Section 4 of the Abortion Act 1967 provides a conscientious objection to participation in abortion procedures. However, the scope of this conscientious objection clause is routinely being challenged. In 2012, the General Medical Council released its Draft Guidance on Personal Beliefs and Medical Practice, which stated that doctors must “be prepared to set aside their personal beliefs” in relation to a variety of controversial areas, including prescribing contraceptives – including the abortifacient morning-after-pill, referring women for abortions and performing “gender reassignment surgery.”
There have been a number of cases in the past few years that have followed a similar pattern in that no exemption will be made where a Christian has a conscientious objection in the workplace because he or she cannot endorse, condone or approve homosexual conduct.
Hate speech laws are very strict in France. Since the law of December 8th, 2004, any discrimination in speech against homosexuals is forbidden. Christians for example are unable to publically say that having a same-sex relationship is a sin. The consequence is that nobody criticizes homosexuality in itself on TV, radio or in newspapers.
Swedish penal law contains the crime “agitation against a national or ethnic group,” a crime that carries a maximum penalty of 2 years in prison. The Swedish government charged four activists who wanted to “start a debate about the lack of objectivity in the education in Swedish schools” by distributing leaflets on the "homosexual agenda".
According to section 5 of the Public Order Act 1986, it is criminal offence to use “insulting words or behaviour” which is “likely to cause harassment, alarm or distress.” Originally enacted to combat football hooliganism, this provision has led to the arrest and prosecution of many Christian street preachers in recent years.
Anti-stalking legislation is used against side-walk counselling or picketing. On October 25th, 2011, the state court of Graz, Styria, upheld a judgement of the first instance condemning pro-life side-walk counsellors to pay fines on the grounds of “stalking.”
Christian-inspired non-governmental pro-life organisations often express their faith and their convictions by protesting in front of abortion clinics, or by simply standing in front of clinics or counselling centres in order to offer conversation and alternatives. In the German cities Freiburg and Munich, this activity has been severely limited. Local courts have given in to the pressure by the targeted locations, which could have been mainly financial ones. Courts have restricted the form of manifestation as well as established a geographical ban. Appeals are on-going.
Anti-religion groups have created a climate hostile to frank discourse. Besides defamation campaigns and negative stereotyping, hate incidents have come to the Observatory’s notice. Activists physically prevented a professor to enter an auditorium to voice deviating views. Anti-religion slogans and images are often used in hurtful manners, such as the public destruction of crosses, the image of Jesus as a crucified pig, or slogans such as “We are here to hurt your feelings” or “If Mary had had an abortion, we would have been spared people like you”.
Law 93-121 of January, 27th, 1993, so- called “loi Neiertz” made it a specific offense to obstruct abortions. Therefore manifestations in front of hospitals are frequently not permitted. A well-known doctor and embryologist, Xavier Dor, was condemned and sentenced to prison several times because he prayed together with a few others in front of a hospital and obstructed legal abortions. At 83, his latest trial is on-going.
Organisations may base their work on whatever beliefs or convictions - but to receive public funding, they must not object to current legislation. This creates a problem for Christian organisations especially with regard to objecting to medical procedures.
The law states that “the public authorities shall not provide any assistance to associations in the case where the admission process or its operations discriminate on grounds of birth, race, sex, religion, opinion or any other condition or personal or social circumstance.”
In transposition of EU – law, Austria has adopted strict non-discrimination legislation in the employment sector. When a Christian religious official was looking for a secretary, his legal advisor asked the equal treatment commission before publishing a job advertisement: would it be permissible to reject a headscarf-wearing Muslim woman? The answer was no.
The parliament of Denmark voted to force the established Evangelical Lutheran Church to perform same-sex “marriage” ceremonies inside their sanctuaries, although one-third of all the denomination’s priests say they will not participate in such rituals. The Danish parliament voted by an overwhelming 85-24 margin to compel churches to carry out unions for same-sex couples that are identical to heterosexual marriage celebrations.
Without exception, businesses are required under the Equal Status Act to offer goods and services to anyone who asks for them and the business cannot ‘discriminate’ on the basis of sexual orientation, marital status, etc. While churches are not forced to perform same-sex ceremonies, they might face fines if they do not rent out halls for receptions following a civil partnership ceremony.
Public bodies have to break up contracts if a violation of the principle of non-discrimination is established on the basis of the personal convictions of a private partner. A communal administration will therefore not be allowed to maintain a rental contract with a private house, used for civil marriages, if the owner of the house is found to object to an actual request for a same-sex marriage.
The Equality Act 2010 prohibits discrimination on several grounds, including sexual orientation, in the area of the provision of goods and services. While there is a vital exemption to the general prohibition against discrimination for religious organisations when providing goods or services, this can only be relied upon in limited circumstances and is not wide enough to cover many situations.
The report “Combattre l’homophobie – pour une école ouverte à la diversité” of the public administration in charge for the French-speaking educational system, imposes on public and private kindergartens from first enrolment until the end of secondary education to address homosexuality, stating that religion stigmatises. The report specifically addresses the Christian tradition as judgmental (mentioning Saint Paul, Saint Augustine, Saint Thomas Aquinas) and in an ambiguous analysis says that at certain times, the Catholic Church, and even popes, have performed homosexual rituals.
Parental consent with regard to abortion virtually does not exist. There is no legal requirement to inform the parents of a minor wanting abortion. However, if the minor needs full anaesthesia, the parents will need to give their consent.
The state is very strict with regard to political correctness in schools. It is very difficult for Christian teachers to debate with their pupils about abortion. One of the most striking cases was Philippe Hisnard, a French Catholic teacher who was revoked and suspended from teaching because he organised a debate about abortion in a class of “civic education”.
“Home-schooling” is prohibited. Parents’ rights are commonly understood to include the right to choose the form of education of one’s children, including the possibility of non-institutional education, such as so-called home-schooling. Germany, however, allows home-schooling only in the most exceptional circumstances. In general, parents do not have the option to home-school their children. Offenders have to pay fines, and occasionally prison sentences are pronounced.