Church of Scotland bosses under-fire over trans rules after girl, 11, ‘froze' after finding MAN in toilets
GENDER ROW Church of Scotland bosses under-fire over trans rules after girl, 11, 'froze' after finding MAN in toilets
Click to share on X/Twitter (Opens in new window)
Click to share on Facebook (Opens in new window)
CHURCH of Scotland bosses have been slammed after an 11-year-old girl "froze" when she found a man in the toilets of a community centre.
The organisation was found to have flouted the law on single-sex spaces following the landmark Supreme Court ruling in April, The Times reports.
Sign up for Scottish Sun
newsletter
Sign up
3
An 11-year-old girl froze after she found a man in the toilets (STOCK IMAGE)
Credit: Alamy
3
The incident happened after the landmark Supreme Court ruling on the definition of a woman
Credit: Alamy
The Supreme Court unanimously found 'sex' under the Equality Act referred to 'biological sex'.
It means guidance around toilets, changing rooms and other facilities will have to be changed to exclude trans people where single-sex services are provided.
But the Church of Scotland wrongly stated that biological men could still share female loos.
The girl's mum initially raised concerns over a man from an LBGT club using female facilities at a church-run community centre in Cupar, Fife.
Her 11-year-old daughter, who was attending a drama class, "froze" when she came face to face with the man in the toilets back in May.
She later spoke with the church minister, Rev Jeff Martin, who was initially supportive, she claimed.
But in an email last week, further advice from Church of Scotland HQ stated that "a trans woman's use of the women's toilet aligns with her gender identity, and this is lawful and consistent with best practice".
The church claimed its stance was based on the advice of "legal experts" like activist group Stonewall and the Good Law Project, which is looking to overturn the Supreme Court ruling.
The Church of Scotland admitted that its advice was wrong after being approached by the Times.
It said: "We support the right of women and girls to access single-sex spaces and the right of trans women and trans men to access gender-neutral spaces, so that trans people are not put in a position where there are no facilities for them to use."
NATS health secretary Neil Gray today failed to back nurse Sandie Peggie amid a row over single-sex space
Leading equalities law expert Dr Michael Foran said the Church of Scotland's initial advice "completely misstates the law".
Trina Budge, from For Women Scotland, was left "quite astonished" over the advice.
She added: "We are delighted and relieved that the church has reconsidered its position."
Every organisation in the UK was told to look over their equalities policies following the Supreme Court ruling.
And around 18 schools in Scotland are set to reintroduce single-sex facilities.
It comes after the Scottish Government said that local authorities have a statutory responsibility for the school estate, including the provision of toilets.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Herald Scotland
5 hours ago
- The Herald Scotland
Legislation ‘forthcoming' to stop Adams internment compensation
A Supreme Court judgment in 2020 paved the way for the former Sinn Fein president to secure compensation over his internment without trial in the early 1970s. Mr Adams won his appeal to overturn historical convictions for two attempted prison breaks, after he was interned without trial in 1973 at Long Kesh internment camp, also known as Maze Prison, near Lisburn. The Supreme Court ruled that his detention was unlawful because the interim custody order (ICO) used to initially detain him had not been 'considered personally' by then secretary of state for Northern Ireland Willie Whitelaw. At the time of the case, the previous government contended that the ICOs were lawful because of a long-standing convention, known as the Carltona principle, where officials and junior ministers routinely act in the name of the secretary of state. Mr Adams subsequently successfully challenged a decision to deny an application for compensation for his detention. However, the Legacy Act stopped such payouts to Mr Adams and other former internees. The Act retrospectively validated the ICOs to make them lawful and halted civil claims related to the orders. However, in February last year, the High Court in Belfast ruled that the provisions of the Act related to the ICOs were incompatible with the European Convention on Human Rights. The Labour Government has not appealed that judgment and has tabled a remedial order in Parliament that will repeal various parts of the Legacy Act. The draft laws to be introduced by Mr Benn will aim to give effect the block on payouts to former detainees in a lawful manner. In a question to Mr Benn, Labour MP Chris McDonald asked 'what steps he is taking to address the issue of interim custody orders that were not signed by his predecessor' in relation to Mr Adams's case. Responding in a written answer on June 26, the Secretary of State said: 'The main issue here is the application of the Carltona principle in the context of ICOs. 'The previous Government's attempt to address this following the 2020 Supreme Court judgment in Adams has been found by the Northern Ireland courts to be unlawful and we need to find a better way of reaffirming this principle. 'The Government will therefore legislate to address this issue in forthcoming primary legislation.'
