Alba Trying to Square the Circle

It was high time that the SNP's dominant position on the independence side of Scottish politics was challenged and so Calton welcomes the entry of the Alba Party to the field. Quite a lot of women have done the same, judging from Alba's women's conference at the weekend, in spite of Nicola Sturgeon's attempts to smear Alba leader Alex Salmond as not safe around women. This is because Alba seems to provide a real alternative to Sturgeon's anti-female, woke, pro-trans policies. Their Equalities Policy has a series of statements about women's rights, including the right to safe spaces and women-only sport. So far, so good. However the self-same equalities policy goes on to say

ALBA acknowledges that no single protected characteristic is
more virtuous or more worthy of recognition and safeguarding
than another. They are all fundamentally important, each on
their own, and as a collective.

 There are also some waffle words about reforming the Gender Recognition process in a "respectful, sensitive and positive fashion". Which basically means that the Alba Party has no more idea than the SNP does about how to square women's rights with trans demands. That is because the circle cannot be squared. There is no solution that will keep everyone happy. Alba looks like it is coming down on the side of women, which is an improvement on the SNP, but it is still throwing a sop to the trans lobby and, in the process, potentially letting women down in the future. Until a political party is willing to grasp the nettle and recognise that people cannot change sex, women will continue to be threatened and undermined. Alba is a step in that direction but no-one should kid themselves on that Alba is the solution. Least of all women.

Biased Broadcasting Corporation scorns Christian license fee payers

This morning's discussion on BBC Radio Scotland's Morning Call was on whether or not the TV licence fee was worth it. After having heard yet another instance of biased reporting on Radio Scotland's Newsdrive this afternoon, Calton would have to say no, the licence fee is not worth it. (Not that he pays it, the eyrie thankfully not being on TV Licensing's database and him not having a TV anyway.) In a item about a proposed conscience clause for Northern Ireland's equality legislation, both presenter Laura Maxwell and interviewee Eamonn Mallie were clearly opposed to any attempt to accommodate strongly-held religious beliefs within NI's equality law and no other viewpoint was put across. Mallie is entitled to air his views but he should have been balanced by another interviewee who supported the clause. Maxwell, as newsreader, was not entitled to air her personal views. Newsdrive should not be a vehicle for presenters to put forward their personal opinions. They are there to present the news in a balanced, non-biased way, bearing in mind that they are being funded by over 90% of households via the TV licence and not all of those households agree with their trendy-lefty PC views. Mallie should have been challenged on the very slanted and inaccurate way he presented the story. Instead of doing this, Maxwell was only too happy to support him in his biased report which was, quite frankly, bigoted against Christians. The sooner supporting the BBC financially becomes a choice for viewers and listeners, the better.

It wis the SNP

If St Margaret's adoption agency was the only one in Scotland, there might be a case for removing its charitable status unless it was willing to provide a service for all types of potential adopters. As it is, the Roman Catholic organisation does valuable work in placing needy children with families and should not have its charitable status withdrawn, in Calton's opinion. Couples or individuals turned down by the agency can always go elsewhere to adopt. They have choice. The charity exists primarily to help vulnerable children, not gay or unmarried couples, and if they decide that heterosexual married couples are likely to provide the best home for the children they seek to place, that should be respected. Other adoption agencies may take a different view. That's called diversity. Unfortunately, what we have at present is more like equality fascism and there's no point in the likes of Mike Russell wringing his hands over St Margaret's when his party are busy promoting same-sex marriage which, if passed at Holyrood, will usher in even greater intolerance towards the Roman Catholic Church than we have at present. The SNP crossed the road to pick a fight with the Roman Catholics. They can't now say "ah didnae mean it, it wisnae me".

A false idea of equality

Calton found it quite chilling the way that three of the panel in last night's Any Questions? were either totally complacent that the introduction of same-sex marriage would have no effect on those who disagreed with it or were quite happy to see anyone who did disagree with it given the sack. Bronwen Maddox thinks that people should be free to do as they like, except refuse to marry a gay couple, Oliver Letwin has no idea of the impact the legislation which he supports is going to have on teachers and Ben Bradshaw seems to think that, as long as churches are not forced to conduct gay marriages, everything's fine. In Calton's opinion, only UKIP's Steve Crowther correctly analysed the situation we now have when he said that it was all about David Cameron, who has deliberately crossed the road to pick a fight with religious groups. No wonder voters are switching to UKIP. Same-sex marriage legislation will only make this country a fairer society if there is reasonable accommodation of those who disagree with it. What the Westminster and Scottish Governments need to remember is that people like Lillian Ladele and Gary McFarlane have not changed their beliefs - the Government has changed the rules. Both those people have been sacked when reasonable accommodation could have been made for them. They have been sacrificed to the god of a false idea of equality and to Cameron's ambition. They won't be the last.

Oh - and Jonathan - don't look now but your anti-UKIP prejudice is showing.

Big Brother is watching you

Calton is very relieved to see that Adrian Smith has won his case against Trafford Housing Trust. Mr Smith wrote a comment on his personal facebook page, in his own time, on his own computer, saying that gay church weddings were "an equality too far". Trafford Housing Trust demoted him and slashed his pay because it thought that his comments "might upset co-workers". Now, if Smith had used the Trust's email system to send an email to all his colleagues airing his views on same-sex marriage the Trust might have had a point. As it is, Calton finds it very worrying that an employer should seek to have so much control over the expression of religious or political views by its employees in their own time and on their own personal social media pages. It's bad enough that you can now get your collar felt for upsetting someone by stating your opinions (or displaying Bible verses). Trafford Housing Trust have taken this one step further by disciplining an employee for expressing views which 'might' upset someone! If this sort of thing continues, the title of George Orwell's seminal work will only have been out by 28 years.

Open season on Christians at the BBC

Libby Purves is entitled to her opinions on assisted suicide and other matters and she is entitled to air them on Radio Scotland. What she is not entitled to do is label as 'bigots' those who happen to disagree with her. Such ignorant and inflammatory language does nothing to further reasoned and rational debate and Calton is surprised that Kaye Adams let Dr Purves get away with it unchallenged. Maybe he shouldn't be, given that Kaye very quickly stepped in to shut up a caller who was making remarks which might have been offensive to homosexuals recently but let the following caller indulge in an extended rant against Christians without any attempt to curtail him. Yet another example of the open season on Christians at the Biased Broadcasting Corporation, where some are clearly more equal than others when it comes to being protected against offence.

Some are more equal than others

Scottish Muslim leaders are urging their communities not to vote for any candidate who supports the redefinition of marriage to include same-sex couples in the forthcoming council elections. Meanwhile Ken Livingstone, London mayoral candidate, wants to educate Londoners in the Koran, if elected, in order to make London a beacon for the teachings of Islam. Does this mean that Red Ken is now against the redefinition of marriage to include gay couples? Calton is struggling to find any other way to square this apparent circle. Meanwhile Norwich City Council has banned a church from using its premises because of their supposed attitudes towards Islam even although no hate crime has been committed. Have any muslim groups been banned due to their attitudes towards homosexuals? It seems that some people are more equal than others in modern-day Britain.