MARRIAGE BATTLE NEEDS PUBLIC ORDER ACT CHANGE

The Christian Institute's campaign for the removal of the word 'insulting' from Section 5 of the Public Order Act is an essential precursor to the battle for the God-created institution of man-woman marriage in the UK.

When, and not if, legislation is introduced in Parliament to allow same-sex 'marriage', this will have a profoundly corrupting impact on British society. Children growing up will no longer be able to take it for granted that a married person shares a bed with a member of the opposite sex.

Christians, amongst others, will want to protest publicly, but no prizes for guessing which piece of legislation can be used to stifle Christian freedom of expression.

A peaceful Christian protest 'upsets' a crowd of pro-gay-marriage supporters and some disorder results. The Christians are the ones prosecuted under the Public Order Act.

We must not forget the lesson of street preacher Harry Hammond. He was prosecuted in 2001 under the Public Order Act 1986 after an angry crowd, 'insulted' by his sign bearing the words 'Jesus Gives Peace, Jesus is Alive, Stop Immorality, Stop Homosexuality, Stop Lesbianism, Jesus is Lord', violently pushed him to the ground in Bournemouth town centre.

One can question the communication skills evidenced by the late Mr Hammond's sign. But surely no fair-minded person can disagree that the situation regarding Christian freedom of expression has significantly deteriorated since 2001.

That's why this is such a vitally important campaign.

Here is cc's letter to Adam Holloway MP:

Dear Adam, I hope I am not taking advantage of old friendship by writing to you an open letter in support of the Christian Institute's honourable campaign for repeal of the word ‘insulting’ from Section 5 of the Public Order Act.

I am writing to you in particular for two reasons:

1). You are a member of the Cornerstone group of Conservative MPs. Your group believes in ‘the spiritual values which have informed British institutions, our culture and our nation’s sense of identity for centuries’ and stands for ‘our ancient liberties against politically correct censorship and a commitment to our democratically elected parliament’.

2). You have had a professional life outside politics, having served in Her Majesty’s Armed Forces. You therefore understand the pressures that the increasingly oppressive culture of political correctness in our country is placing upon people, outside the Westminster cocoon, who wish to live by the spiritual values of the Christian faith.

Section 5, with its criminalisation of the use of ‘insulting words’, has been deployed in two recent prosecutions against Christians. One involved a couple who debated religion with a Muslim in their hotel over breakfast; the other a street preacher in Cumbria who in conversation with a police officer upheld traditional Christian teaching on sexual ethics.

The Christian Institute helpfully points out that

a genuine Christian would never seek to be insulting, but we know that some people may feel offended by the claims of the gospel or by Christian beliefs on ethical issues. Being offended or feeling insulted should not be a matter for the criminal law or the police. Disagreement is not hatred. The freedom to disagree, to debate, and to discuss is at the heart of our democracy.

I would add that some of our Lord's most famous statements were made in the heat of hostile debate with his religious opponents, including the one which, in Christian-influenced civilisations, has allowed both spiritual and political liberty to flourish: 'Render therefore unto Caesar the things which are Caesar's; and unto God the things that are God's' (Matthew 22v21 - AV).

May I ask you to use your parliamentary influence to ensure that the words of the living Christ can continue to be proclaimed in the United Kingdom without interference from a badly drafted law?

Kind regards,

Julian