Rejoice, lovers of liberty and Enlightenment values. On the 3rd July 2019, the Court of Appeal decreed that universities should not conflate beliefs with discrimination. Do not underestimate the importance of this judgment, at a time when so many scholars have been persecuted for thought crime. Noah Carl, a talented and conservatively-minded young man, was cast as a Nazi eugenicist for studying genes and intelligence – and disgracefully dismissed by Cambridge University to the glee of a baying mob. Christians have been witch-hunted for homophobia, and feminists for transphobia, despite meaning no harm in anything they have said or done.
Section 10 if the Court of Appeal‘s judgement,
The University wrongly confused the expression of religious views with the
notion of discrimination. The mere expression of views on theological grounds (e.g. that ‘homosexuality is a sin’) does not necessarily connote that the person expressing such views will discriminate on such grounds. In the present case, Judgment Approved by the court for handing down. Ngole -v- University of Sheffield there was positive evidence to suggest that the Appellant had never discriminated on such grounds in the past and was not likely to do so in the future (because, as he explained, the Bible prohibited him from discriminating against anybody.
After years of bludgeoning by so-called political correctness and the hypocritical doctrines of tolerance and diversity, the tide may at least be turning against censorship in our high seats of learning. Universities must be ‘bastions of debate and defenders of expression’, pronounced David Isaac, chairman of the Equalities & Human Rights Commission in a speech at the School of Oriental & African Studies in London this week. In this age of hypersensitivity, people are offended (or offended by proxy) all too easily. It is wrong, Isaac argued, to ban stalls promoting Christian causes such as protecting the unborn child at fresher fairs.
Christian groups have been particularly bullied by radical activists, who gain disproportionate influence on campus. Fundamentalist (i.e. insufficiently apologetic) beliefs are portrayed as harmful to female and LGBT students, while the same student unions are unstinting in their support for Muslim representation. Quite rightly, an Islamic society would not be expected to reject scripture on divine creation, sexual mores or abortion. But Christians must tread just as carefully as an orthodox priest in Stalinist Russia, or in China toe the narrow line of state-sanctioned faith.
So it is very heartening to hear the verdict of the Court of Appeal on the case of social work student Felix Ngole. Expelled from his course at University of Sheffield in 2016, Ngole was represented by Christian Concern, who successfully claimed that the institution had acted unfairly. A university obsessed with discrimination had itself discriminated. Expected to apologise for remarks he had made on Facebook about a same-sex marriage controversy in the USA, Ngole refused to retract his opinions or to renounce his faith. Referring to passages in the Bible, as far as the university authorities were concerned he might as well have been citing Mein Kampf.
Does devout religious belief lead to prejudice in practice? It could do. But I think back to my mental health nursing student days near Glasgow, an area rife with sectarianism amidst the worst outrages of IRA and UVF terrorism. I felt sickened when a fellow trainee, on seeing the news of a mass carnage of a cadet brass band at a military barracks in Kent, expressed his approval. He was of Catholic Irish background, a republican, a Celtic fan, and a polar opposite to me. Yet despite being so partisan, he was an excellent nurse. We had a great time together in our training, although I still can’t forgive his support for an act of barbarism.
If having a preferential perspective is anathema to fair and ethical practice, there would be few nurses or doctors in Northern Ireland. Yet the reality is that throughout the Troubles victims of shootings or bombings received compassionate care, irrespective of which side of Belfast they inhabited. Each of us as human beings is unique and deserving of dignity: the life of God’s children is sacrosanct. Arguably, despite its humanist ideals, secularism has wreaked damage on universal principles and practice. The Biblical exhortation to treat others as you would want to be treated yourself is sadly forgotten by those who indulge in Twitter storms, or who sign petitions to get someone sacked and destroy their livelihood.
To my knowledge, Ngole would have no problem in working with a gay client, but I’m afraid that he would not be credited with such inclusiveness, despite his Christian values. This must change if we are to move beyond the petty battles of identity politics. The Court of Appeal verdict is a symbolic step to overcoming illiberal and intolerant attitudes by those who profess themselves as liberal and progressive. Let’s take the ‘but’ out of freedom.
