.....but you`ll only need one
A worrying development has come my way courtesy of the British Red Cross - of all things. One of their volunteers is reported to have been `dismissed` for having the temerity to protest against gay marriage. The 71-year old was told he was no longer welcome at the charity because his views were incompatible with the British Red Cross values. The volunteer in question has worked for the charity for 20 years as a senior Red Cross volunteer and he is is appealing against his dismissal, which he calls `unfair and without justification. What have I done wrong? I passionately believe in the institution of marriage between a man and a woman as the cornerstone of our society and I don`t believe Parliament was representing the views of people when it changed the definition of marriage.`
The letter sent by the Red Cross informing him of his dismissal accused him of breaching its principles as an organisation which remains neutral on political issues. The Director of the Christian Institute which co-ordinated opposition to gay marriage and is providing legal advice in this case, said, "This is a shocking case. His only `crime` seems to be that he was one of millions of ordinary people who opposed Parliament`s change to the definition of marriage. What will disturb most people is that the Red Cross says it is not his actions but his thoughts and views that were the problem. Is it now official policy of the Red Cross that any volunteer who holds traditional views on marriage will face the sack?"
For their part, the Red Cross are quoted as saying, "We are committed to and bound by our fundamental principles which do not take sides in controversies of a political, racial, religious or ideological nature. We have to consider the compatibility of people`s expressed views in line with the fundamental principles."
Well, it`s good of them not to take sides despite dismissing someone who has given over 20 years of voluntary service by helping people and, as the case is going to appeal, it would not be right to comment directly on it. However, the worrying aspect is the suggestion that it is not his actions but his thoughts and views that were the problem.
Now I wonder if you can guess what I`m thinking. I`ll give you three guesses......but you`ll only need one.
The letter sent by the Red Cross informing him of his dismissal accused him of breaching its principles as an organisation which remains neutral on political issues. The Director of the Christian Institute which co-ordinated opposition to gay marriage and is providing legal advice in this case, said, "This is a shocking case. His only `crime` seems to be that he was one of millions of ordinary people who opposed Parliament`s change to the definition of marriage. What will disturb most people is that the Red Cross says it is not his actions but his thoughts and views that were the problem. Is it now official policy of the Red Cross that any volunteer who holds traditional views on marriage will face the sack?"
For their part, the Red Cross are quoted as saying, "We are committed to and bound by our fundamental principles which do not take sides in controversies of a political, racial, religious or ideological nature. We have to consider the compatibility of people`s expressed views in line with the fundamental principles."
Well, it`s good of them not to take sides despite dismissing someone who has given over 20 years of voluntary service by helping people and, as the case is going to appeal, it would not be right to comment directly on it. However, the worrying aspect is the suggestion that it is not his actions but his thoughts and views that were the problem.
Now I wonder if you can guess what I`m thinking. I`ll give you three guesses......but you`ll only need one.
No comments:
Post a Comment