Does anyone else think that religion is a bit of an odd protected characteristic?

[ADHDPI]

I may be way off the mark here as it is only a thought that has popped into my head just now.

As an atheist, I have quite strong feelings about religion and find it all quite bizarre and absurd. However, if I said that to someone religious in my office I could potentially be sacked due to criticism of their protected characteristic.

I just don't feel it is the same as saying a similar comment about disability, ethnicity, sex etc. Of course I don't think anyone should be actively discriminated against because of their religion, but no more so than because of the colour of someone's eyes. It doesn't effect anyone else. It's more the fact that I as an atheist cannot voice my opinion about religion without insulting a protected characteristic and vice versa.... Yet its generally OK to believe that God doesn't exist. Odd!

Thoughts? Have I missed something? Am I being far too black and white here?

I think you don't understand what protection is afforded under the Equality Act 2010.

Protected status is not about immutable characteristics. It's about having those differences protected. Clue is in the name.

Right, but again that's about who is making the decisions.

I have left the Catholic faith (100%) but if someone in a position of power came along and said that for the purposes of their laws anyone baptised Catholic is still Catholic, I couldn't change that. IIRC, Jews weren't allowed to convert in the later stages of Nazism. See also the 'one drop rule' in the USA.

Apologies for the assumption!

I'm Jewish and most Jewish people I know would definitely see their religion as part of a broader cultural background- and it's that which needs protecting against discrimination, rather than the actual belief system.

After the Forstater judgement it has been confirmed that a lack of belief in gender identity is protected. As long as you don’t go around harassing people you are protected if you don’t believe. That doesn’t mean you will not suffer any detriment in reality, but legally you shouldn’t.

https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2010/15/section/10:

Religion or belief:

(1)Religion means any religion and a reference to religion includes a reference to a lack of religion.

(2)Belief means any religious or philosophical belief and a reference to belief includes a reference to a lack of belief.

(3)In relation to the protected characteristic of religion or belief—

(a)a reference to a person who has a particular protected characteristic is a reference to a person of a particular religion or belief;

(b)a reference to persons who share a protected characteristic is a reference to persons who are of the same religion or belief.

Lack or absence of belief is also protected, just as much as any (established and recognised) belief system. Sometimes it's also quite complicated: for example, the discrimination against people who are believed and/or perceived to be Jewish, even though they do not practise Judaism: is that discrimination on the basis of race (which includes ethnic and national origins? or religion? Sometimes it is a combination. Similarly for the discrimination against Roman Catholics, or people perceived to be of Roman Catholic origin or affiliation, in Scotland: where is the dicrimination based - religion/belief? Race? It's really hard to say.

What, specifically, would you change about the law (if you were able to mandate changes) as it protects religion?

You can’t be sacked for criticism of religion. You could be sack for being bullying or abusive to someone on the basis of their religion or race.

religion is generally closely tied to ethnicity eg Jews and sikhs were both recognized as a race prior to religion becoming a protected characteristic.

you can absolutely “voice your opinion” about religion. But if you are harassing or discriminating against people because you don’t like one religion or another then it’s fair enough that they protected from you.

why don’t you try to be more tolerant op - you don’t have to believe in any particular religion but why abuse people who do. Try to live and let live.

It’s amazing how many people still believe this in spite of the fact that history proves against it.

Sorry, that was for babyjellyfish at 14.18

Yep, a really complex area of the law. There's also the occasional tribunal result where coeliac disease is treated as a disability under the EA, but that tends to be where the person is symptomatic IIRC, so it seems you could get rid of someone because their weird spongy bread annoys you, as long as they aren't sick 😅

There's also a lot of complexities around definitions and potentially conflicting rights and exemptions and exceptions and, as you say, indirect discrimination, so combined with the fact it gets interpreted in so many different ways in different courts and tribunals, some of which set precedent and some of which don't, and the whole thing is hidden under layers and layers of "advice" from various interested parties that may or may not accord with what was intended or what actually happens when there are cases… ugh.

Race can be changed as the law sees it. Eg someone can become Scottish or Jewish, etc. in addition sectarianism such as prejudice towards Catholics (or Protestants) in Northern Ireland or Scotland isn’t based on the belief of the victim - it’s based on how they were born.

Surely you can't change your race/genetics?

YABU. History tells us that in the discrimination mine religion is the canary. Mess with that protection at your peril.

The state can.
In apartheid South Africa, the classifications were all over the place. People could be moved from one category to another at random.
Obviously an extreme example!

Race includes ethnicity and nationality. So yes, it can be changed.
Eg, I am from x country, upon aquiring citizenship in Y country, I may either become dual citizen or relinquish my original one and become only Y citizen.
Hence I changed a characteristic included under race in EA2010.

I'm not quite clear which bit you're referring to, Crabo, but just for clarity, I'm not talking about the so called Burning Times, which didn't happen.
I'm talking more about prejudice and discrimination by public services and members of the public in modern times.

No, I think given the history of the 20th century, it is necessary.

I don't know if there have been any discrimination cases brought by Jediists but theoretically they would be protected as long as their beliefs passed the Grainger test:

(i) The belief must be genuinely held.

(ii) It must be a belief and not an opinion or viewpoint based on the present state of information available.

(iii) It must be a belief as to a weighty and substantial aspect of human life and behaviour.

(iv) It must attain a certain level of cogency, seriousness, cohesion and importance.

(v) It must be worthy of respect in a democratic society, be not incompatible with human dignity and not conflict with the fundamental rights of others.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grainger_plc_v_Nicholson

These are the same criteria used to decide that belief in climate change, veganism and gender critical beliefs are all protected.

Thata interesting. So you can change your race if referring to nationality, but cannot change your race is referring to ethnicity. Hmm. I've learnt so much from this thread!

Pagans and witches are protected:

www.lawson-west.co.uk/for-people/services/employment-law-solicitors-leicester-market-harborough-and-uk/articles/pagan-witch-wins-discrimination-case

Of course people should be protected from discrimination and bigotry because of their religion. They should be free to practice their beliefs without imposing them on others. But I do see your point. The stumbling block I have is protecting misogyny in the name of religion - e.g. accepting that men and women of some religions must be separated to go swimming, or that Catholics can spout anti-abortion rhetoric under the guise of faith. I'm not sure as a secular country we should be enabling the discriminatory practices of religion.

I looked into this a while back, and from what I can understand, that unless the church has officially excommunicated you, in their eyes, once you have been baptised you will always be a Catholic until you die and for an eternity beyond. So according to them you stop being a Catholic.

I would think you could possibly change ethnicity.
While most people would probably define their ethnicity based on what they were classed at birth, you can change common attributes to different group within your life. So imho possible

It's protected because for most people it's so ingrained in them from birth, upbringing etc that it is a fundamental part of their identity

l know no one including myself who has ingrained religion into their children. My oldest is 29. Religion has no impact on his life whatsoever.

I meant to say, that according to them you never stop being a Catholic.