Showing posts with label Britain. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Britain. Show all posts

November 13, 2016

EltonJohn Says Britain has Become Less Healthier to Live and More Anti Gay




  

SIR Elton John admits Britain is "horrible" at the moment.

The music icon thinks his home country has become noticeably less tolerant in recent years - and Sir John believes Britain finds itself in an unhealthy state of mind.

The 69-year-old star - who married his long-term partner David Furnish in 2014 - said: "You know, I don't like it here at the moment, to be honest. I don't like the hatred here.
 
"It's like David said recently, it's like a boil has been lanced that was there for a long time and suddenly all this hatred has come to the surface.

"People have been OK about gay marriage and things like that and suddenly they're not. I have never, ever thought this of this country until now.

"I was always proud to come from here and to live here, because there are different opposing views about everything but it's a pretty civilised place. At the moment, though, it's not, and I don't like it. It's horrible."

Sir Elton also admitted to feeling pessimistic about the apparent rise in anti-gay rhetoric around the world.

He told the Observer newspaper: "I remember going to Moscow when the gay scene was rampant and you'd go to this club in Moscow where nude men would be swimming though a tank and stuff like that.

"Then the mayor of St Petersburg started taking books out of libraries and clamping down. It's just extraordinary. We live in very strange times, but there are voices of reason and they need to be heard."


June 29, 2016

Putin is Loving BREXIT But Wait….


                          

                                                                                               




       


There is no doubt that Moscow was hoping for Britain to leave the European Union. Its propaganda channels such as RT eagerly championed the "Leave" case, and following the narrow but clear vote in the UK to leave the EU, Russian newspapers and commentators were jubilant.
It’s not so much Brexit itself that matters to the Kremlin, but rather the hope that this will generate yet more division and distraction in the West. But Vladimir Putin ought not to regard this as an undiluted win, because there are some buried risks for Russia, too.

A Europe focused on its own internal problems is one not focused on Russia’s transgressions

The Kremlin’s calculation is that the Brexit referendum will not only lead to protracted negotiations over Britain’s withdrawal but will also encourage other fragmentary pressures.
Already, populists across Europe are calling for their own referendums, from France's Front National and the Dutch Party for Freedom on the right to the Five Stars movement in Italy on the left.
There is also a new enthusiasm for secession in Scotland by the Scottish Nationalists, who narrowly lost an independence referendum in 2014, and in Italy from the Lega Nord, which campaigns for the independence or autonomy of northern Italy from Rome.
Although there is no evidence of any meaningful Russian impact on Brexit, its propaganda machine and covert "active measures" operations are much more active and effective in continental Europe — for example, the Front National received an $11.7 million loan from a Russian bank in 2014.
Russian assets will continue to be thrown behind these various campaigns. But regardless of whether these parties and movements succeed, as long as Europe is occupied with its own internal problems, then as far as Putin is concerned, the Kremlin wins.
It’s not that Putin expects or necessarily even wants the EU to fall apart. After all, he does not harbor any imperialistic designs on Europe. What he wants is a West too disunited and inward-looking to be able meaningfully to resist Russian adventurism in its self-claimed sphere of influence.
Already, figures such as Moscow Mayor Sergei Sobyanin have suggested that Britain’s departure will lead to a relaxation of the sanctions regime imposed on Russia since it annexed Crimea and invaded southeast Ukraine.
Putin is also hoping that turmoil in Europe will infect NATO, undermining its coherence. Governments needing to shore up their domestic support or facing separatist political campaigns at home may be less committed to maintaining or increasing their defense expenditure, for example, or to deploying troops to support their allies.
Finally, a post-Brexit Britain is likely to suffer prolonged economic troubles. Desperate to attract business, London may be tempted to ignore calls for greater transparency and accountability in its financial sector.
As a result, it would become a welcome hub for Russian dirty money and dubious business deals, allowing Moscow some opportunities to bypass the effects of Western sanctions.

