Well done the English legal system.
Lord Justice Laws said legislation to protect views held purely on religious grounds could not be justified. He said it was an irrational idea "but it is also divisive, capricious and arbitrary".
"The law of a theocracy is dictated without option to the people, not made by their judges and governments. The individual conscience is free to accept such dictated law, but the state, if its people are to be free, has the burdensome duty of thinking for itself."
Incidentally the judge only gave these views because Archbishop Carey put in a witness statement specifically asking him to state his views on this aspect of the case. It was not gratuitous.
I think the court could have given additional grounds, but maybe that was a matter for the employer to explain in sacking this man from work to which he was clearly unsuited. The essence of counselling is to be non judgemental. The client is not there to be judged nor to be advised but to be enabled to work in a caring, supportive way through their own issues according to their own values. It is unacceptable to suggest that counselling can be properly undertaken by anyone whose personal values intrude so dramatically. A well trained and competent counsellor understands that their own issues (which are inevitable) are their own problem, not the client's. The sheer arrogance of SOME (not all, maybe not most) Christians imagining that they are invited to bring their religion into other lives uninvited is breathtaking. I say not all because I fully accept that many Christians, Muslims and Jews are perfectly able to function very modestly and dispassionately even with clients with whom, in any other context, they would certainly want to disagree. Indeed, that is the case for any counsellor or psychotherapist much of the time - it is the nature of the job. If the clients had their lives all sorted out rationally they would not need the help! The counsellor is not there to tell them they have got it all wrong.