Fri 31st Oct 2014 | Last updated: Thu 30th Oct 2014 at 16:43pm

Facebook Logo Twitter Logo RSS Logo

Latest News

Catholic charities at risk after adoption agency ruled to be ‘discriminating’

By on Thursday, 24 January 2013

Screen shot 2013-01-24 at 12.00.19

A leading Catholic lawyer has warned that Catholic charities across Britain are at risk from equality laws after an adoption agency was told it could lose its charitable status.

The Office of the Scottish Charity Regulator ruled that St Margaret’s Children and Family Care Society in Glasgow is directly discriminating against gay people by refusing to place children in the care of same-sex couples.

The regulator said that although the charity provides a valuable service, it believed its current practice was unlawful, and gave it three months to change.

The ruling came about after a complaint by the National Secular Society.

Martin Tyson, the Scottish Charity Regulator’s head of registration, said: ‘We acknowledge the valuable service provided by this charity, but the fact is that all charities must comply with the law, including the Equality Act 2010.”

But Neil Addison of the Thomas More Legal Centre said the regulator threatening to remove the agency from the charities’ register was “surprising”.

He said: “There is an exemption in the Equality Act for charities. If what they’re doing is breaking the Equality Act there is a procedure for challenging it, for saying what they’re doing is unlawful.

“It’s a gross overreaction. It’s like closing down an entire hospital because one small section is in breach of health and safety.

“If they’re right, then the exemption in the Equality Act is worthless, because if you break the Act then you are not a charity. It’s a completely circular argument.”

Mr Addison also said that the ruling had implications for other areas of equality law, including the Government’s “quadruple lock” protecting religious groups in the event of gay marriage.

“It’s going to stop all sorts of Catholic charities which are arguably in breach of the Equality Act. If you apply this logic, what’s to stop the regulator refusing to register a church or diocese as a charity?

“It is very worrying. I think the regulator is going way beyond its powers and remits.”

Education Secretary Mike Russell said he was “disappointed” by the decision. He said: “We do not believe that this outcome is in the best interests of the children St Margaret’s helps, who are in need of a safe and loving family home.”

  • whytheworldisending

    A complete red herring. If you are trying to say that anyone staying in any relationship is automaticallly to be thought of as good or decent, its another non-argument.

    Take Eva Braun and her chum (heterosexuals), who were together 16 years,(and would have much longer if they hadn’t had to get married in a bunker) or Hindley and Brady.

    Even with all that had happened throughout their relationship prior to her incarceration, Hindley wrote Brady faithfully until she severed the relationship in 1971.

    During her time in prison Hindley began a homosexual relationship with a female prison officer Patricia Cairns, as they worked together to strategize her escape. The plan failed when escape paraphernalia was found in Hindley’s possession.   

    Christian marriage is about more than symbiosis.

    “If you love only those who love you, what good is that? Even corrupt tax collectors do that much.” [Matthew 5:46]

  • whytheworldisending

    We have no problem with people who want a secular society and freedom under the law. Gaytheists don’t want this. They do not respect the Law or the freedoms of the majority. They think they should be free to break the law, try to change it to legalise crimes they like, and then force everyone else, and their kids, to knuckle under Laws-THEY-Like, but which the vast majority of ordinary law abiding people abhor.

    Truth and Freedom are two sides of the one coin, and the truth is  that the Gaytheists are an undemocratic small but organised minority seeking to rule over, and dictate to and enslave the majority in a totalitarian fundamentalist religious (atheistic) state. Britons never never ne-ver will be slaves.

    This goes back to the Pharoahs. God said “Let my people go!”

  • JabbaPapa

    Your anti-Catholicism is loathesome, hateful, and extremely bigoted.

  • JabbaPapa


  • JabbaPapa

    And Indian and Chinese restaurants also have exemptions meaning they’re allowed to only emply Indian and Chinese people

    Dontcha just luuuuurrrvvvve the implicit racism and double standards ???!!!???

  • JabbaPapa

    And I’m too old for fairy stories

    More of your typical intellectual incoherence ..

    If you think that :

    a) Catholicism is based on “fairy stories”


    b) you are “too old” for them

    then logically,

    c) WTF are you doing here ???

  • Nick

    Thank you JabbaJabba, I’m tempted to take that as a compliment,

  • Nick

    Now that does merit a reply.

    Correct I cannot reply God because he doesn’t exist. And I note that when Prince Charles comes to the throne, he’s made it known he wants to be “Defender of Faiths”!!

    So yes, I reply The People”.
    And as I keep telling you, the majority do now support it and even if they didn’t, minority rights have never been an issue for the majority (hence no referendum!