But there are lots of ways this could backfire on Russia

For all this, there are some grounds to suggest the outlook will not be quite so purely beneficial for Russia.
The economic impact of Brexit is already mixed. Russia made a $3.7 billion paper profit on its gold reserves in the first 24 hours after the vote, as prices rose in response to global uncertainty.
But much of Russia’s foreign exchange reserves were in sterling, which duly shrank in value by about $1.2 billion in the same period. Russian Energy Minister Alexander Novak is also worried about the risks of a serious further slump in oil prices, on which the budget depends.
Konstantin Kosachev, chair of the Russian Senate’s foreign affairs committee, has warned that "if the EU gets weighed down in its own problems, and crosses the line into crisis, then it will affect our trade relations."
While Britain accounts for just 2.7 percent of Russia’s exports and 1.9 percent of its imports, the EU as a whole is the country’s main trading partner, accounting for about half of each. If Brexit has negative economic implications for the rest of the EU, then this will inevitably have knock-on effects on Russia, already stuck in a recession likely to last years.
The weaker the Russian economy, the harder it is to maintain the loyalty of the elites, to pacify the masses, and to keep spending on the modernized military on which Putin is relying for so much of his international clout these days.
Furthermore, if Brexit seriously weakens the EU, it might actually make Russia’s geopolitical position more challenging, not less.
In Moscow, it has become fashionable to sneer at the EU’s sluggish and hesitant foreign policy initiatives, constrained as they are by both bureaucratic inertia and a culture of consensus and conciliation. As one Russian foreign ministry staffer put it to me, "Europe just wants to make things nice for everybody."
However, there is also a growing recognition that the EU acts as a moderating influence on some of its more aggressive and ambitious members. A particular concern is Poland, a country with a growing economy, a desire to assert a strong regional role, longstanding antagonism toward Russia, and a strong, nationalist government.
Russia’s business ombudsman Boris Titov called Brexit "not the independence of Britain from Europe, but the independence of Europe from the US." However, while he claimed there would be a "united Eurasia" within a decade, the more immediate likelihood is that Washington will double down, not withdraw from Russia’s immediate strategic neighborhood.
If it feels that Europe is increasingly ineffective, a post-Obama White House may look more assiduously at cultivating direct regional relationships with Ukraine and in Central Asia. This would be a much more direct challenge to Moscow's authority, forcing it to come to terms with its lack of positive support and real soft power in Eurasia.
Overall, then, Putin may still have reasons to regret what he wished for. His ideal is an EU that is distracted, divided, and weakened, but not mortally so. He may, however, find that he has traded a cozy and polite neighbor for an uncertain, volatile, and sometimes aggressive one.
~~
Mark Galeotti is a senior research fellow at the Czech Institute of International Affairs, a visiting fellow with the European Council on Foreign Relations, and the director of Mayak Intelligence. He blogs at In Moscow’s Shadows and tweets as @MarkGaleotti.

March 31, 2015

Do You Think the Us is LiberaL? Not by a long shot ! How About UK Politics?


Why the UK ? Because they are the most similar to us and are the closet and longest ally we had through the last 100 years. They are closest to us even when you take our nearest ally the Canadians. They are much too conservative in comparison and have not had the same impact for better or worse to us than the British have had. Now You will be surprised about UK politics because most people think they are the ‘stiff upper lip’ more conservative than us. Read on and learn or review your knowledge of a people that are clearly our parents as nations go. True we grew up and married outside of the family but blood is thicker than water as families go even family of nations.

