What's in a Law?

Quite a lot of blogs are talking about the high court ruling yesterday on a Christian couple who have been denied the opportunity to foster children because of their views on Homosexuality, whilst it's an interesting story, I'm sure these people are perfectly capable parents, certainly within the median range of nice people in the world. The problem is not them as people but the views they have (no doubt indoctrinated into them) regarding Biology which come directly from the Bronze age and are wrong on many levels; however "traditional" they may be.

What I find interesting about this case is not that this couple is Christian, its not because of what they believe nor because they claim their "rights" are being denied but because the judges have decided that Christian values have no automatic place in our law. This is a landmark ruling because it's saying that in the marketplace of ideas Christian ideas are not special and that ideas cannot stand on tradition alone they must stand on merit, this is a secular idea and clearly it means that in this case the law is being interpreted according to secular values and not religious ones.

No one would deny that Britain has had a long history of Christianity ruling the roost, some good times, some bad times, the divine right of kings and all that; but, this ruling is challenging the dogma that we must unconditionally respect the values of that historical legacy. Importantly the judges are not saying that all Christian values are wrong nor that Christians have no right to hold them, but that they have no place in the law unless they square with reality; meaning reality in 2011 and not reality in 1411.