Magistrate forced out of family court for opposing homosexual adoptions
From Judiciary won't allow Christian Beliefs, posted March 3, 2007 at WorldNetDaily.com
A magistrate judge in Sheffield, England, has been told he cannot serve on the local court's Family Panel, even though he's been recognized as having "an unblemished record and is well regarded by fellow magistrates" because he is a Christian.
"This case is a clear picture of how Christian faith is becoming privatized in society," said Andrea Williams, of the Lawyers Christian Fellowship. "It is yet another example of the repression of Christian conscience and signals the prevalence of a secular 'new morality' and the erosion of Christian values at the expense of our children's welfare."
The case arose when McClintock realized he would be assigned to hear cases involving adoption by homosexual couples, which are allowed now under England's Civil Partnerships Act 2002. Realizing the concerns that might arise, he asked that his religious beliefs be accommodated and he be "screened" from such cases.
He also expressed concern that children would be put at risk by the unproven social experiment of homosexual duo adoptions.
"Andrew McClintock believes that the best interests of the child are served by placing them in a situation where they would have both a mother and a father and therefore he could not agree to participate in gay adoption," Williams said. "The imposition of secular values in every aspect of our lives will force those who hold Christian beliefs out of jobs. It will be to the detriment of the whole of society."
McClintock took his case to the Employment Tribunal in Sheffield, where he'd been a Justice of the Peace since 1988 after he was told in 2004 he must preside over cases that involved homosexual duos proposing to adopt. His lawsuit was against the Lord Chancellor and the Department of Constitutional Affairs, in which he explained that he had suffered discrimination because of his religious beliefs.
His request for accommodation was called for under Regulation 10 of the Employment Equality (Religion or Belief) Regulations 2003.
The Tribunal, however, said the case did not involve religious freedom or conscience. Further, the Tribunal concluded even if Mr. McClintock had been able to show he made his decision to resign based on his religious beliefs, there still was no case for discrimination.
"If a judge personally has particular views on any subject, he or she must put those views to the back of his or her mind when applying the law of the land impartially," the Tribunal ordered.
Read the rest of this article.
This should be serve as a warning to American Christians. If laws are changed to recognize homosexual behavior as the equivalent of heterosexual behavior Christians will not be allowed to function in the workplace according to biblical truth. They will often be forced to choose between loyalty to Christ and their jobs...
