Is homosexuality a sin? Minister for Equality refuses to rule it out

Ruth Kelly, a prominent member of Tony Blair's cabinet, has refused to say whether or not she views homosexuality as a sin. This wouldn't amount to a whole hill of beans were it not for the fact that Ruth Kelly has just been appointed in Tony Blair's latest cabinet reshuffle as Minister for Equality with the specific charge of ensuring equal rights for gays and lesbians.

It now transpires that Ruth Kelly, a self confessed member of Opus Dei, has missed a series of votes on equal rights since 1997 including a vote in June 1998 on the Crime and Disorder Bill to lower the age of homosexual consent, and two votes in 1999 on the Sexual Offences (amendment) Bill also lowering the age of consent.

Indeed, on one of the few occasion that she did vote on this matter, she voted for an amendment that would have allowed unmarried heterosexual couples to adopt, but exclude same-sex couples.

Interviewed on BBC Radio Five Live, Ms Kelly twice declined to say whether she thought homosexuality was a sin. She said: "I'm sort of getting used to these questions as I go from one department to another. Is it possible to be a practising Catholic and hold a portfolio in government? The answer is 'yes'. Why? Because I'm collectively responsible for cabinet decisions and I firmly believe in equality and I believe everyone should be protected from discrimination."

Hmm. That sounds like a non answer.

Pressed again, she replied: "I don't think it is right for politicians to start making moral judgements about people. What I think the question is, is what are my political views? As a politician, those are the ones that I'm accountable for to the public."

And the most bizarre statement of all. She regards her moral views as different from her political views. That must make her unique in the history of politics, as most of our political views are formed by our morality and the way we think the world should be organised. Not Ruth Kelly. She is obviously saying that there are things she can do for political expediency that she finds morally unjustifiable. Which is, in itself, hardly the kind of moral stance that most would regard as acceptable for a politician.

This has understandably caused outrage:

A poll on the gay website pinknews.co.uk found 93 per cent of readers believed Tony Blair should reconsider Ms Kelly's appointment.

Lorely Burt, the Liberal Democrats spokeswoman on equality, said: "How can the gay community trust legislation to be properly implemented when Ruth Kelly has such an ambiguous record on gay rights? Ruth Kelly urgently needs to come clean about whether she agrees with her own department's policies on equality issues. Blair's reshuffle tried to reduce bad headlines but has so far only succeeded in shifting trouble from one department to another."

The gay rights campaigner Peter Tatchell said: "Given her equivocal stance and her voting record on gay rights issues, it seems inappropriate she should be in charge of a department tasked with ensuring equal rights for lesbians and gay men."

Unless Blair was to propose putting Enoch Powell in charge of race relations, I simply can't think of a more inappropriate appointment I've ever heard of.

Oh wait, I have. George Bush sent John Bolton to the UN.

Bush appointed Bolton to show his utter contempt for the UN. Blair, who has lowered the age of consent for gays to 16, cannot be accused of harbouring similar prejudices. Rather this highlights just how badly thought out his recent reshuffle was and just how much he has lost the political instincts that have kept him in power for so long.

It is unthinkable that the Blair of '97 would have botched something this badly.

Click title for full article.

Tags: Ruth, Kelly, equality, gay, rights, homosexuality, sin,