Politics and personal beliefs

[Salu]

http://news.independent.co.uk/uk/pol...icle363108.ece

The burning question is "Can she be minister for equality if she thinks homosexuality is a Sin"?

There was some debate on this yesterday on local radio....Personally I think she can. She may not condone it but as long a she works to provide an equal opportunity for everyone it shouldn't be a problem. Just because she may not agree with something does not mean she will necessarily persecute or actively discriminate against something....and of course she could always discriminate without vocalising her believes anywayââ‚Ã⠀šÃ‚¬Ãƒâ€šÃ‚¦.

You could also argue that if she was not allowed to do this job then she would not have been given an equal opportunity either.

I think that it is kind of a stupid idea to give her the job but I do not think it will interfere with her job. She could quite easily put her personal beliefs aside and do her job effectivly

[Nugget]

Originally Posted by Damien

I think that it is kind of a stupid idea to give her the job but I do not think it will interfere with her job. She could quite easily put her personal beliefs aside and do her job effectivly

I'm not so sure about that - her beliefs didn't really impact on her remit as Education Secretary, but she wa pretty lousy at that anyway

[Russ]

Originally Posted by Salu

The burning question is "Can she be minister for equality if she thinks homosexuality is a Sin"?

I think a more prudent question would be "Does she think homosexuality is a sin?" - being Catholic doesn't mean she automatically would.

[Salu]

She deliberately avoided answering that when asked directly on Radio 4 I believe. This has lead to the speculation above.

[Russ]

Perhaps she avoided it because she didn't want a religious-based debate?

[etccarmageddon]

or she has something to hide?

[Russ]

There IS that possibility but I prefer to give her the benefit of the doubt on this occasion.

[iSteve]

Originally Posted by Damien

I think that it is kind of a stupid idea to give her the job but I do not think it will interfere with her job. She could quite easily put her personal beliefs aside and do her job effectivly

I agree, it's possible to put aside personal beliefs and do a job well - The Blairs, for example, are religious too - but their government repealed Section 28, which forbid the 'promotion' (i.e. discussion) of homosexuality in schools.

If it transpires her beliefs are infering with her performing the role of equality minister, then and only then should she go. But I assume she's given a vow privately that it won't, and that she wouldn't have taken on te role if she thought they'd be any conflict, and so until we see evidence of the contrary, I think we should take her on her word.

To do otherwise would be to practice discrimination (against her) on the grounds of her religion.

That all said, I think Blair could have made a better choice...

[Ramrod]

Originally Posted by Russ D

I think a more prudent question would be "Does she think homosexuality is a sin?" - being Catholic doesn't mean she automatically would.

Her membership of Opus Dei would increase the likelihood that she does think its a sin.
Hell, putting her in charge of something like this is like putting Russ in charge of the dept of fossils at some university...(no offence Russ)

Originally Posted by Ramrod

Her membership of Opus Dei would increase the likelihood that she does think its a sin.
Hell, putting her in charge of something like this is like putting Russ in charge of the dept of fossils at some university...(no offence Russ)

I think a lot of people are mature enough to understand that they can not let their personal beliefs interfere with their job. Especially someone such as her who is in the public eye and will be watched like a hawk over any policys she may have regarding homosexuals.

Originally Posted by Ramrod

Her membership of Opus Dei would increase the likelihood that she does think its a sin.
Hell, putting her in charge of something like this is like putting Russ in charge of the dept of fossils at some university...(no offence Russ)

If I might answer on Russ' behalf ... we don't believe fossils are wrong, we just believe the generally accepted chronology that surrounds them is wrong. It would be more akin to putting Russ (or me) in charge of using the fossils to compile an exhibition about evolution.

Nevertheless, I hope that either of us would be able to do that. After all, while it may be the general consensus, it is still only a theory. I would be happy to curate such a display and to ensure it is described accurately (and by that I don't mean I would insist on mentioning the alternative as well, just that I would not present as fact what is merely theory).

I think this illustrates Ruth Kelly's position nicely. You simply cannot go around vetting people on all their personal opinions before giving them jobs. Otherwise where would it end? There are committed members of various religions in the Commons. Should they be barred as MPs, for fear they might be unable to represent constituents of a different religion?

And if Kelly does consider homosexuality to be a sin - and let's face it, she probably does, as Opus Dei is a fundamentalist expression of Christianity - that does not mean she is incapable of distinguishing between what she thinks of what someone does, and whether she thinks they have the right to do it.

[me283]

It's ironic, that some people on here are saying that you shouldn't confuse her own opinions and beliefs with her ability in politics... yet the same people kept ripping into Nick Griffin's beliefs and opinions, using them as a reason for him being dangerous as a politician!

Quite a strange position for a member of Opus Dei to be placed in, a minister of equality! I think her position should certainly be reconsidered. I believe firmly that religion and politics should be separated, and this is Opus Dei here - it means 'work of God', it's a hardline organisation where the members are meant to carry out the work of God in their working lives. Members infiltrated the Spanish Franco government and look what happened - women had no rights, homosexuality was illegal. Of course I'm not saying that anything like this will happen here but I certainly don't think that it's an appropriate position for a member of this organisation.

[Ramrod]

Originally Posted by Chris T

And if Kelly does consider homosexuality to be a sin - and let's face it, she probably does, as Opus Dei is a fundamentalist expression of Christianity - that does not mean she is incapable of distinguishing between what she thinks of what someone does, and whether she thinks they have the right to do it.

Point taken but we are talking about sin here. She presumably believes that homosexuals are going to hell for acting against Gods wishes. That has to translate into a less than tolerant attitude on her part.....