Meanwhile, on the Other Side of the Pond…

…someone who tries the old "conscience clause" maneuver to get out of doing her job gets a very different reception than she would here:

A tribunal ruling in favour of Christian registrar Lillian Ladele who refused to "marry" gays was based on a "fundamental error", an eminent employment law judge said this week.

Justice Sir Patrick Elias, President of the Employment Appeal Tribunal, criticised the judgement in support of Ms Ladele, who was threatened with the sack by the Town Hall because of her refusal to take part in civil partnership ceremonies. The 47-year-old believes gay couples are "sinners".

Hmm, another Christian who doesn't seem to understand the basic precepts of Christianity, including that little concept about all humans being sinners. Perhaps you've heard of that Jesus fella, Ms. Ladele? His whole being born (see: Christmas) and dying (see: Easter) were pretty much all about that central tenet of the religion so important to you that you're willing to discriminate against your fellow citizens and risk your very job for it.

Islington Council appealed against the decision in her favour, arguing that its strict employment code meant staff could not hold discriminatory views based on sexual preference and that Ms Ladele was not fulfilling her job description.

Can you imagine CVS suing one of its pharmacists for not doing their bloody job in the US? Me, neither. And I can imagine even less an American judge explaining why the original ruling was wrong with an example like this:

[Tribunal barrister Helen Mountfield, an employment law specialist] said: "Employing someone who discriminates against someone on grounds of sexual orientation sends an unacceptable message. This is a case of considerable wider importance and we believe the tribunal has misapplied the law. … What if I go into a job interview and the employer will not employ me because he says it is his strongly held religious belief that a woman's place is in the home?"

Oh, snap! Mountfield also noted that upholding the original ruling "would allow religion to become a 'trump card' and outweigh other employment equality rights."

It's like a whole different magical universe or something.

A verdict from the Employment Appeal Tribunal, led by Justice Elias (who, I shit you not, is known as "the Pele of employment law"), is expected by the end of the year.

[H/T to Shaker YeomanPip by email.]