UK tribunal declares Christianity is 'incompatible with human dignity'
A Christian doctor who was fired for refusing to identify transgender clients by their preferred pronouns has lost his legal battle after a United Kingdom employment tribunal declared his belief violated human dignity.
Dr. David Mackereth, 56, was forced to leave his job at the Department for Work and Pensions last year because he would not use transgender pronouns, saying in July 2018 that he believes "gender is defined by biology and genetics" and "the Bible teaches us that God made humans male or female." In July, Mackereth told an employment tribunal, a U.K. body that hears employment disputes, that he was pressured by his supervisor to refer to transgender individuals by their preferred pronouns, which he said was a violation of his Christian faith.
Mackereth's counsel, an attorney affiliated with the Christian Legal Centre, a Christian legal group, argued his client was discriminated against on account of his faith, according to a press release from Christian Concern, a Christian advocacy organization based in the U.K.
The attorney referred to Mackereth’s belief in the truth of Genesis 1:27, which states, “So God created man in His own image; in the image of God He created him; male and female He created them.” Belief in this verse, he argued, leads to the understanding that “every person is created by God as either male or female. A person cannot change their sex/gender at will.”
But the tribunal disagreed with Mackereth’s defense, declaring belief in Genesis 1:27 and the rejection of transgender pronouns to be inconsistent with respect for human dignity.
“[B]elief in Genesis 1:27, lack of belief in transgenderism and conscientious objection to transgenderism in our judgment are incompatible with human dignity and conflict with the fundamental rights of others, specifically here, transgender individuals,” the tribunal wrote in its decision.
Mackereth, who now works as an emergency doctor in Shropshire in western England, expressed concern about the ruling, saying his “30 years as a doctor are now considered irrelevant compared to the risk that someone else might be offended.” He said he would appeal the decision.