Premier Christianity uses cookies Read our cookie policy.
By 
Roger Kiska2025-11-27T13:52:00+00:00
Northern Ireland’s Christian-based curriculum breaches human rights law, according to a new Supreme Court ruling. And yet similar challenges to LGBT teaching have repeatedly failed, notes Christian Concern lawyer Roger Kiska — an inconsistency he says reveals a troubling double standard
Source: Fredrick Kippe
On 19 November, the Supreme Court issued its judgment concerning the RE syllabus in Northern Ireland.
A claim had been brought by humanist parents and their daughter against their child’s primary school, with the parents alleging that the school’s RE teaching and collective worship had acted to indoctrinate their child to the Christian religion.
Lord Stephen, writing on behalf of a unanimous court, found in favour of the claimants.
In his article for Premier Christianity, Peter Lynas of the Evangelical Alliance tried to find the silver lining in the decision, believing that we should be optimistic and take this opportunity to reimagine how Christian education is delivered in Northern Ireland.
He is correct that the Supreme Court’s ruling does not interfere with the principle that religious education in Northern Ireland is Christian and must be based on the Holy Scriptures.
I do not share Peter’s optimism, but I hope the Department of Education (Northern Ireland) does, and that they work towards crafting a syllabus which continues to reflect the Christian heritage of Northern Ireland and the truth and the hope of the gospels.
The basis on which the Supreme Court struck down the core RE syllabus was human rights law, specifically A2-P1 of the European Convention on Human Rights which reads: “No person shall be denied the right to education. In the exercise of any functions which it assumes in relation to education and to teaching, the State shall respect the right of parents to ensure such education and teaching in conformity with their own religious and philosophical convictions.”
The second sentence guarantees that schools (and the state) must respect how parents wish to raise their children in accordance with the family’s religious (or non-religious) beliefs. The European Court has clarified that this provision applies to all subject matters, not just religious education. And yet, in the entire history of European Court and UK caselaw, A2-P1 has only ever been applied to cases where parents wished their children to be excused from religious education classes. On the other side of the equation, in each and every challenge by Chrisitan parents against indoctrinating LGBT or sex education, the Court has ruled that no violation has occurred.
So, the real question is, who exactly does human rights law serve? It appears to only protect freedom from religion, but never religious freedom; at least where education law is involved. And this is precisely the disillusionment I hold with the Supreme Court’s case.
There is now a very clear and obvious double standard between the teaching of Christianity and LGBT education and sex education.
On a true reading of the latest Northern Ireland judgment, Christian families should be successful in challenging statutory RSHE in England. Yet attempts to challenge aggressive and partisan LGBT education in the recent past, as with the case of Izzy Montague, have been unsuccessful. Izzy’s son, a 4-year-old at the time, was required to participate in an LGBT school Pride march, create rainbow themed art, and participate in a slew of other activities promoting pride month. Teachers openly wore (and were encouraged to wear) rainbow themed clothing and shirts with LGBT campaigning slogans clearly visible. Far from seeing such education as indoctrinating for a 4-year-old child, English courts held that such education was necessary to promote tolerance and diversity.
The courts in England and Wales have gone out of their way to portray LGBT education as being about equality and diversity, and therefore somehow exempting them from critical and objective inspection (presumably because from a secular perspective these qualities are unequivocally good and therefore free from critical treatment). The result is that our courts have essentially held that LGBT education, even where it overtly takes the form of campaigning, does not violate parental rights whereas soft evangelism in the classroom does. The uncritical promotion of Christianity is viewed as problematic, whereas the uncritical promotion of LGBT education is valued and viewed as necessary.
A colleague of mine wrote me after reading the judgment and commented on just how shockingly awful the judgment was. In many ways he is correct. The judgment does provide some profoundly disturbing examples of what it believes to be “indoctrination”. For example, teaching pupils that “praying is a way of talking to God so that we can thank him, praise him, say sorry and ask for help.” This was cited by Justice Stephen as evidence of a violation of A2-P1. Further evidence was that pupils are taught that God loves them and is forgiving towards them. Even this, Justice Stephen argued tends toward indoctrination. Later it is noted that pupils are also taught to “consider the respect due to creation, which is the gift of God;” a further indication, the court suggests, that the school was “indoctrinating” its pupils.
Equally distressing is the criticism of collective worship in the judgment, which is deemed to fail in its duty to be critical, objective and pluralistic. The finding that Northern Ireland’s collective worship violates A2-P1 guts the meaning of collective worship entirely. By definition, how could any form of collective worship be conveyed in a manner which is “critical, objective and pluralistic”?
By way of comparison to the Izzy Montague case, Izzy’s child (and his classmates) were presented with both male and female clothing and toys, and told that it was ok for him to wear or play with anything he felt comfortable with. Rather than indoctrination, the County Court lauded this activity for breaking gender stereotypes.
Comparing the disparate treatment of Christian RE with LGBT education highlights just how far astray our courts have gone. While some are cautiously optimistic about re-shaping the existing syllabus, others, and rightly so, are far more concerned about the trajectory of these types of cases. More than just striking down an RE core syllabus, this judgment stands out by it being the first ever case of its kind, where a court has held that a full exemption from RE could not cure a violation of A2-P1.
If Christian education is not safe in Northern Ireland, where 80% of the population is Christian, it begs the question of which part of our religious freedom will be taken from us next by the stroke of a judge’s pen. 
Grab this Deal!
We’re celebrating a remarkable journey from our humble beginnings as Buzz in the 1960s to the vibrant, multi-platform publication we are today. One thing has remained constant: our commitment to connecting faith with the world around us. To celebrate our birthday, we are offering you a Print and Digital subscription for just £24 your first 12 months!
Subscribe Today
*Offer applies in UK only, but check here for our overseas offers
2025-11-27T12:09:00Z
Church and state must work in partnership in order to effectively serve the poor, argues Hannah Rich. Former Conservative MP Miriam Cates is wrong to pit the two against one another, she says
2025-11-27T11:14:00Z
Formerly an atheist trapped in addiction, Shaun O’Sullivan transformed his life after finding Christ through a street preacher he once mocked. Now, he says he is being targeted by police for proclaiming the gospel on the very streets where he first heard it
2025-11-21T14:29:00Z
A landmark Supreme Court ruling has declared Christian-focused religious education in Northern Ireland state schools unlawful, yet Peter Lynas says there are grounds for hope. The way we teach the faith may need to change, but our right to communicate the Gospel remains unhindered, he says
2025-11-27T11:29:00Z
Sudan’s civil war has killed an estimated 150,000 people and displaced half the population, yet remains largely ignored by international media. Rafat Samir explains the impact it’s had on the country’s 2 million Christians and how believers worldwide can pray
2025-11-27T11:08:00Z
Johnny Rivera explores why Christian leaders must learn to fill up before pouring out, moving from unsustainable ‘canal’ ministry that gives as soons as it has to life-giving ‘reservoir’ leadership that flows from overflow
2025-11-26T11:43:00Z
Reform UK’s leader Nigel Farage is back in the headlines this week, accused of allegedly making racist remarks while at school. Holly Petersen says Christians must not be fooled by his policies of hostility and division. It goes against everything Jesus commanded
Site powered by Webvision Cloud