Telegraph
6 hours ago
- Telegraph
Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson is an insult to the US Supreme Court
In January 2022, one year after Joe Biden assumed the White House, Justice Stephen Breyer of the US Supreme Court announced his impending retirement. Biden, who had selected the intellectually challenged Kamala Harris as his running mate two years prior, in large part on diversity grounds, sprang into action to fulfil a campaign promise to black political kingmaker Rep Jim Clyburn (D-SC) – that he would select a black woman for his first Supreme Court pick. And so the Biden White House foisted upon us Ketanji Brown Jackson – a hitherto obscure jurist, nominated because of her sex and race, but who ironically refused to provide a definition of the word 'woman' when asked about it at her US Senate Judiciary Committee confirmation hearing. Curious, that! Alas, it has only been downhill from that rockiest of rocky starts. I pondered, at the time of Jackson's nomination, how a justice who knows she was selected on the basis of identity politics could be expected to fairly adjudicate cases that involve issues of race and sex? My concern proved prescient. Barely a year after her nomination, Justice Clarence Thomas – the Court's longest-serving member, who also happens to be black – excoriated Jackson's 'myopia' in his concurring opinion in Students for Fair Admissions (SFFA) v Harvard, which ended the systemic racism of 'affirmative action' in university admissions: 'Justice Jackson's race-infused world view falls flat at each step. Individuals are the sum of their unique experiences, challenges, and accomplishments. What matters is not the barriers they face, but how they choose to confront them. And their race is not to blame for everything – good or bad – that happens in their lives. A contrary, myopic world view based on individuals' skin colour to the total exclusion of their personal choices is nothing short of racial determinism.' As part of her SFFA dissent, notably, Jackson also made a 'mathematically absurd' claim about black infant mortality. Any decent law clerk – or any decent judge – would have caught on before publication. By missing the obvious, Jackson demonstrated precisely the sort of brazen nitwittery that should have cautioned political leaders away from allowing the search for one of the nine most important lawyers to be determined by identity politics. Yet as satisfying as Thomas's defenestration of Jackson in his SFFA concurrence was, Friday's fusillade from Justice Amy Coney Barrett in her majority opinion in Trump v CASA, a case addressing the contentious debate over the legitimacy of so-called nationwide injunctions, was if anything even more fulfilling. Barrett took a mighty, acerbic sledgehammer to Jackson's paean to unvarnished judicial supremacy. 'We will not dwell on Justice Jackson's argument, which is at odds with more than two centuries' worth of precedent, not to mention the Constitution itself,' Barrett wrote. 'We observe only this: Justice Jackson decries an imperial Executive while embracing an imperial Judiciary.' What's more, Jackson 'chooses a starting line of attack that is tethered neither to [historical] sources nor, frankly, to any doctrine whatsoever'. And 'among its many problems, Justice Jackson's view is at odds with our system of divided judicial authority'. Perhaps most bitingly, Barrett mocked Jackson's glossing over the all-important inquiry as to the historical 'limits on judicial authority' as mere 'legalese' (Jackson's own ignominious word choice). In a word: brutal. Notably, all six of the Court's Republican-nominated justices, including the ever-mercurial chief justice, John Roberts, signed onto Barrett's opinion in full. Call it a pile-on. One cannot help but get the sense that Barrett, the normally mild-mannered former law professor and mother of seven, really just wanted to say: 'Justice Jackson is unfit to serve on this Court.' And maybe she should have done so. Because it happens to be true. The fact that Ketanji Brown Jackson was selected as a justice of the Supreme Court of the United States on the basis of her race and sex is offensive enough. But the fact she now routinely produces such intellectually indefensible balderdash that she is roundly mocked by her more senior colleagues, takes the level of offence to a different level. Simply put, serious countries do not elevate arguably unqualified dimwits to public positions of extraordinary prominence. The continued humiliation of Ketanji Brown Jackson at the nation's highest court – at the behest of her colleagues – is a lagging social indication. It is a warning that something has gone deeply wrong in how the world's pre-eminent superpower nominates the most prestigious constitutional officers and decides the most pressing constitutional issues. The America that just sent B-2 bombers to drop 14 'bunker buster' bombs on Iran's nuclear facilities is a serious place. The America that counts Ketanji Brown Jackson as a Supreme Court justice? Less so. Frankly, no one should be more offended at this appalling DEI idiocy than Jackson's fellow black women. Because Jackson was nominated explicitly due to the fact she is a black woman. Ah yes – but we can't possibly define what a woman is, can we? And therein lies the rub.
