SORs. So if one of our staff were to teach that the Christian GP should follow the Bible’s teaching and risk being sued rather than be involved in encouraging immoral activity they would be vulnerable to litigation.

It doesn’t take long to realise that dear friends within our church are threatened by these regulations if they decide to live obediently to the Bible’s teaching. It seems very likely that we will lose the debate in both Houses. The Government are pushing this through regardless of the concerns of many and to the consternation of many MPs. Iain Duncan-Smith, the ex-Conservative Leader said

‘There should have been a full SOR debate in the House of Common, the procedure used by the Government has brough Parliament into disrepute’. 15th March 2007

Some who choose to obey the Bible’s teaching will be sued. A few many decide to go to prison rather than pay the financial penalty. Our children may one day ask what we did to oppose the persecution of Christian teaching. What will you say?