                                                                        

The U.K. general election campaign, which kicks off in earnest Monday, will focus on many issues, especially the ones that voters say are most important. But beneath how the parties propose to address them are several long-standing political disagreements that fit into three broad categories: left-right politics, U.K. national politics and European Union membership politics.
Some of these will matter to voters more than others, but they all inform how and where the parties will campaign. They’ll also shape which parties might be willing to work together and what kinds of bargains will be struck after an election that appears highly unlikely to give any single party a governing majority.
This election is difficult to forecast, though we’re going to try with our general election predictions on FiveThirtyEight. Understanding these three dimensions of political conflict can help put the numbers in context.
                                                                           

Left-right politics

If you are watching from the U.S., keep in mind that the U.K. political system’s center of gravity is substantially to the left of yours. The political positions espoused by the Labour Party and the Liberal Democrats would both fall within those of the Democratic Party in the U.S. And while the Conservatives may seem more aligned with U.S. Republicans, they’re substantially to the left on issues like same-sex marriage, how health care should be provided, and what rates of taxation are appropriate.
Disagreements about the scope of government underlie the classic divide between the Conservatives and the Labour Party on most issues, including taxation, benefits, pensions, education and health care provision. These issues will be very much at the center of the campaign, not least because the Conservatives and Labour will be doing their best to remind voters that they have traditionally voted for one of those two parties because of their stances on them:
  • On taxes, Labour wants to increase the top tax rate to 50 percent, where it was before the Conservative-Lib Dem coalition government reduced it to 45 percent in 2012. The Liberal Democrats themselves agree that the rate should return to 50 percent.
  • On education, the Conservatives are proposing to create more “free schools” (charter schools in U.S. terminology), but the kind of voucher program popular among Republicans in the U.S. would be a political nonstarter here.
  • On health care, no one challenges the basic premise that it should be free and universal, but there are differences on exactly how to administer the National Health Service. Indeed, Labour recently attacked Conservative budget cuts just by saying those cuts might at some point in the future require some charges for health services, a claim that Conservatives deny.

U.K. national politics

The U.K. is far more politically centralized than the United States. Parliament in Westminster has the power to legislate on all issues or to devolve (or grant) powers to lower-level governments as it sees fit. Some powers are devolved to local governments (councils) across the U.K., but the House of Commons could rescind these powers at any time if it chose to do so. In the past two decades, the Commons has also devolved powers to national assemblies in the non-English nations of the U.K.: Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland.
Northern Ireland: Northern Ireland has an entirely separate party system from the rest of the U.K., divided along sectarian lines. None of the parties from the rest of the U.K. will have competitive candidates in Northern Ireland. Sinn Fein, an Irish Republican party that advocates that Northern Ireland exit the U.K. and join the Republic of Ireland, abstains from taking up the (currently five) seats it wins in Westminster because its members refuse to take an oath of allegiance to the queen. Two of the other Irish parties, the Democratic Unionist Party (DUP, currently eight seats) and the Social Democratic and Labour Party (SDLP, currently three seats) could help form a government if one party is just short of a majority. These parties are likely to primarily push for financial support for Northern Ireland if they are in a position to negotiate with the major parties. The DUP is viewed as a more natural partner for the Conservatives and the SDLP for Labour, although the DUP could work with Labour as well. The DUP is primarily concerned with Unionism (Northern Ireland remaining in the U.K.) and consequently is more flexible in its alliances.
Scotland: Since a referendum in 1998, Scotland has had its own devolved parliament with power over all areas not explicitly reserved for Westminster, including agriculture, education, health and justice. The Scottish National Party (SNP) has led the Scottish government since 2007, winning a narrow electoral victory that year and a much larger victory in 2011. The SNP, which currently holds only six seats in the U.K. Parliament, appears poised to win many of the 59 Scottish seats in Westminster; that would mark the end of Labour Party dominance of Scottish politics going back to the time of Margaret Thatcher. If it finds itself in a position to negotiate with the major parties, the SNP will be pushing for additional devolved powers for the Scottish Parliament. The SNP presents itself as further to the left than Labour, and party leader Nicola Sturgeon has indicated that while the SNP would not join a formal coalition with Labour, it would provide needed votes to support a minority Labour government on an issue-by-issue basis so long as Labour was implementing progressive policies. The SNP has ruled outsupporting a Conservative government in any form.
Wales: Wales also has a devolved parliament, with somewhat more limited powers than Scotland’s. Wales has a national party as well, the Plaid Cymru, but it is unlikely to win many more than the three seats it currently holds. Welsh nationalism has not developed into the political force that Scottish nationalism has, perhaps because of Wales’s longer shared history with England. If the ability to form a government were to come down to a very small margin, the Plaid would support Labour rather than the Conservatives.
England: England has no equivalent national assembly, so the House of Commons determines all policy for England. This creates an asymmetry because the entire Parliament (including members from Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland) votes on issues related to England. The scope of further devolution and the rights of non-English MPs to vote on legislation that affects only England are both lurking issues in the coming election, especially with further Scottish devolution on the horizon. The Conservatives have sometimes argued for a principle of “English votes for English laws” in Westminster, an argument that has been simmering since devolution for Scotland was proposed in the 1970s. Labour is strongly opposed, in part because Labour wins more seats than the Conservatives in Scotland and Wales. 
EU membership politics                       

