British Tribunal: Belief in Genesis Incompatible with Human Dignity

Western legal reasoning just crossed the Rubicon.

In a unanimous decision handed down this week, an employment tribunal in England determined that a government employee’s sincerely held belief in Genesis 1:27 is incompatible with human rights and dignity. Yes, you read that correctly; the decision can be accessed here.

This all started when the Department for Work and Pensions ordered their employee, Dr. David Mackereth, to use the preferred pronouns of his clients or face termination. He refused to comply with the directive, which eventually led to the tribunal’s decision on October 2.

Though there is much to be alarmed about in this case, what must not be missed is what is new. State-sponsored speech coercion—we’ve been there. Pressure from an employer to conform to transgender ideology or face being fired—we’ve done that. But what we haven’t seen before is the black-and-white reasoning that a person’s belief in the Bible, in this case Genesis 1:27, is irreconcilable with the Western tradition of human dignity and fundamental rights.

Dr. Mackereth was very clear about what Genesis 1:27 teaches, which is consistent with the overwhelming majority of Christianity as it has been practiced all over the world for the past 2,000 years. According to the decision, Dr. Mackereth believes that “every person is created by God as either male or female. A person cannot change their sex/gender at will. Any attempt at, or pretence of, doing so, is pointless, self-destructive, and sinful.”

But this wasn’t the only problematic “belief” held by Dr. Mackereth that the court cited in its decision. It also referenced Dr. Mackereth’s

“Lack of belief that it is possible for a person to change their sex/gender, that impersonating the opposite sex may be beneficial for an individual’s welfare, and/or that the society should accommodate and/or encourage anyone’s impersonation of the opposite sex (“lack of belief in Transgenderism”)” and his

“Belief that it would be irresponsible and dishonest for e.g. a health professional to accommodate and/or encourage a patient’s impersonation of the opposite sex (“conscientious objection to Transgenderism”)”

I find it telling that transgender ideology is cast by this decision as a matter of “belief” and “lack of belief” — a newly minted god in the secular pantheon.

According to the court, Dr. Mackereth’s genuinely held beliefs as well as lack of beliefs are “incompatible with human dignity and conflict with the fundamental rights of others, specifically here, transgender individuals.”

Christians, we’ve been put on notice. According to the reasoning of this court decision in Britain — which you better believe will not stay in Britain — belief in Genesis 1:27 is now a public enemy of human rights and dignity.

The irony of a Western democracy citing human rights and dignity to censure Genesis 1 wasn’t lost on Dr. Katie McCoy, who responded to the decision on Twitter:

“There is no basis for absolute human dignity without Genesis 1-2. The West owes its value of an individual to the influence of Christianity. Divorce human dignity from the image of God, and a person’s worth becomes relative to one’s usefulness.”

Dr. McCoy is absolutely right. Without Genesis 1 and 2, there is no human rights or dignity. The Rubicon has been crossed, and it falls to us to defend the plain meaning of Genesis 1 and 2. For in so doing, we are defending the rights and dignity of our fellow man.

Impossible. There is no basis for absolute human dignity without Genesis 1-2.

The West owes its value of an individual to the influence of Christianity.

Divorce human dignity from the image of God, and a person’s worth becomes relative to one’s usefulness. https://t.co/SdJi4MABjq

— Katie J. McCoy (@blondeorthodoxy) October 4, 2019