Andrea Williams

Christian Magistrate Andrew McClintock has lost his case to have his freedom of conscience recognised when practising as a Justice of the Peace. The Sheffield Employment Tribunal handed down their judgment on 28th February.

The decision of the court means that Mr McClintock, a committed Christian who became a Justice of the Peace in Sheffield in 1988, will not be able to serve on the Family Panel, even though the Tribunal recognised that "he has an unblemished record and is well regarded by fellow magistrates and by the Department of Constitutional Affairs".

Difficulties first arose for Mr McClintock when he considered the implications of same-sex adoption, arising from the Civil Partnerships Act 2002. He became concerned that a tension existed between his Christian beliefs in the Biblical model of the family and his work as a Magistrate sitting on the Family Panel. In March 2004, Mr McClintock raised his difficulties with the Chairman of the Family Panel at Sheffield. Mr McClintock was not asking for a change in the law, rather he was requesting that his religious conscience should be accommodated, and that he should be "screened" from cases which might require him to adopt children in to same-sex households. He also expressed his concern that children could be put at risk by the untried social experiment of same-sex adoption, in which vulnerable children were being used as "guinea pigs".

The Employment Tribunal rejected Mr McClintock's claim that he had been discriminated against because of his religious beliefs, and that his right to religious freedom was infringed.

Commenting on the judgment, Andrea Williams of the Lawyers Christian Fellowship said:

"This case is a clear picture of how Christian faith is becoming privatised in society. It is yet another example of the repression of Christian conscience and signals the prevalence of a secular 'new morality' and the erosion of Christian values at the expense of our children's welfare."

"Andrew McClintock believes that the best interests of the child are served by placing them in a situation where they would have both a mother and a father and therefore he could not agree to participate in gay adoption. Andrew McClintock's case demonstrates what will happen as greater numbers of men and women of integrity (as the court described Mr McClintock) are forced to choose between applying a law which runs contrary to their fundamental Christian belief or obeying their conscience. The imposition of secular values in every aspect of our lives will force those who hold Christian beliefs out of jobs. It will be to the detriment of the whole of society."

Andrew McClintock commented:-

"This ruling is going to make it harder for many conscientious people: whether they are JPs in the family court, or otherwise involved with children, or maybe with different matters of conscience. Anyone who holds seriously to the traditional morals and family values of Jews, Christians or Muslims will think twice before taking on such a job. It is like a re-imposition of a Test Act, such as that abolished in 1828, and will diminish the pool of people willing to do such work, both in numbers and diversity".

"There will be more children now whom the courts remove from one kind of harm, but only to face another hazard. The expert witness in the case, Professor Byrd from the USA, said there was little research into the effect of same-sex nurture on children's development, and that what had been established was worrying. This view of the scientific facts was unchallenged by the other side. So, more needy children will be fuelling this experiment in social science, and suffering what the experts call mother-hunger or father-hunger."