Chris

Of all the posts I’ve seen on this forum that thoroughly misunderstand religious faith, this is probably the most succinct.

Faith isn’t a simple matter of choice; for many people, especially those from minority communities, following a religion is very much part of their community, and therefore their personal identity - the deep connection between the two is frequently misunderstood by Westerners.

For those who “choose” a religion outside of their upbringing there is often profound change in their way of living caused by the emergence of deep personal convictions. To even attempt to make a hierarchy of rights as you’re trying to do doesn’t just misunderstand what faith is, it’s just a bit ... well, crass. Sorry.

Also please don’t forget that London isn’t a typical world city and Western European democracies aren’t typical of human community the world over. The idea that religion is a personal bolt-on to be afforded minimal regard is a peculiarly modern, Western idea with very little analog in the present or the past.

And ... finally ... also bear in mind that that well-known religious zealot, Peter Tatchell, has supported the Ashers’ case from the outset. As a human rights campaigner of many years experience he’s well aware that you can’t pick and choose who gets to exercise their conscience and who doesn’t. Societies that try to legislate for that do tend to get it horribly wrong.

Thankfully, in this case, the Supreme Court has ruled that this is not what we have legislated for and the Ashers - and everyone else - remain free to choose, whether to personally or via business, what political or social causes to endorse. You don’t have to like what they believe but you do have to respect their right to believe it.