What is in Kelvin's Head?

  • It’s Time to End Tax Breaks for Anti-Gay Charities – including churches

    There is no underestimating the difference that a change in the law can make to people who happen to be gay or lesbian. Civil Partnerships gave a level of legal protection that changed people’s lives forever. Equal marriage extended that protection by giving people the chance of being able to be regarded as equally fit to enter the institution of marriage. It was about more than rights – it was about dignity too.

    However, notwithstanding the great gains that have been made in recent years, the journey is not over. We have established that people of goodwill are prepared to champion gay rights whether or not they happen to be gay themselves. The time has come to begin working on the next step on the journey.

    We must be eager to ensure that children receive age appropriate sex education that is inclusive of LGBT identities. We must be sure that governments pursue foreign policy that is works towards extending the rights that LGBT people in the UK possess to those in other countries. But we must not rest there. There are still real things that need to be done in the UK where a change in the law can make a material difference to gay lives.

    Today I propose a new change that is worth campaigning for – it’s time to campaign for the government to remove the charitable status of any organisation that campaigns against gay people. It is a simple change to the law but an important one.

    There are still many organisations that take an anti-gay position in public. Very many of them get tax-breaks through the Gift Aid system by becoming charities. It’s time to end tax-breaks for those who work to limit gay rights.

    Will this ever come about?

    When I first started campaigning on reforming marriage law to include lesbian and gay people, most of the people I spoke to, including many who ultimately became core activists simply didn’t believe that it was worth the time of day as it would never happen. The change I’m proposing today is much easier to enact.

    Why should there be effective government sponsorship of homophobic organisations?

    Why should any UK tax-payers have to live with so-called charitable organisations campaigning against them?

    Charities which tried to campaign against people because of their race would soon have their charitable status removed. Why not those who campaign against gay people?

    The time has come. Time for change. It’s time to remove the charitable status if any organisation campaigning against LGBT people.

    Q and A
    Would this mean curtailing freedom of speech?
    No – organisations and individuals would be free to say whatever they liked within the law. A charity simply could not receive Gift Aid support in any given year if it were to campaign against LGBT people during that year.

    Isn’t this persecution of Christians?
    No – this change is proposed by a Christian priest and would apply to all charities.

    Would church congregations lose their charitable status?
    There’s no reason for church congregations to lose their charitable status so long as they don’t campaign against the rights of LGBT people. As there is strong and increasing support for LGBT people in the pews (if not amongst Christian leaders) this is something that many Christians will campaign for. Some denominations might prefer to be free to forego their charitable status in order to continue anti-gay campaigns. Others will not.

    What about the Muslims/Catholics/Evangelicals?
    This policy would apply across the board to all charities.

    How can this be brought about?
    Engagement with activist organisations, within charities and with those seeking election.

    Isn’t charity law devolved – why would it be appropriate for people in Scotland to bring this up during a Westminster election?
    Some charities registered in England campaign against gay rights in Scotland (eg the Mothers’ Union). This is an issue facing both the UK as a whole as well as Scotland.

    Would this cost tax-payers money?
    No – just the opposite. Money that formerly had been given to anti-gay organisations would hitherto be available to the government to spend on the common good.

    Further questions and comments welcome.

    , , , ,

52 responses to “Inclusive Language – again”

  1. ryan Avatar
    ryan

    Kelvin – that cracked me almost as much as your last tweet on the left of your blog ;-)!

    Reply
  2. Jimmy Avatar
    Jimmy

    Ryan, although you address your comment to Kelvin like I am not there. I assume you are referring to my poem, I can assure you that it does not crack me up watching you making any opinion you may have untenable.

    Reply
    1. kelvin Avatar
      kelvin

      No Jimmy – I think Ryan was indeed referring to my last comment, above.

      Reply
  3. Jimmy Avatar
    Jimmy

    Thank you Kelvin and Sorry Ryan.

    Reply
  4. ryan Avatar
    ryan

    No worries! Was indeed referring to the v.amusing coming out day tweets at the side.

    I’m not sure there’s ever existed anyone, anywhere,at any time, of whom it could be said that *all* their opinions are ‘untenable’, so such rhetoric is dehumanising at best. Apropos nothing, I was moved to google the poetic stylings of the great David Brent. Who needs Auden? 😉
    http://murfinsandburglars.com/2009/04/14/bad-poetry-for-tuesday-david-brent-edition/

    Reply
  5. Peter Avatar
    Peter

    Kelvin; no, I think it distracts. It simp;ly reminds us that this is how your mind works: you make connections and delight in that sort of word-play. However, to sharpen up my point. Thank you for helping me to realise that, for some, ‘family’ is not a positive word in the way in which I experience it. For my part, this willl mean that I will be more careful about its use when others might feel excluded (and therefore hurt). Mutatis mutandi can you accept that I feel offended by what seems to be merely a casual linking between family and the f word? These are sensitive areas, but sensibilities are by no means confined to those who find family a painful or unhelpful concept.

    Reply
  6. Simon Avatar
    Simon

    I am slightly nervous aboaut the alternatives to the 1982 Liturgy, not because I don’t share the inclusive sentiments expressed above (I do). I fear that, as so often in the history of the church, the steps we take to avoid one kind of mistake in the way we talk about God can lead us into another. The avoidance of pronouns as a measure to achieve inclusivity produces inelegant, strained and stilted English. How would it be if one were to use it in day-to-day speech? ‘I saw John this morning. I asked John’s how John’s health was. John said that John was over his flu, and hoped to be back at work on Monday’. This may not in itself seem to be a problem. But in fact, what very quickly happens when we adopt this idiom in addressing/expressing God, is that the very idea of a personal God begins to recede. My basic instinct is that the church’s language of pulbic prayer is properly anchored in that of the scriptures. There are dangers in departing from this. The perceived problem (rightly perceived) is perhaps better tackled by good teaching about the nature of God, than by linguistic contortions that produce stilted prayers, and possibly a less real and vivid idea of God.

    Reply
  7. Melissa Avatar
    Melissa

    About the family imagery – another reason to drop it in church is for the sake ones who, like me, do actually have the signifying family relationships.

    There is too much pressure on day to day life with children when that life is forced to serve as some kind of example or testimony or witness to the world – or more likely one’s church friends – about the nature of God.

    I think it sours love because in that kind of scheme loving children is more fundamentally a means to an end.

    Reply

Leave a Reply

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

Previous Posts

  • How to be single at Christmas

    I find myself wanting to write something about being single at Christmas. After all, I’ve got some experience to draw on. There was a time when I used to find being on my own at Christmas a tricky thing to think about, but these days its one of the times of the year when I…

  • +Richard on the new atheists

    Don’t miss Richard Holloway’s  book review on The Atheist’s Guide to Christmas. Here’s the full link. And here is a highlight: That said, this book is fun, especially if you read it as a prospectus for a complex and varied religious position. The comedians in it – and there are too many of them –…

  • Decorating the Church

    Now, just in case there is anyone reading this who comes to St Mary’s who hasn’t been around in previous years at Christmas – there’s a job to be done tomorrow that you might not know about and your help would be most appreciated. As a liturgical church we are vigilant about keeping Advent, a time of…