David Cameron has badly let down his fellow Christians

The PM promised to make it possible for people to wear a cross at work – but he has done nothing

Column LAST UPDATED AT 09:48 ON Thu 6 Sep 2012

WHAT do David Cameron's government and Count Dracula have in common? They both hate people displaying the Christian cross. Let's hope they don't share any other nasty habits. If you don't believe me, read on.  
 
Mrs Nadia Eweida was suspended from her job with British Airways in 2009 for wearing the cross on duty – despite the fact that other religions are allowed to wear religious paraphernalia while working at BA.

In 2010, Shirley Chaplin, a 56-year-old nurse with a lifetime of service on the wards, was moved to a desk job by the NHS in Exeter for the same reason. They believe this to be unfair and discriminatory and have appealed to the European Court of Human Rights at Strasbourg.
 
That loyal and devout subjects of Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth the Second, By the Grace of God, Defender of the Faith, should have to appeal to such a court at all is in itself an insult. But no further remedies were available from a militantly anti-Christian English judiciary that consistently found against both women. The Supreme Court even refused to hear Mrs Eweida's case.
 
In front of the ECHR on Wednesday, James Eadie, QC, First Treasury Counsel - the top barrister who handles the government's most important business in the courts - argued that Christians in England and Wales do not have the right to wear the cross at work. The colloquial term for his plum and well-paid job is appropriately the ‘Treasury Devil'.  
 
Eadie's argument went like this: prohibiting both individuals from wearing a visible cross "did not prevent either of them practising religion in private" and Christians "under difficulty" from the ban were not discriminated against if they had the choice of "resigning and moving to a different job".
 
He added that the wearing of a cross was not a "scriptural requirement" or a "generally recognised" act of worship such as wearing the Muslim headscarf or Sikh turban and employers were therefore exempt from a legal obligation to accommodate the practice.
 
Eadie's arguments are a masterclass in the politically correct modern legal mind – he got the job in 2009 under Labour. The discriminatory malice towards Christianity, dressed up as legal reasoning, is breathtaking. The bullying tone of the government's case is shameful and the ignorance astonishing. If the wearing of a cross is not "a generally recognised" act of Christian worship, I'm a Dutchman.
 
Needless to say Eadie's fat fee for spouting this drivel is paid by the hard-pressed taxpayer. I don't suppose he is staying in a budget B&B in Strasbourg either. Mrs Eweida and Mrs Chaplin's legal fees are being paid by a Christian charity.
 
Apparently, the prime minister disapproves. At Easter this year, he told church leaders at a Downing Street reception that the nation needed Christian values and that he supported those who wanted to wear a cross:

"I think we see the fight-back in this very strong stance that I've taken and others have taken in terms of the right to wear a crucifix. I think this is important. People should be able to express their faith…"

He also told the House of Commons in July that the right to wear the cross was an "absolute freedom" and promised to amend legislation to "make clear that people can wear religious symbols at work."

But he has done nothing. One email to the Attorney General's office could have called off this legal madness.
 
There are millions of people in this country who believe Jesus Christ to be the Son of God, and millions more, probably, who can't quite believe but try to lead their lives according to Christian principles. I wonder how many intend to vote for David Cameron at the next election.
 
As Adlai Stevenson once said of President Nixon, "He is the kind of politician who would cut down a redwood tree, then mount the stump and make a speech for conservation." · 

Disqus - noscript

Gosh - so many things you could have picked on here to show how David Cameron has badly let down his fellow Christians (you assume here that he is one - not a judgment I'd like to make) - his patent loathing of the poor and disabled, his bullying attitude towards others, his disregard for the environment, his croneyism, the number and frequency of bare-faced lies he tells, the casual way he breaks promises (even ones he claims are 'cast-iron') and yet your main beef with him concerns the wearing of crosses. I suspect most Christians wouldn't agree that this is the most important way he's let them down.

David Cameron is toast and is nothing but "a one term Prime Minister"

Cameron probably sees no political advantage in keeping his promise in this case - he is vacuous, disingenuous and downright slippery - as a "natural" Conservative and leaving religion aside for one moment - I feel that he has let his country down across the board - the Lib Dems are a very convenient "get out" for him - he can, plausibly, blame his Coalition partners for preventing him from following through true Tory policies - in this case though, he can only blame himself - it is certainly within his remit to end this blatant, politically correct, discrimination.

I would guess that if a planning application, to convert a cathedral into a Moslem "day centre", were to be submitted, Cameron would cave in to that proposal too!

Lies, lies and more lies. Keep telling the same lies over and over again and eventually people will believe they must be fact. It is a tried and trusted technique the religious have used for millenia (in fact, it is exactly what religions are based on).
Contrary to the claims of this and numerous other articles, It IS possible for people to wear crosses at work and, as we all know, they do! In over 99.9% of all workplaces this just isn't an issue. There is a tiny handful of cases where employers do not allow certain types of jewellery, usually for health and safety reasons (it has nothing to do with whether or not the jewellery displays a cross or any other symbol).
It was not crosses that were banned - it was certain types of jewellery. Does everyone get it now???

Well said SimonNorwich; the distortion and blatant lies or bad repoorting on this topic is at an epidemic level.
Crispin, please read the cases and you will realise this is not anti-Christian!!

Just an example of the unilateral multiculturalism imposed on this country by the current and previous governments. British and Christian people are expected, in fact ordered, to accommodate cultures and religions of people from other lands but those same people are allowed to complain about and oppose British and Christian beliefs in our own country.

David Cameron comes from a very long line of Jewish bankers and can trace his ancestry back to Moses! He is never Christian!

Oh what a strident, one-sided outburst ! If I as an atheist posted like this I would be damned as "militant". Christians are getting upset because after centuries of religious dogma, the tables are being turned.
"The discriminatory malice towards Christianity, dressed up as legal reasoning" It's not malice: if I go to a BA check-in desk I expect to meet a representative of BA , not God. Why can't the cross-wearing staff simply wear the cross UNDER their tops ? But no, they want the world to know they are Christians. Bully for them, but it's irrelevant to their performance in their job,- and to me as a customer.

(I still don't understand why Sikhs are allowed to wear turbans on motorcycles, would they really protect in the case of an accident ? )

Why is this an issue? Here in New Zealand you can wear any kind of emblem, of any religion or cult. You can even wear a T-shirt with a blasphemous depiction of Jesus. And nobody takes any notice.

All the same, I think things have changed for the better. When I was boy (in New York) there were no discussions of this sort. No paper would print the comment of an atheist or agnostic. The Catholic Church was the self-appointed censor for the entire populace.

Why not? In a few years cathedrals will be shopping malls.

Mr. Cameron now puts himself above God. It takes our minds off his silly war that pointlessly kills so many, his failure to even recognize the rotten banking system is pathetic. Soon he will be remembered for keeping his hair nice and sounding in the know in parliament. Identifying positive achievement is going to be tough.

Ladies and gentlemen, we have located the devil....