Coop Bars Christian Voice For Anti-Homosexual Views

"The Co-operative Bank has asked an evangelical Christian group to close its account because of its anti-homosexual views.
The bank said the opinions of Christian Voice were incompatible with its support for diversity." http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/4617849.stm

An interesting one. Whilst I share the Co-op's consternation at CV's views I'm not entirely sure about refusing to let them hold an account. I say this purely because there is an issue about where organisations draw the line. On the other hand the Co-op does make a good point about supporting diversity within its workplace and elsewhwere. Equally CV raise a valid point regarding where this leaves other religious groups with similarly homophobic views which, rightly or wrongly, are grounded in their interpretation of their religion.

So I need some help making my mind up on this one!

[Roy MM]

Surely political/moral/religion views should not be a priviso for your banking needs, rediculous.

[punky]

Originally Posted by andyl

So I need some help making my mind up on this one!

Same here. I am a big supporter of gay rights, so on the one hand, the Co-Op has done good. On the other hand, this is a forum of censorship with the Co-Op determining what they consider people should she and read, which I really despise.

This always comes up with freedom of speech. Eventually someone is going to say something that hurt's someone's feelings, so where do you draw the line between acceptable and unacceptable? I would rather people not be upset by intolerant views, than to censor people who may upset someone, but its hard to do it that way.

This is a free country, and they are able to serve whoever they want. If that's what they want to do, then good luck to them, I suppose. It is a good public relations exercise, I guess lots of people will move to them in support of their descision.

[Mr_love_monkey]

Well, the co-op has always touted it's self as an ethical bank, not doing business with companies that use sweatshops, extremist groups, so this action is really inline with it's 'mission statement'.

[Derek]

I'd say they are entitled to their opinion and don't think they should have been forced to close their account.

Other people may not agree with it but I don't think banks etc. should decide who is and who isn't allowed to hold an account.

I actually DO see the logic of this situation.

The term Co-op comes from cooperative.This means a diverse group of people who buy,trade and work together and in return for being a member of the group get certain benefits back.So how can a Co-operative bank accept the diversity of it's members if one of those members has issues with other members of that group?

I remember the days when the Co-Op paid out dividend to it's members.My mother would take me out for a celebratory meal.

[bmxbandit]

imo religion is not an excuse for racial or sexual intolerance, nor is it even mitigating circumstances. whether this is for the bank to decide is much less clear... but the co-op do pride themselves on being an ethical bank, and they clearly do not fit the bill.
__________________

i suppose i agree with the decision for corporate clients, but that begs the question of whether they can (or should) extend it to individuals. mush less solid ground

[Pierre]

I trust they will not be letting any Islamic groups open an account with them also? As they too oppose homosexuality.

Pah! who cares anyway, it's their little bank they can do what they want. I'm sure the CV wont lose any sleep. They'll probably fina a better rate elsewhere anyway.

[Ramrod]

I bet they wouldn't dare do it to an Islamic group........too much risk of a PC and/or violent backlash..............

[bmxbandit]

Originally Posted by Ramrod

I bet they wouldn't dare do it to an Islamic group........too much risk of a PC and/or violent backlash..............

maybe that's why they did it, to set a precedent with a xian group... thus avoiding and possiblty of being labelled racist/sexist/other-ist themselves?

cynical, moi?

[Russ]

I'm aware that many Christian views are misunderstood and/or unpopular with current issues however any faith or section of society is entitled to own them. I recall there was a similar situation recently with the BNP being asked to close their bank account. Regardless of one's controversial views, people are perfectly entitled to see the world in any way they deem fit. Taking the Co-op's view, it's as if having anti-homosexual views is *wrong* - and I believe this is not the case. Holding such a view may be seen as undesirable or even ignorant, but nobody has the right to decide someone's views are wrong.

However looking at the greater picture, the Co-op is entitled to decide who they want as customers - they don't have to give someone an account.

[bmxbandit]

Originally Posted by Russ D

Regardless of one's controversial views, people are perfectly entitled to see the world in any way they deem fit.

people, absolutely. organisations, i'm not so sure...

[Russ]

Originally Posted by bmxbandit

people, absolutely. organisations, i'm not so sure...

I don't see why that make a difference - a group of people is not too far connected from an organisation.

On the issue of Islam I wonder if the Co-op provides Islam-friendly bank accounts. But, if they are going to pursue this policy, I would certainly expect them to be even-handed in their treament of religious groups who espouse similar views, be the Islamic, Catholic or whatever. That is not the same as excluding those religions as the issue of homesuxuality etc tends often to be an interpretation. With CV it looks to be a message of 'hate' that has sparked this.

Of course none of us would I'm sure have any problem with the Co-op refusing to deal with the BNP or Combat 18. As I say it's a question of where you draw the line. Having said that the Co-op is free to pursue its ethical stance, or being cynical, it's marketing plan. I have seen little sign of them adopting ethical stances towards employees of CIS who seem to get the brown end of the employment stick.

[Jules]

I suppose that they should be admired for putting principals before profit having said that I think it is a shame that people are not more tolerant about other peoples lifestyles