Christian registrar loses European court case

“What this case shows is that Christians with traditional beliefs about marriage are at risk of being left out in the cold.

“If the Government steamrollers ahead with its plans to redefine marriage, then hundreds of thousands of people could be thrown out of their jobs unless they agree to endorse gay marriage

Bishop Egan’s letter to the Prime Minister:


If she disagrees, she should seek employment elsewhere. This seems like a person who believes liquor is evil working in a bar.

That’s like saying a math prof should quit his job because the department says he has to teach 2+2=5.

Sorry - this is a bit of apples and oranges here.
This is not a case where the woman sought employment where her beliefs would be compromised…She has worked there for many years…it is the law that has changed.

In order for your analogy to work it would need to be something like a case where a person worked at a restaurant for many years and then the restaurant gets a liquor license.

This very point was addressed in the video that accompanies the news story in the OP…
It is just and reasonable to assume and require that any new applicant be willing and able to perform civil partnership ceremonies. It is not just and reasonable to require it of someone already working there when the law was changed - since there were ample registrars available willing to register such unions.


Here is a quick summary of the case regarding the Christian registrar:

Marriage registrar Lillian Ladele worked for Islington Borough Council in London. When civil partnerships were legalised in 2004, Miss Ladele refused to conduct them, saying it was against her religious beliefs.

In December 2007, the local authority changed the rules governing their registrar’s working conditions.

Miss Ladele went from effectively working on a freelance basis, which allowed her to swap civil partnership ceremonies with colleagues, to a system which granted her far less flexibility.

Miss Ladele argued she was being forced by the north London council to chose between her religious beliefs and her job. She claimed she was shunned and accused of being homophobic for refusing to carry out the ceremonies.

In July 2008, an employment tribunal ruled in Miss Ladele’s favour, agreeing that she had been harassed.

At the time, Miss Ladele hailed the decision as a “victory for religious liberty”.

But in December that year the Employment Appeal Tribunal reversed the ruling, and it was upheld for a second time by the Court of Appeal in 2009.

The Supreme Court refused to allow Miss Ladele to appeal again, prompting her decision to consider taking her case to the European Court of Human Rights.

But the European judges rejected her action in January 2013.

So, if I understand correctly, when she was a free-lance employee she was allowed to pass along civil union responsibilities to other employees. But when she became a regular employee she was no longer allowed to do so.

Remember that this ruling cuts both ways. If a Registrar refused to marry a couple because they were Catholic, or Christian, then the couple would be in the right and the Registrar wrong.


In what world is Christianity comparable to homosexual conduct?

In the world of human rights. Everyone has the human right to equal treatment in a Registrar’s office. The Registrar may not refuse service to homosexuals; the Registrar may not refuse service to Christians. This is not about homosexual conduct, it is about homosexual people.


DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit