Some "big news" recently that the woman who worked for British Airways who had already won a ruling to allow her to wear a cross in the workplace, has now taken that same case to the European Court of Human Rights and proven that she has the same right there too.
Cue ridiculously misleading headlines:The Independent:
"Christian woman wins landmark discrimination case."("Landmark"? Seriously?)The FT:
"BA employee wins right to wear cross."(She already HAD that right. FFS!)
And of course, the Daily Fail:
"'Thank You Jesus' Christian British Airways employee tell of joy as after European court finds she DID face discrimination over silver cross."(Thanks Jesus! You've allowed a court to re-state the obvious! Well done!)
What most of the coverage is failing to make clear is that there were in fact FOUR court cases being brought before the ECHR and the other three ALL LOST their court cases
One of those who lost their court case was Gary McFarlane
, a relationship counsellor who refused to counsel gay couples because of his religious views. I previously posted an interview with him here
(shocked at the lack of opposing voices provided in the interview, but fairly pleased with the amount of pressure placed by the interviewer himself).
The other two were:- Lillian Ladele
, a chaplain who refused to perform civil partnerships
. It has now been decided that her wish to discriminate on religious grounds does not trump gay rights
or the requirements of her employers.- Shirley Chaplin
, a nurse who had refused to accept the option of wearing a cross a different way in her workplace, such as in the form of a lapel pin. She lost the case that wearing the cross on a chain, which is against the uniform rules for nurses in UK hospitals, was a necessary part of her freedom of religious expression in the workplace.Andrew Copson, as always, delivers some proper common sense below:(video link)Side-Note
Interestingly, a google image search for "ECHR religion rulings" mostly comes up with images related to a case from 2010 where a woman was unable to get her abortion within Ireland in spite of a risk to her life. There were a lot of protests against the ruling by anti-choicers, but perhaps if Ireland had taken that case a little more seriously (since unlike the above, it actually contradicted their own rulings) Savita might still be alive.(cross-posted to atheism)