Scottish Sun
6 hours ago
- Scottish Sun
Benefits bill passes – all the Universal Credit and PIP changes YOU need to know
Click to share on X/Twitter (Opens in new window) Click to share on Facebook (Opens in new window) DISABLED Brits would have faced stricter tests to qualify for support under the original benefits crackdown. They would have needed to score at least four points in one activity like washing, dressing, or preparing food. Sign up for Scottish Sun newsletter Sign up 2 Sir Keir Starmer had called the current benefits system unsustainable, indefensible and unfair Credit: SWNS 2 After more fury from the backbenches, the changes were shelved altogether with no date for when - or if - they'll happen Credit: Alamy Currently, people can qualify by scoring eight points across multiple tasks, making it easier to access the benefit. Last week, ministers watered down the policy to apply only to new claimants after more than 120 Labour MPs threatened to revolt. But after more fury from the backbenches, the changes were shelved altogether with no date for when - or if - they'll happen. Disability benefits Any proposed changes to Personal Independence Payments now won't kick in until after a review has taken place. The PIP benefits - the main disability welfare payment for those with a disability - is subject to a review by Welfare Minister Sir Stephen Timms. The benefit payments are in place to help those affected with daily tasks such as mobility. Payments currently start at £1,500 but rise to £9,600 which are paid out even if someone is still working. The daily living rate comes in at £73.90 for the lower rate and £110.40 for the higher rate. Figures show that the mobility rate is worth £29.20 and rises to £77.05 for the higher rate. Ministers have revealed that 1,000 people per day are claiming PIP - which is the equivalent of the size of Leicester every year. Following a major rebellion, those who are now claiming PIP be able to claim the same amount of money. But for new claimants from November 2026, there will be a set of stricter measures set out as the government aims to reduce spending on the benefits and get people back to work. Review by Sir Stephen Timms to delay PIP changes Welfare Minister Stephen Timms has told MPs that any changes to PIP eligibility will come in after his review has been published. The major concession came just 90 minutes before MPs were due to vote. The Timms review is due to report in autumn 2026. His four-point eligibility criteria has been dropped entirely from the legislation. Now, disability groups will work with Timms on his review. Universal Credit More than three million recipients of Universal Credit don't have to find work due to their poor health. A single person who is aged 25 or over can receive the basic level of UC which comes in at £400.14 every month. But that can rise by a further £422.37 due to the incapacity top-up due to a disability or long-term condition - more than doubling the original payment. The new plans mean that anyone up to the age of 22 will not be able to claim. Existing claimants will get £97 per week until the end of the decade. But new claimants will only receive £50 a week in the next financial year. Ministers had tried to freeze the payment for the next four years but a commitment has been made for it to go up with inflation. Employment support package Welfare Secretary Liz Kendall will spend an extra £300 million on employment support she insists is the biggest disability employment support package for a generation. The cash will be spent on trying to get those claiming sickness benefits back into work. A total of £1 billion will be spent in 2028/29.