As a member of the European Union, the U.K. is bound to abide by some EU policies that have attracted significant opposition among the public. In fact, in some polls support for leaving the EU altogether approaches a majority.
The most salient issue tied up with EU membership is migration. The U.K. has seen high levels of immigration in recent years from elsewhere in the EU but is not allowed to place any restrictions on that immigration. An entire party, the U.K. Independence Party, is nominally organized around the goal of “independence” (exit) from the EU, although UKIP also has elements of specifically English nationalism and more general right-wing populism. UKIP could support a Conservative government. However, the party is generally viewed as unreliable and is unlikely to have enough seats to be a major player even though it will probably finish third or fourth in vote share.
The Conservatives have substantial internal disagreement about continued membership in the EU, and David Cameron — the current Conservative prime minister — has promised a referendum on exit to finesse these intraparty disagreements. Labour and the Liberal Democrats are generally in favor of remaining in the EU. The SNP is in favor of staying in the European Union.
The big challenge for making sense of the election is that these political disagreements — about left-right politics, U.K. national politics, and EU membership politics — are not all equally important everywhere in the U.K. Exactly which parties are competitive, and the issues that are important to voters, varies substantially depending on where you are.
Labour and the Conservatives face challenges from different political directions in different areas. Marginal constituencies that come down to Labour versus Conservative tend to cluster around the edges of English cities, the kinds of suburban seats that have always decided U.K. elections. But in much of southeastern England, the Conservatives will face UKIP challenges. In seats across southwestern England, the current coalition partners, the Conservatives and Liberal Democrats, will face off in one of the latter’s traditional strongholds. In Scotland, the SNP will face off against Labour in most constituencies. And we have not even mentioned the Green Party, another left party that has recently been polling at nearly the same level as the Liberal Democrats across the U.K., but without sufficient concentration of support to be a threat in more than a handful of constituencies.1
At the level of individual seats, there are relatively few where more than two parties have a chance. The U.K. does not have just one two-party system; it has lots of different two-party competitions in different parts of the country. This is a big part of the challenge of forecasting the election.

March 7, 2015

The Home Office Tells Lesbian Applying for Stay She can’t be a Lesbian Because She is got Kids


        

