Lawyers' Christian Fellowship responds to criticisms

[...] As Christians we are compelled to speak Gospel Truth into a society crying out for help. We are all sinners redeemed by the blood of Jesus. When the Government is about to introduce laws that will compel some Christians to be complicit in sinful behaviour then as Christians the most loving thing to do is to speak out. However, many in society are intolerant of a message that whilst God loves every individual, it is contrary to His will to indulge in sex outside marriage, including gay sex. Those who are prepared to speak this message will be labelled homophobic, bigoted and extreme.

As well as the general issue of whether or not Christians should be standing up against the impact of the SORs, there have been specific challenges from politicians and others suggesting that claims made by LCF and others about the Regulations are exaggerated and inaccurate. At every stage of our analysis of the law, a team of lawyers within LCF has analysed the Regulations and Government statements and have sought reassurances that our concerns would be met. At no stage have we ever received such assurances. We will shortly be producing a legal briefing which will address all these specific criticisms and substantiate why an accurate legal analysis of the Regulations highlights the reality of the concerns we (and other Christian organisations) have been expressing.

[...]

Finally, it has been noted that some quotations in the Christian Press have made unjustified criticisms of the freedom rally that was held outside Parliament on the 9th January.

In the Church Times the leader of Faithworks, the Revd Malcolm Duncan, described the demonstrators’ approach as “virulent and aggressive” and said: “Vociferous opposition, a lack of constructive dialogue, and threats of civil disobedience mean that the Church is in danger of sounding homophobic”. His view was supported by the Lesbian and Gay Christian Movement who said “A small group of fundamentalist Christians have led a wicked campaign of disinformation about these regulations, making claims that anyone who bothered to read them could see were false.”

We would disagree strongly with these comments. Read more