[karajorma]

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2012/jul/07/church-of-england-discriminatory-parties

The Church of England has voted overwhelmingly in favour of legislation to bar clergy from joining racist or discriminatory political parties.

On the second day of the General Synod, the church's legislative body, members voted by a huge majority to declare that allegiance to a party whose policies are "incompatible with the teaching of the Church of England in relation to the equality of persons or groups of different races" would be "unbecoming and inappropriate".

Although the church has not named names, the legislation was born out of a motion proposed in 2009 by Vasantha Gnanadoss, a Metropolitan police civilian worker and Synod member who warned of the potential for the British National party (BNP) to grow in influence. "Passing this motion is a push that is seriously necessary," she told the Synod at that time.

Under the proposals, bishops would have to declare a particular party to be incompatible with the church's teachings.

Speaking before Synod on Saturday, the bishop of Guildford, the Rt Rev Christopher Hill, said the legislation was "about something of vital importance to the body of Christ: our care and concern for the equality of all human beings as created by God and redeemed in Christ".

In an interview, he said that the measure was at this stage hypothetical as no members of the Church were known to be members of such parties, which have not been officially identified. But, he said, it was an important symbolic stance. "We felt we had we had to do this in principle because some people are claiming the name of Christianity for obnoxious social teaching against Christian faith and … against the common good and equality."

The BNP has condemned the ban, insisting that changes in its constitution mean it is not a non-discriminatory organisation. A spokesman accused the church of "bullying and persecuting … individual people on the basis of what they think".

He added that "if the right set of circumstances came about and the individual sought help from the party" the BNP would not rule out taking legal action. William Fittall, secretary general of the Synod, has in the past warned that such a ban could prove legally problematic.

The move, which formed part of a wider piece of legislation concerning conduct of the clergy, received unanimous support from the house of bishops and the house of clergy. In the house of laity, 100 voted for the legislation and two against. There was one abstention.

You have to laugh at the irony of a far right party complaining about someone discriminating against them.

[BlueFlames]

You have to laugh at the irony of a far right party complaining about someone discriminating against them.

Being in the United States, I'm having trouble getting past the part about a church condemning discrimination. 

[Klaustrophobia]

because conservatism and religion automatically equals racism.


 

[jr2]

because conservatism and religion automatically equals racism.


 

You didn't know? The people that believe such generalized stereotypes, however, are all unbiased, non-prejudiced rationalists.

[BlueFlames]

Actually, the first thing that jumped to mind was the relatively recent closing of Catholic adoption agencies in several states, because the church decided their charity services were less valuable than their ability to discriminate against homosexuals.  Most recently, the Catholic church shut down their adoption and foster care services in Illinois, because the state mandated that same-sex couples be provided equal consideration as adoptive or foster parents.  (Source)

No, not all churches are as militantly discriminatory, but for an off-the-cuff, semi-jovial remark (or do emoticons no longer count, if they don't come in triplicate?), there's enough of a basis.

[Bobboau]

You have to laugh at the irony of a far right party complaining about someone discriminating against them.

or a far left party being discriminatory.

not sure how that relates to anything, but it felt like something funny to say.

[Grizzly]

*nvm*. Missread.

[Dilmah G]

LOL WHAT.

Honestly, I have no idea how these people haven't been quietly lynched. I believe the national recognised form of dealing with these wankers in Australia is to glass the ****s, and I have absolutely 0 qualms with doing it.

[Flipside]

I would say it's a case of the Pot calling the Kettle Black, and then telling it to go back where it came from

[headdie]

The BNP has condemned the ban, insisting that changes in its constitution mean it is not a non-discriminatory organisation.

please excuse me as a i change my underwear from laughing uncontrollably at this one.

A spokesman accused the church of "bullying and persecuting … individual people on the basis of what they think".

and how is that different from the BNP?

He added that "if the right set of circumstances came about and the individual sought help from the party" the BNP would not rule out taking legal action.

Good luck the government cant even deal with the Church let alone a bunch of thugs

[Flipside]

Funny thing is, it's a blatant admission by the BNP that they feel that they would fall into the 'racist and discriminatory' group...

[karajorma]

The BNP has condemned the ban, insisting that changes in its constitution mean it is not a non-discriminatory organisation.

please excuse me as a i change my underwear from laughing uncontrollably at this one.

Well the funny thing is it's not completely untrue. A while back the European Court of Justice found that the BNP's practices were discriminatory and basically forced them to take people of any colour.

[NGTM-1R]

please excuse me as a i change my underwear from laughing uncontrollably at this one.

Reality has a well-known liberal bias.