The Home Office has been accused of having ‘outdated’ views on sexuality, after it rejected an asylum claim made by a Nigerian lesbian. 
Aderonke Apata, 47, came to Britain in 2004 and is an award-winning LGBT rights activist. 
Now, she is challenging the Government’s decision not to grant her asylum in Britain and fears that deportation to Africa would compromise her safety. 
Yesterday, she appeared in London’s High Court to appeal her case. 
She was accompanied by her fiancée Happiness Agboro and a group of gay-rights activists. Apata has even submitted footage and photographic evidence of her sex life to prove that she is homosexual.  However, the Home Office has refused to recognise her sexuality – arguing she can’t be classified as a lesbian because she has children from a previous heterosexual relationship.  
Barrister Andrew Bird, on behalf of the Home Secretary, claimed that Apata wasn’t “part of the social group known as lesbians,” although he conceded that she had “indulged in same-sex activity.” 
“You can’t be a heterosexual one day and a lesbian the next day. Just as you can’t change your race,” he added during the hearing. 
Apata’s barrister, Abid Mahmood, called these views: “highly offensive”. 
“Some members of the public may have those views but it doesn’t mean a government department should be putting these views forward in evidence,” he told the court. 
He added that the Home Secretary, Theresa May, had called Apata’s case a “publicity stunt” in court documents. 
Until recently, gay asylum seekers were liable to be asked ‘intrusive’ and personal questions about their sex lives, in order to establish the validity of claims about their sexuality. 
Nigeria passed a law criminalising homosexuality in January 2014and it’s punishable by up to 14 years in prison (for attempting to enter a gay marriage. Supporting a LGBT organisation can get you 10 years jail time).  
Since the anti-gay law was implemented, there has been a noticeable backlash against the homosexual community, with vigilante attacks against gay people increasing dramatically. 
In March last year, four Nigerian men were publically whipped after being convicted of gay sex. 
Apata’s fragile mental state also forms part of her case. She has previously been diagnosed with post-traumatic stress. She attempted suicide while being kept in prison and facing deportation. 
Mahmood added: “There is evidence of the genuineness of her case, that she will be picked out as a lesbian if she is returned.” 
After the hearing, Apata said: “The Home Office has treated me badly from day one. Staying in Britain means staying safe, staying with my partner and continuing my campaigning.” 
petition to overturn the decision and grant Apata refugee statushas, so far, had almost 29,000 signatures. 
A ruling is expected by the end of March.

October 31, 2014

England Foreign Secretary says Countries that ban gay sex violate International Law


                                                                                

  
Britain must make defending the rights of gay and lesbian people a key plank of its relations with other Commonwealth countries, the former Foreign Secretary William Hague has insisted. 
He said it was “shocking” that homosexuality is still illegal many countries with historic ties to the UK and argued that Britain must use what influence it has to press for change. 
His comments came as he addressed a reception in Parliament at which the annual PinkNews awards were presented. 
Mr Hague, who is leaving the Commons at the next election, said he was proud of Britain’s record on the issue during his four years as Foreign Secretary including putting pressure on countries such as Uganda over draconian new anti-homosexuality laws. 
But he said more must be done and accused countries which ban homosexual acts of breaking international law. 

“While we are making progress in Britain and elsewhere, the situation in many countries in the world is not only difficult, it is actually worsening,” he said. 
“It is completely incompatible with international human rights laws to make illegal consenting same-sex relations and to deny rights to people on the basis of their sexuality.” 
Homosexual acts are classed as a criminal offence in around 80 countries and territories around the world including many former British colonies. 
“One of my last acts as Foreign Secretary was to write to the Commonwealth Secretary General urging him to use his position to urge member states to live up to their responsibilities to promote the rights of their LGBT citizens,” he said. 
“It is shocking that homosexuality is still illegal in so many member states and it must be an important part of our relations with those countries to persuade them to do better.”
Mr Hague presented a “peer of the year” award to Lord Fowler, who served as Health Secretary under Margaret Thatcher for his work combating HIV and Aids. 
Speaking at a dinner following the awards, a serving Church of England bishop said he was “ashamed” of the church’s record on gay rights. 
The Rt Rev Alan Wilson, the Bishop of Buckingham said the world would be a better place if Christians spent less time obsessing about the “minutiae of the Book of Leviticus”, which contains passages condemning homosexuality. 
Speaking as he prepared to say grace before the meal, he told guests: “I want to say how honoured and privileged I felt to be here tonight knowing that the institution that I represent has not got a glorious record in terms of its dealings with its own LGBT people and the community at large. 
“I am ashamed and I need to say that.”
Quoting a passage from the book of Micah, he added: “Doing justice, loving mercy walking humbly with God – if it was about that rather than some of the minutiae of the Book of Leviticus, perhaps the world would be a better place. 
“And I look forward to a day when frankly the institution I represent, the Church of England, would stop being part of the problem and start being part of the solution.”
He added: “Take it from me, the day will come when I promise that faith communities in this country will be very much more part of the solution than the problem.”
Benjamin Cohen, publisher of PinkNews said: "We were delighted when William Hague offered to use the PinkNews Awards to make his first major speech on gay rights. 
"The Foreign Office under his leadership radically altered its approach to LGBT issues placing gay rights at the heart of its human rights agenda. 
"Hague is a perfect example of a politician on a journey when it comes to gay rights - from the party leader who opposed the repeal of Section 28, to one of the proud sponsors of the Marriage (Same-Sex Couples) Act."
"The bishop spoke with honesty and from the heart, revealing the shame that he feels for the way that the Church of England has dealt with the issue of homosexuality. 
“We look forward to the day when the bishop's views are not a rarity in the world's great religions and instead before part of the mainstream reality."

