On the rule of law

Terry Sanderson, president of the National Secular Society, said: “It is unfortunate that the court has enabled Catholic Care to exploit what was obviously an error in the drafting of the equality legislation. The loophole this created was never intended to be used this way.”

Now that\’s about adoption and whether an agency can discriminate against those it wishes to (and given that such agencies, even the State, regularly discriminate on the basis of weight, age, smoking, drinking and race, why they shouldn\’t be allowed to do so on the basis of sexuality escapes me).

But the much more important point is that we are a society governed by law. It is what the law says, not what the dunderheads in Parliament meant it to say, which counts.

Which is, of course, why we have the distinction between tax avoidance and tax evasion. You owe what the law says you owe, not what an MP would like you to owe.

3 thoughts on “On the rule of law”

  1. You’re so literal! Don’t you realise that we are supposed to do what the Righteous brigade tell us to do, not what is written in some dusty old law book?

    Welcome to the 21st century, where laws mean whatever someone on the Left wants them to mean!

  2. In this case I’m glad that the adoption agency have stuck to their guns.

    Adoption of children isn’t one of our human or civil rights. Nor should it be. In fact, adoption of a cat from the animal shelter isn’t one of our inalienable rights. We can be turned down, and they don’t have to give us a right of appeal, or even tell us why.

    The first duty of the agencies is toward the children, who need a loving, decent, upbringing. The second duty is toward the public who fund them, and require them to arrange a good home for every child.

    The state, and the gay lobby, should get their noses out of this.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *