UK Christian Care Home Refuses to Ask Patrons about Sexual Orientation & Refuses to Display Homosexual Promotional Literature| Loses Funding

Christian Care Home Loses Funding Over Homosexuality Stance

By Maria Mackay, Christianity Today

Brighton & Hove City Council has pulled thousands of pounds worth of funding from a Christian care home because of its religious beliefs on homosexuality.

The council withdrew £13,000 of funding when the care home refused the council’s request to ask the elderly Christian residents about their sexual orientation every three months. The home also refused demands from the council that it use images of homosexuals in its promotional literature and show staff a Stonewall presentation on ‘gay rights’.

The home is run by Pilgrim Homes, a charity serving elderly Christians for more than 200 years. Its residents include former missionaries and a retired church minister.

Phil Wainwright, director of human resources at Pilgrim Homes, said he was told by the council that the home must ask residents if they were lesbian, gay, bisexual, heterosexual or ‘unsure’, even if they objected.

But managers at the care home told the council that meeting its demands would “unduly distress” the residents and go against their Christian ethos. They also informed the council that residents over the age of 80 in particular would regard probing from the council on sexual matters as “hostile and intrusive”.

“There was a strong feeling among people in the home that the questions were inappropriate and intrusive,” said Mr Wainwright. “They felt they had come to Pilgrim Homes because of its Christian ethos and were upset they were not protected from such intrusions.”

The council responded by accusing the home of “institutionalised homophobia” and withdrew the funding, which was being used to pay for warden services in sheltered housing.

Pilgrim Homes said it now plans to take Brighton & Hove Council to court for religious discrimination. The legal bid is being financially supported by The Christian Institute’s Legal Defense Fund.

The Christian Institute’s Mike Judge said: “Brighton Council is displaying a very prejudiced and discriminatory attitude to the religious beliefs held by the elderly residents of the home run by Pilgrim Homes.

“After a lifetime of Christian service, these elderly men and women deserve to live in a restful environment which supports and nurtures their Christian faith.

“This case is the latest in a series of troubling incidents where the rights of Christians are seemingly being ignored in favour of ‘gay rights’.”

[Hat-tip: Secular Heretic]

 

Technorati Tags: UK,freedom of religion,elderly home,christian care center,legal defense fund,pilgrim homes,morality

A Case For Morality

By William K. Vogeler, Esq.

Marriage is between a man and a woman.

It is such a simple declaration, but seemingly necessary as a matter of law today. Gay rights advocates rage that it is bigoted; activist courts claim it is discriminatory. But it is neither. It is, rather, an indication of moral confusion. Joyce Kilmer, a soldier and poet, stated the problem in the contradictions of his time. He recognized the greatness of God and the smallness of man. "Poems are made by fools like me, But only God can make a tree."

We as human beings have made many marvels, but we will never create better than God has created. Or if your god is Nature, you will never do better than evolution. Whatever our philosophical persuasion, we know this is true: we cannot create a universe, a planet or a person. And we cannot survive as a species without heterosexual relations.

The principle --- the supremacy of God or Nature --- underlies all human endeavors. We can change, even improve, the human condition. But ultimately we must recognize our very being depends on certain, self-evident truths.

One saving truth is that we are still moral beings. It defines and guides our conduct as individuals and as a society. If we deny our morality, we deny our humanity. In the realm of government, morality is center stage. But she has become more like a dreary background than a leading lady. Because of our limited ability to appreciate the real drama of life, we have lost sight of the fact that life is a morality play.

So the same-sex marriage issue --- without morality at its center ---has divided good people, independent states and a great country. The United States have defined marriage as between a man and a woman many times. But courts increasingly have overturned these laws, focusing on
notions of equal protection over democratic processes.

A handful of judges have called traditional marriage laws unconstitutional. At the same time, these non-elected jurists have frustrated millions of voters and fueled hate across the country. The arguments have pitted heterosexual rights against homosexual rights, civil rights against children's rights, and set in conflict many other public policies. And in the crossfire of this battleground issue, morality has been dismissed.

But morality cannot be ignored in this debate. Same-sex marriage laws raise the same moral questions as laws against bigamy, incest, prostitution, bestiality and pedophilia. As a country and as people, we have consistently outlawed these behaviors on moral grounds. We justify them to preserve families, protect children, promote health and otherwise bring order to society. But we do so ultimately because we know it is right.

For those of us who chose divine intelligence, we act on faith. For those who prefer human intelligence, we act on reason. In either case, we make a choice consistent with our belief about what is right. That is the essence of morality. This dynamic is more than a philosophical perspective. It is the engine of human progress. It is natural selection and faith in action --- opposite sides of the same coin.

So it is time for Americans to make another decision based on a moral conviction. We must hold this truth to be self-evident: Marriage is between a man and a woman.

Like our Founding Fathers, we must enact a national constitutional amendment to ward off an encroaching aristocracy --- those courts that have overruled the will of the people. As Thomas Jefferson wrote, enumerating certain inalienable rights endowed by our Creator:

"That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness."

In so doing, we will regain our democratic right to govern ourselves. We will assert our sovereign power to act according to the dictates of our conscience and our moral choices. In the words of Abraham Lincoln:

"That this nation, under God, shall have a new birth of freedom -- and that government of the people, by the people, for the people, shall not perish from the earth."