    Constitutionally speaking, equal marriage is being voted on on Tuesday and will be rubber stamped into law by the Queen this summer. ;-)

  • Nick

    “The very thought makes one shudder.” – That’s because you’re homophobic.

    But we don’t need Gay adoption agencies because we have full legal rights to adopt from ANY adoption agencies – INCLUDING Catholic ones. ;-)

  • Nick

    No racism Jabba, just fact.
    And I’ll leave the double standards to you.

  • Nick

    The people support it.
    And we’ll see where my opinion stands on Tuesday – 300+ majority is being forecast now! ;-)

  • Nick

    I don’t even attempt to define “sin”, I don’t even believe in such a concept. – Neither does right thinking society. And neither does Parliament or the law of the land.

  • Nick

    What am I doing here?

    I’m here for the fun of ridiculing you guys and taunting you and your silly religion even further after next Tuesday’s vote.

  • Nick

    And by the way Jabba, you shouldn’t swear – its a sin! ;-)

  • Nick

    “We obey God. If it comes to a choice between God’s Word and someone’s opinion, which do you think people will follow?” – Tell you what, lets come back to that one after next Tuesdays vote.

  • Nick

    And it isn’t yours?

  • Nick

    What, you’re not going to try and suggest the courts support you are you?
    And we’ll see if the Government take any notice of MP’s on Tuesday when they vote for equal marriage.

  • Nick


  • Nick

    No, but adoption is…

  • JabbaPapa

    That’s because you’re homophobic

    I wonder when you’ll stop posting rubbish in this site ?

  • Nick

    There doesn’t need to be any Gay adoption agencies, as Gay people have full rights to adopt from any adoption agency – including Catholic ones! If the Catholic ones are going to close themselves down and thus cut off their noses to spite their face, that’s their problem.

  • whytheworldisending

    Why didn’t you just say “The People” in the first place if that’s your answer?

    You speculate in saying “When Charles comes to the throne,” and you grasp at straws when you imagine that when Charles says “Faiths,” that he is not going to include “Christianity” or when you imagine he would describe Atheism as a faith he would defend. (Although no doubt you would redefine the the word “Faith,” to mean “No faith.”)

    Its Tuesday, and same sex marriage is still unlawful.

  • whytheworldisending

    The christian church is trying to help you. Discriminate means tell the difference between things, and people need help when they cannot tell the difference between right and wrong.

  • whytheworldisending

    Even if the commons lost its common sense, the Lords will defeat and/or delay it until May, when ity will have to wait until the next session. It will then be defeated, and the government will have to wait 12 months before introducing it under the Parliament Acts 1911. By then we will be months from the next general election, and even Cameron is not so stupid as to use the Parliament Act to force this nonsense on the ELECTORATE (remember them) just when they are deciding who to vote for.

  • whytheworldisending

    I’m not a fairy so I wouldn’t know what you’re talking about.

  • whytheworldisending

    Pity you have so little self-objectification that you cannot laugh at yourself. Do you think there are any sick perverts out there with a sense of humour?   

  • whytheworldisending

    Did people follow Maggie Thatcher and her lunatic Poll Tax law? Certainly not. They rioted. And there will be no coming back for Cameron whatever happens.

    If the Bill doesn’t get into law he’ll go. If it does he’ll have to go – just like Thatcher, because there is still some decency and common sense left in the Conservative Party.

  • whytheworldisending

    Neither the courts, nor MP’s are there to support or supress particular political views. The courts apply the law, and MP’s represent their constituents. Unfortunately Gaytheist MP’s are voting according to their own opinions in the face of massive opposition from their constituents. That is a perversion of the political process.

  • whytheworldisending

    Adoption is a service supplied to children for their benefit. It was never about satisfying consumer demand from adults. That is why it is impossible to discriminate against homosexuals seeking to adopt. They are not being supplied with either goods or services, so discrimination law cannot logically apply. The law is being misapplied to fit the gaytheist agenda. 

  • whytheworldisending

    Now lets see… UKIP, BNP?… which would you prefer?

  • whytheworldisending

    I liked the bit where a witness appearing before the Same Sex Bill Committee, who was representing defectors “liberals” within the CofE said that the Cof E’s opposition to same sex marriage was all about “appeasing the Church in Africa.” Is RACISM now part of the “Equality” agenda? Is race equality no longer part of being a “Nice” Liberal?

    Didn’t journalist Brendan O’Neill argue the case brilliantly? Same sex marriage certainly is a ridiculous idea which has come “out of the blue” from the political classes and has nothing to do withj either gay rights or real equality. And Mr O’Neill is a right thinking atheist.

  • Mark Richards

    This is really a very informative kind of post…
    adoption service