CT RILEY suggests that it is the legality of a particular issue that is the arbiter of the inalienable, democratic human right to think speak and believe (HAS, June 30).
The law, good, bad, partial or discriminatory trumps everything and this applies to laws formulated according to the priorities and agenda of a transient government of any particular party.
History teaches a different lesson. Look what the law did to the Chartists when they spoke out on the right to combine. Who eventually emerged victorious? Today, how do we define laws which create a climate where people are forced to resign from their life’s work for a single injudicious remark?
Mr Riley is a master of the injudicious remark.
I challenge him to name a single contemporary, mainstream Christian foundation that teaches that disability is God’s punishment, that mental illness comes from demonic possession, who claim the right to discriminate against the mentally ill or who assert that religious rights should be more (as opposed to equal) important than the rights of others.
If he cannot, he should be good enough to say so.
Michael Baldasera, Darlington.
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel