Christian Institute
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The Christian Institute (CI) is a British, right wing, evangelical Christian registered charity. It derives its policies from a belief [1] that the Bible is inerrant and should be the authority on all of life.
The CI has campaigned on issues including gambling, abortion, euthanasia and religious freedom of expression however it is most notable for its campaigns against gay rights. In particular, the CI sought to retain Section 28, retain an unequal age of consent for homosexuals, and opposed The Civil Partnership Act, legislation to permit gay couples to adopt, and measures to prevent discrimination in the provision of services and goods. All these pieces of legislation were ultimately enacted by parliament.
In 2000 the CI became the first and only group to ever take a case to court for a breach of Section 28. The case failed.
The Christian Institute's political activities resulted in censure in 2001 for breaching the rules limiting overt political campaigning by charities:
-
- "The Charity Commission has criticised the rightwing religious pressure group behind the Tory peer's campaign against the repeal of clause 28 for breaching the terms of its charitable status. It has ordered the Christian Institute to change its subtitle, 'influencing public policy', and accused it of engaging in politics. The Newcastle-based charity, supported by hardline Christian evangelicals, lobbied hard to support Lady Young's campaign in the House of Lords to defeat government attempts to repeal clause 28, intended to prevent 'promotion' of homosexuality in schools and by local authorities." The Guardian, 23rd. August, 2001, page 7.
In 2004 the CI printed a full-page advertisement in The Times newspaper in favour of a controversial amendment to the Civil Partnership Bill seeking to include within the scope of the Bill siblings who had lived together for longer than 12 years.[2] This was considered by the Bill's supporters to be a wrecking amendment and was ultimately rejected both in both Houses. In response, Members of Parliament questioned the CI's charitable status in light of its political campaigning.[3]
