Banning Conversion Therapy or Banning the Gospel?

The latest issue of Affinity’s Social Issues Bulletin is out now. It is free to download, as are all previous editions. In the current edition Simon Calvert warns about attempts to ban so-called ‘conversion therapy’.

Banning Conversion Therapy or Banning the Gospel?

Evangelical Christians should be in no doubt that activists behind demands to ‘ban conversion therapy’ have the beliefs and practices of the evangelical church firmly in their sights.

Having initially, and understandably, engaged public sympathy by recounting stories from fifty years ago, or from abroad, of homosexual people being given electro-shock therapy or even being victims of the horrific practice of ‘corrective rape’, activists have dramatically changed their focus.

Now they are talking about prayer, bible studies and Christian parenting.

The Christian Institute has been very clear that we do not oppose a ban that protects people from harmful pseudo-medical practices. And, of course, harassment and physical and sexual abuse are already illegal.

But activists from the ‘Ban Conversion Therapy (BCT) campaign want much more than this. They want ordinary church activities such as prayer to be brought within the ambit of a conversion therapy ban. They even explicitly argue that ‘gentle non-coercive prayer’ should be banned if it does not endorse LGBT ideology.

This emerged in a disagreement between BCT chair Jayne Ozanne and the Bishop of Manchester. To be clear, the Bishop, David Walker, supports banning conversion therapy. He even supports prosecuting prayer. But he stops short of banning ‘gentle non-coercive prayer’. Here is how The Guardian reported his remarks:

[The Bishop said] ‘Where activity has harmed someone, the person who has caused the harm should face prosecution.’ That activity should include prayer aimed at changing someone’s sexual orientation, he added. He said he was not referring to ‘gentle non-coercive prayer, but where there is a level of power imbalance and a level of force’.                                                                                                            

But Jayne Ozanne, a former Government LGBT advisor, hit back in the same article saying: 

I’m very grateful to Bishop David for his clear support for a ban, although I would strongly refute that ‘gentle non-coercive prayer’ should be allowed.

She continued:

All prayer that seeks to change or suppress someone’s innate sexuality or gender identity is deeply damaging and causes immeasurable harm, as it comes from a place – no matter how well meaning – that says who you are is unacceptable and wrong.

The idea that ‘gentle non-coercive prayer’ should be included in a list of illegal actions is alarming. In any event, it would violate the human rights of believers.

This view is confirmed by a legal opinion from Jason Coppel QC, one of the UK’s leading human rights lawyers, which says a conversion therapy ban encompassing ordinary prayer “would be likely to violate Convention rights”.

The Christian Institute instructed Coppel to examine the wording of a ban advocated by BCT and asked him to consider several scenarios of ordinary evangelical church practices. In his written advice, Coppel said the scenarios involving evangelism, church membership, baptism, communion, private prayer and Christian parenting could all fall foul of a broad conversion therapy law of the kind advocated by BCT.

Coppel also pointed out that such a law would be in breach of the human rights of evangelicals. Regarding Christian beliefs on sexuality, Coppel says:

The Courts have consistently regarded such beliefs as protected by Article 9 ECHR and worthy of respect as such. [para. 21] … These beliefs must be treated by the State with neutrality and impartiality [para 34].

The Christian Institute sent Coppel’s written advice to the UK Government and threatened a judicial review if it caves to demands to outlaw prayer as part of a conversion therapy ban.

Those pushing for the ban to include ordinary prayer seem to attribute the worst possible motives to those of us who hold different theological beliefs from them. They are not willing to listen to mainstream evangelical groups or to their concerns. Now they have gone a step further by stating that the legislation should cover not only practices they consider coercive but all forms of prayer, no matter how mild.

Jayne Ozanne’s response to the Bishop of Manchester is very revealing. It shows the focus is not about protecting people from genuinely abusive behaviour. It’s about criminalising mainstream theology that campaigners on the fringes of the church don’t agree with.  

Other ban advocates agree with her. Matthew Hyndman, co-founder of BCT, said:

Those who resist legislation against conversion therapy often resist the idea of a prayer or a pastoral conversation being subject to the scrutiny of law. However, if these things take place in an overwhelmingly homophobic or transphobic context the pernicious power of prayer must be dealt with.

Evangelicals know that failing to endorse LGBT ideology is routinely denounced as ‘homophobic’ and ‘transphobic’.

Referring to a ban in Australia which comes into force next year, and which explicitly outlaws prayer, Conservative MP Alicia Kearns told the BBC, ‘The model that’s been passed in Victoria is a good one.’

So the activists are serious.

But in Britain we worked out centuries ago that prosecuting people for praying ‘the wrong kind of prayer’ was oppressive, counter-productive and wrong.

And the Government would do well to remember that the courts have consistently ruled that mainstream Christian beliefs about sexual ethics and gender are protected by Article 9 of the European Convention on Human Rights and worthy of respect in a democratic society. No matter what some activists might think, you cannot outlaw other people’s beliefs just because they offend you.

The UK Government will consult on its proposals for a ban in September. If you would like The Christian Institute to contact you with advice on how to take part in the consultation, join their mailing list by clicking here.

Simon Calvert is Deputy Director for Public Affairs at The Christian Institute.

 

(This article was originally published in the Affinity Social Issues Bulletin for July 2021. The whole edition can be found at www.affinity.org.uk)