South Africa’s constitution, the most progressive in the world, clearly prohibits anti-gay discrimination. That Democratic promise did nothing, however, to stop a Dutch Reformed Church from firing a same-sex loving music teacher, says the sacked employee, who’s now suing:
Johan Strydom instituted a R 100,000 damages claim for loss of income and the impairment of his dignity with the congregation after they abruptly terminated his services as a music lecturer at the church’s arts academy in July 2005.
He said in court papers the termination of his employment contract not only constituted unfair discrimination, but had also impaired his human dignity.
He told the court he had refused to discuss his sexual orientation with the church after being informed that he must attend a meeting to discuss the issue. This was after the church had received an anonymous call from a man who told them Strydom had homosexual relationships.
The church admitted that Strydom’s gay ways influenced their decision, particularly the fact that he was sexually active and refused to admit his sin. Had he decided to damn himself and never have sex – well, that would be fine.
Forgive us if we’re wrong, but aren’t double standards still discriminatory?
tallskin
I hope he wins and wins big.
Now when is someone in the USA oh here in Europe going to sue a sky pixie church for hate speech, for anti gay attitudes, for causing the deaths of gays and lesbians?? – How about the European court of human rights taking this case on?
Just think of the consequences of a court victory for that?? The effects would, literally, reverberate around the world.
IndyRights
Why are so many people here so quick to sic the thought police on any person or institution that doesn’t hold their particular values? Certainly of all places, churches and other places of worship should maintain the freedom to set rules and boundaries for their behavior and beliefs. And yes, this might include discrimination based on sexual identity and action. Not all groups should be forced to be open to all people.
Didn’t Mr. Strydom recognize the policies of Dutch Reformed Church when he took the position and took their money? It is really he who owes the church an apology, not the other way around.
John
The Employment Equity Act (which was enacted under Nelson Mandela in 1998) does not exempt churches from discimination lawsuits.
In fact, Chapter 2, Section 5 of EAA explicitly states that: “every employer must take steps to promote equal opportunity in the workplace by eliminating unfair discrimination in any employment policy or practice.”
Chapter 2, Section 6.1 specifies that employers may not discriminate on the basis of sexual orientation.
So, if we decided this case on the basis of the statute, Mr. Strydom clearly has a cause for action. The only way the church could come out on top (no pun intended) would be to raise questions about the constitutionality of the Employment Equity Act itself.
However, they’re probably more likely to run into problems with such an argument. That’s because the SA Constitution (uniquely) protects gender and sexual orientation rights on equal terms with religious freedom. In common law, there’s no hierarchy of constitutional rights. One fundamental right cannot possibly negate another. And when they’re in conflict, the courts generally defer to the judgment of the representatives of the people (i.e. Parliament).