Liked this Blog ? Why not post it to a friend ?
Subscribe To Quarterly Digital Edition
Subscribe To Quarterly Traditional Print Magazine (delivered to your door)
A current popular topic on the PC agenda which offers ample opportunities for moral bullying, virtue signalling, heroic posturing etc is “cultural appropriation”. Of course this charge is almost exclusively levelled against whites. The aim seems, ultimately, to prove that white Europeans have nothing to be proud of. All we have acheived has been stolen from other cultures and we should give it all back (and apologise, and hang our heads in shame, and pay reparations, and watch our language and give up any claim to anything).
Is the use of hair straighteners by Afro-Caribbean women a form of cultural appropriation? Just a thought.
…… Or English, rational discourse, medicine that works, education for all, even girls, an age of consent higher than nine, or – what us colonialist oppressors excel at – cultural-appropriation-virtue-displays.
Can anyone name a single country that is better ruled now than when England governed it? At least they can’t be accused of appropriating democratic decency
Indeed. Most of the sensible people among us in Asia appreciate having been fast-forwarded from pre-scientific agrarian societies ruled by strongmen thanks to Western science and technology, and governance (India is the world’s largest democracy, thanks to…).
We’re OK with cultural appropriation, so enjoy you Brits should enjoy your “cuppa” without the burden of guilt of having stolen state secrets from China (the sourcing and processing of tea leaves).
Of course, bad things happened too, but the white colonialists hardly monopolized cruelty, ignorance and barbarity – these are universal human traits which the West has done much to eliminate.
Your worst enemies are actually craven, obsequious white liberals who delight in accusing other whites of “white privilege” (e.g. privately schooled Emma Barnett) and of being “racist” (Cameron).
The truth is that most whites in history were also oppressed, and led miserable lives. Many of the dead white males who advanced science and civilization were far from privileged, having to fight oppression and censorship (e.g. Galileo) jealousy, prejudice (Harrison the clock maker), inertia (Lister) and class barriers (Michael Faraday) in their struggle for the truths that have set Mankind free.
These offence-seekers are prisoners of their own anger, not free, thinking souls. You have to wonder what has brought them to this.
Indeed, Michael, well put. But wondering isn’t going to change the thousand-yard-stare Lefties’ minds.
A robust response is needed and soon as the Left has infiltrated all your institurions (education, the judiciary, the civil service, the Police, Parliament, the National Trust and the RNLI even…). You Brits need to launch a Nueva Reconquista (without the negative baggage of auto da fe and the Inquisition etc.) – this time, it should appeal to all people who support Enlightenment values, Magna Carta and the rule of law of any color and ethnic group.
Perhaps you have Diane Abbott in mind.
Too optimistic. Universities are not the only culprits, and the idiot ideology of ‘economic man’ and profit-focus (not PC) is largely to blame there. Pharmacists are legally permitted to refuse contraception if it’s against their beliefs. What about that?
Following the 2016 Referendum I warned fellow Brexiteers, elated at the result, that our pro-EU establishment would do their utmost to overturn the Leave victory. The response I received was “We’ve won fair and square. What can they do?”
Political correctness is now deeply embedded in the intellectual life of this country and the West in general. It has become the primary moral code of an atheist society. If you think that a couple of court decisions indicate a turning of the tide then you probably underestimate the size and strength of that tide.
It is in the nature of conservatives to defend rather than take territory. Radical activists only seek to take territory and destroy any opposition. They use victim groups as a weapon. Sneering at “snowflakes” misses the point. The activists real aim is not to protect the allegedly vulnerable. Rather, the intention is to use the chosen victims to demonstrate that capitalist society is cruel and oppressive and only socialism offers a humane alternative.
Absolutely right, Mana in London: progressive activists have no real interest in the “allegedly vulnerable”; the latter are merely human shields behind which they advance their totalitarian ideology with impunity.