Report comment

Anon @ 14:20

I wholeheartedly agree that uniformity is not the same as equality. However, in Jakóbski, his requirement not to eat meat has no realistic impact on the other prisoners. That is a matter of uniformity amounting to discrimination. But where two families strongly wish for their dead to be dealt with as soon as possible, one is, albeit unavoidably, treated as preferential to the other. This IS a matter of equality, and this should not be based on religion - that is effectively discrimination against people for not having a religion, or an alternative one.

Hassell's policy is flexible to an extent - murder victims (potential for acquisition of important evidence necessary for justice to be dealt - clearly in the interests of the population as a whole) and organ donors (potentially saving a life - one would hope would be considered to be in the interests of the population as a whole) were expedited. These are reasonable exceptions, and I don't think anyone, religious or not, could argue otherwise.

I accept that you will undoubtedly get families who say, yes, please feel free to prioritise the religious views of the deceased and his/her family, we can wait a few days. But what about those who do not? I do understand that many would regard this stance as unreasonable (indeed, I would like to think that I myself would consent to waiting) but it is their view and belief regardless, and they are entitled to hold it. In these circumstances, the cab rank rule is clearly the fairest and most equal way.