September 9, 2014

Wedding in China of Gay British Diplomat and Neil Patrick Harris Marries after 10 yrs


                                                                              
                                                                               

When U.S. television star Neil Patrick Harris announced September 8 that he had married his partner of 10 years David Burtka in a ceremony in Italy, it blew up on Twitter. The post, which included the Harris quip "we put the 'n' and 'd' in husband," clocked nearly 30,000 retweets and close to 60,000 favorites within a few hours. Over in China, it was the Sept. 6 wedding of a British diplomat and his American boyfriend in Beijing that was going viral on social media.

   
It wasn't a celebrity wedding, but it was big news because gay marriage is not legal in China. Nonetheless, the union of Shanghai Consul General Brian Davidson and his boyfriend Scott Chang, a U.S. citizen, was binding because it occurred at the residence of British Ambassador Sebastian Wood -- sovereign British territory. A post by Davidson with the hashtag #Love is Great featuring photos of the bowtie-wearing couple drew more than 33,000 likes and nearly as many shares on China’s own version of Twitter, Weibo. 

It also contributed to a swirling debate on whether China should legalize gay marriage. Homosexuality remains taboo in many spheres of Chinese life; there is even a bustling business in clinics that claim to cure homosexuality with electroshock therapy and hypnosis. There have been no signals that Beijing is considering revising its marriage law.

But Chinese society -- particularly its web-savvy youth -- is becoming increasingly tolerant of same-sex unions.
In a poll launched Sept. 7 on Weibo, more than 89,000 people voted in favor of same-sex marriage, while just 8,000 opposed it.

In a poll launched Sept. 7 on Weibo, more than 89,000 people voted in favor of same-sex marriage, while just 8,000 opposed it. 

Reactions to Davidson and Chang's wedding on Weibo mirrored that ratio, with the vast majority of commenters wishing the couple well. One man in the southwestern city of Chengdu wrote that legalizing same-sex marriage said a lot about a country's progress on human rights and the rule of law. He said that the wedding at the ambassador's residence would be a "good example" for China and that he hoped the day would come when such unions were legal in China too. On September 7, Davidson retweeted the Chengdu man's message to his nearly 40,000 Weibo followers. In his own announcement a day earlier, Davidson had written that he was “very proud" that U.K. law allowed him to marry whomever he loved. 

More than 20 British missions worldwide are able to conduct same-sex marriage as long as the host country doesn't object. Although Beijing has yet to object, Hong Kong already has, making same-sex unions at the consulate there impossible, according to Hong Kong newspaper South China Morning Post. This is surprising, given that the self-governed Chinese territory has long been considered a bastion of Western-style civil liberties relative to Mainland China. 

Friends of Davidson and Chang, as well as the ambassador himself, posted numerous photos and congratulations on the wedding -- a social media blitz that blended advocacy and celebration. Wedding guest Wei Xiaogang, the founder of Queer Comrades, a Beijing nonprofit group focused on raising awareness of LGBT issues, noted that the wedding had caused "quite a stir" online. He uploaded a collection of more than 40 photos of the wedding including a shot of the program emblazoned with the words "Keep Calm and Marry On" and one of the couple cutting into a three-tiered wedding cake decorated with a cascade of colorful fondant bowties. Also present: a bagpiper. 
Meanwhile, a few naysayers groused about the ceremony online. One Beijing man wrote that same-sex marriages could imperil family ethics and social stability. He added that gay parents would be more likely to have children with "personality issues." Another Weibo user from Chengdu wrote that same-sex marriage was “abnormal, yet we insist on calling it true love."

