The Archbishop of York, John Sentamu, previously of Uganda (relevant) will be trying to persuade the British Government, this evening or tomorrow, that conscience of people who believe in a god is different to the conscience of an atheist.

For example, if a politician, like Adolf Hitler thinks Jews are not truly human and should be treated worse than animals that is a very bad thing, in deed. But if religious people, because of their faith not their politics, think it is their god's will that women or gay men (again, for example) should be treated as inferior to their god's paradigm for perfection, the human male, then that is perfectly okay, because it's a religion thing like.

Evidently, stopping people from stopping black people getting a job in England is a righteous thing (and, PTL because our John is, coincidently, a black man). Whilst stopping people stopping women and gay men getting a job is (including, in all fairness, black women and black gay men) is a despicable attack upon the basic human rights that apply to religious people only. As Our John says:

"Start down that road and you will put law and conscience into inevitable collision. That way lies ruin. "

I have put the full transcript of the archbishop's illuminating speech up on FOOTNOTES.

Clear as mud, m'lud.



  1. I’m appalled. Here I thought it was only when conscience butted up against law that anything really interesting happened in religious circles. Blood of the martyrs, and so forth. They must have got it wrong, poor things.

  2. When is this heretic going to learn?

    If your conscience teaches you ANYTHING other than what the Magisterium of the Roman Catholic Church teaches (starting w/ “I must submit to the Magisterium”) then it’s officially “malformed.”

    [I wish I were kidding . . . but, as I’ve said before, I watch too much EWTN.]

  3. And I thought that Pastor Ssempa post was revolting. In some ways this is worse because Sentamu is really supposed to know better. (Or has more of an opportunity to know better or something like that…)

  4. What always gets to me is that they must all believe that if only everyone in society was as moral as them, they’d all think and act alike. So, in an ideal world, no gay person would be employed. Anywhere. Ever.
    And that’s Christianity!

  5. Oh dear, dear, dear, Dah*veed! I was not implying anything even remotely similar. As I remember, Spong was criticized for suggesting that Africans were so close to the superstition of animism that they approach Christianity the same way – with a superstitious, literalist way of reading the Bible. That’s preposterous, of course. I lived in South Africa for three years and worked for Desmond Tutu during that time. The Church there is very enlightened and inclusive. The reason has nothing to do with indigenous religions. It’s because the South Africans were evangelized by Anglo-Catholics who also valued the life of the mind and a scholarly approach to Scripture. Many other African countries were evangelized by evangelical/fundamentalist missionaries (largely from the UK) and those missionaries taught their own (shall we say) simplistic approach.

    What I meant is that Sentamu is the Archbishop of York, for pity’s sake and has a breadth of experience that would clearly be impossible for Ssempa. I would say the same thing if, instead of Ssempa, we were talking about some very white “Pastor Smith” right here in Tulsa, Oklahoma. The Archbishop of York would still have a much more cosmopolitan level of experience. Also the Archbishop of York has lived for some time in a country in which secular law supports rights for gay people. Not so in Uganda.