“Under the Equality Act 2010 it’s unlawful for an employer to discriminate against you because of your sex.
“Sex discrimination law covers almost all workers (men and women) and all types of organisations in the UK. It covers:
- employment terms and conditions
- pay and benefits
- promotion and transfer opportunities
Why only ‘almost all’? Why not just ALL? Why is the Church of England not only exempt from taxes, but also the law? More importantly, why would women even want to become a custodian of one of the most hateful religions on the planet? The religion that tells them that because of their gender they should feel shame. The religion that tells them they are the property of their husbands and fathers and are unfit to instruct people due to the Eve-mythology. The religion where women are currency and bargaining chips for the men who run their lives (e.g Lot). Absurdity aside, it is clear that senior clergy within the CofE, are aiming for promotion within the organisation, and there is nothing wrong with ambition and clerical posts are like any other employment.
The CofE has proposed that female bishops will only be posted on the highly discriminatory, and deeply patronising terms, that a male bishop (that the female bishop will have to defer to) will be posted as well and in a supervisory position to that of the female bishop in order to placate the parishioners who are yet to realise that this is the 21st century, and that gender discrimination is always unacceptable. The synod is so grossly out of touch with modern standards and equality, that they even admit that that they failed to anticipate the insult of this so-called compromise. How has it taken 12 years to come up with that sham of a ‘compromise’ and its masque of magnanimosity?
“Until recently the legislation – the fruit of 12 years’ labour that has pitted a minority of conservative evangelicals and traditionalist Anglo-Catholics against a growing majority of church members – had been expected to be given the stamp of approval.” – Lizzy Davies – The Observer, Sunday 8 July 2012
As usual the Archbishop of Canterbury has blundered in with his usual illiberal bluster about how the rest of the synod should be ‘penitent’ with regard to how ‘hard the decision would be’ to hold a vote on whether they would live by the law of the land and appoint female bishops. Just how out of touch can one person get. It shouldn’t even be an argument. After 12 years of delay and procrastination why have we not, as a nation, been boycotting them due to their sexist recruitment policy. The church is in no way ‘representative’ of any proportion of this country if it doesn’t pay tax and is exempt from the law. Fix those and they might have a claim to to that role.
“But if that adjournment bid is knocked back, a final approval vote will go ahead as planned and will need two-thirds of all houses of the church to vote for the measure in order for it to be passed. If it does not get that support and is voted down, the issue will be shelved until 2015.” – Lizzy Davies – The Observer, Sunday 8 July 2012
Objectionable as the presence of 16 un-elected Bishops from a non tax-paying organisation in the elected House of Commons, making political decisions for the whole country is (where are the secular, Hindu, Sikh, and Islamic ‘representatives’ in the same roles?), enough is enough. They must live by the laws of this land as they supersede church lore. The vote is irrelevant and will only show a proportion of society incapable of adapting to modern ideas about equality. The law is the law and the synod must follow it without exemptions (and while they’re at it they can start paying taxes).
Freedom of religion does not entail the freedom to discriminate on any grounds.