But the majority of posts welcomed the wedding news. One man in Beijing compared the struggle for same-sex marriage rights to movements for women's voting rights and equal rights for minorities. He added, “Homophobes and morality police can only be part of a backward group in history that obstructs the progress of humanity." 

Another man from the city of Shenyang in China's northeast wrote that he was glad to see "many reasonable people criticizing the homophobes." He clarified that he personally didn't like gays one bit, and that they made him uncomfortable. "But I have always supported each person's right to choose their own lifestyle, to pursue their own happiness, to pursue their own true love," he added.
State media stated in a very brief news report that Chang's father expressed similarly conflicted sentiments at the ceremony. The web portal of the state-run Beijing Youth Daily reported that the father, who wasn't identified by name, said that his son's choice ran counter to his own tradition. “But I still extend him the greatest blessings.”

Weibo/Fair Use

August 4, 2014

1st gay British Clergyman to marry has job offer with NHS withdrawn

                                                                                


The first gay British clergyman to marry a same-sex partner has had an NHS job offer withdrawn because a bishop will not give the licence needed.
Jeremy Pemberton currently works as an NHS chaplain in Lincolnshire, but has been blocked from taking a new job with the NHS in Nottinghamshire.
He was also told he could not work as a priest in Nottinghamshire after hemarried his partner in April.
His case was raised in the House of Lords earlier this week.
Mr Pemberton told BBC Radio Nottingham he was "very, very disappointed" not to be able to take up the post of chaplaincy and bereavement manager for Sherwood Forest Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust after the offer was withdrawn on Friday.
'Treated inconsistently'
"I've now been treated, I think, in an unfair and rather harsh way in Southwell and Nottingham, whereas I'm now going to carry on doing the job I have been doing in Lincolnshire where I have a licence," he said.
"So I've been treated in an inconsistent way, and the House of Bishops can't agree amongst themselves what ought to be the processes that somebody who enters a same-sex marriage should go through."
NHS chaplains are funded by the NHS rather than the Church of England, but a chaplain needs a licence from the relevant diocese.
The Acting Bishop for Southwell and Nottingham, the Rt Revd Richard Inwood, revoked Mr Pemberton's permission to officiate as a priest in June and wrote to the trust in July saying he would not give Mr Pemberton a licence for the new job.
Jeremy PembertonJeremy Pemberton can still work as a chaplain in Lincolnshire
The trust said it was considering its response after receiving the bishop's letter on 7 July, then withdrew the job offer on 1 August.
Mr Pemberton said: "I think the problem now is that it appears that I'm stuck in the job I'm doing, and if I try to move I could be blocked.
"There are, to be honest, quite a lot of gay and lesbian Church of England chaplains working in the health service.
"Now we don't know, if any of them try to move, will the same thing happen to them, and should it?"
He said he did not know this would happen when he married his partner.
"I didn't, and neither did the House of Bishops, appear to know what would happen," he said.
"As soon as they put their pastoral guidance out that very obvious question was asked of them, and the bishops said, 'Oh no, we don't know, we will have to take it on a case-by-case basis.'
"I'm not going to bow out gracefully and take a low profile.
“I think this needs to be tested [legally] and I think in due course it probably will be somewhere."

Amazon SearchBox Use it for All Meerchandise

The Forest Needs help

Summer Athlete

Adamfoxie Blog Int.

Adamfoxie Blog Int.
Amazon

ONE

ONE
Relief World Hunger

Taylor Made 2016 Family Clubs

Click Here To Get Anything by Amazon- That will keep US Going

Amazon EcHo

Blog Archive/White No# Stories per Month/year

Popular Posts

Everyday at the Movies

Orangutans ARE Part of the Forest

The Gay Man in You♥ or Him