In a major victory for freedom of conscience, religious freedom, and personal autonomy, the European Commission recently announced that this summer, it would withdraw the Equal Treatment Directive (ETD), a highly problematic legislative proposal that sought to “implement the principle of equal treatment between persons irrespective of religion or belief, disability, age or sexual orientation.” One of the primary concerns with the ETD was its potential to force individuals and businesses to act against their deeply held beliefs. Christian business owners, such as florists, bakers, and photographers, would have been compelled to participate in events that violated their religious convictions, including same-sex weddings. A Jewish printer would, for example, not have been able to decline printing New Testaments, nor a Muslim cartoons of Mohammed. It also would not just have affected people of faith, since a vegan person would also not have been able to say no to creating ads for BBQ grills, despite their convictions concerning the need to protect animal life. The directive’s broad definitions could have led to legal challenges against business owners who refused, due to their deeply-held beliefs, to provide services for these types of events, even when doing so was in direct conflict with their conscience.
When originally introduced in 2008, the directive focused on preventing discrimination in the provision of goods and services based on disability. The proposal was then, however, radically expanded under pressure from the LGBT lobby to include “sexual orientation”. Over time, it grew into a sweeping initiative that threatened the core freedoms of individuals and businesses across the European Union. While the stated goal of the directive was to promote “equality,” this shift fundamentally altered the proposal, rendering it a threat to core freedoms by turning freedom of contract from the rule to the exception, imposing excessive bureaucratic burden and legal uncertainty, and privileging a few protected groups at the price of freedom for all other citizens.
Beyond religious freedom, the ETD would have impacted businesses more broadly by imposing a one-size-fits-all approach to equality. It would have stifled the diversity and autonomy that make businesses unique, forcing them to abandon their target demographics or face discrimination charges. For example, it would have prevented niche businesses, such as dating apps catering to specific age groups or religious communities, from operating freely.
Despite these evident concerns, the European Commission pushed forward with the ETD, though negotiations were slow and complex due to objections regarding subsidiarity and overreach. For more than a decade, we at ADF International worked alongside many tireless allies to raise awareness and advocate for its withdrawal to prevent the ETD from becoming EU-wide binding law. Over time, it became clear the ETD’s passage was unlikely due to a stalemate in negotiations in the Council of the EU.
The Commission’s decision to withdraw the directive, as stated in its 2025 Work Program, is a testament to the years-long advocacy efforts on behalf of those seeking to protect the fundamental freedoms of all European citizens. This victory highlights the power of coordinated, long-term efforts to defend freedoms of conscience and religion, for all.
Despite the withdrawal of the ETD, the fight for freedom is ongoing. We must remain vigilant because similar initiatives could resurface in the future. For now, however, we can celebrate this hard-earned victory, seeing that when individuals and organizations unite in defense of fundamental rights, we can ward off threats to fundamental freedoms.
EU Scraps Equality Law in Win for Freedom of Conscience
Pixabay
In a major victory for freedom of conscience, religious freedom, and personal autonomy, the European Commission recently announced that this summer, it would withdraw the Equal Treatment Directive (ETD), a highly problematic legislative proposal that sought to “implement the principle of equal treatment between persons irrespective of religion or belief, disability, age or sexual orientation.” One of the primary concerns with the ETD was its potential to force individuals and businesses to act against their deeply held beliefs. Christian business owners, such as florists, bakers, and photographers, would have been compelled to participate in events that violated their religious convictions, including same-sex weddings. A Jewish printer would, for example, not have been able to decline printing New Testaments, nor a Muslim cartoons of Mohammed. It also would not just have affected people of faith, since a vegan person would also not have been able to say no to creating ads for BBQ grills, despite their convictions concerning the need to protect animal life. The directive’s broad definitions could have led to legal challenges against business owners who refused, due to their deeply-held beliefs, to provide services for these types of events, even when doing so was in direct conflict with their conscience.
When originally introduced in 2008, the directive focused on preventing discrimination in the provision of goods and services based on disability. The proposal was then, however, radically expanded under pressure from the LGBT lobby to include “sexual orientation”. Over time, it grew into a sweeping initiative that threatened the core freedoms of individuals and businesses across the European Union. While the stated goal of the directive was to promote “equality,” this shift fundamentally altered the proposal, rendering it a threat to core freedoms by turning freedom of contract from the rule to the exception, imposing excessive bureaucratic burden and legal uncertainty, and privileging a few protected groups at the price of freedom for all other citizens.
Beyond religious freedom, the ETD would have impacted businesses more broadly by imposing a one-size-fits-all approach to equality. It would have stifled the diversity and autonomy that make businesses unique, forcing them to abandon their target demographics or face discrimination charges. For example, it would have prevented niche businesses, such as dating apps catering to specific age groups or religious communities, from operating freely.
Despite these evident concerns, the European Commission pushed forward with the ETD, though negotiations were slow and complex due to objections regarding subsidiarity and overreach. For more than a decade, we at ADF International worked alongside many tireless allies to raise awareness and advocate for its withdrawal to prevent the ETD from becoming EU-wide binding law. Over time, it became clear the ETD’s passage was unlikely due to a stalemate in negotiations in the Council of the EU.
The Commission’s decision to withdraw the directive, as stated in its 2025 Work Program, is a testament to the years-long advocacy efforts on behalf of those seeking to protect the fundamental freedoms of all European citizens. This victory highlights the power of coordinated, long-term efforts to defend freedoms of conscience and religion, for all.
Despite the withdrawal of the ETD, the fight for freedom is ongoing. We must remain vigilant because similar initiatives could resurface in the future. For now, however, we can celebrate this hard-earned victory, seeing that when individuals and organizations unite in defense of fundamental rights, we can ward off threats to fundamental freedoms.
READ NEXT
The UK Victory Is Not the End of the Transgender Culture Wars
Camus Against the Machine
DEI: Sacrificing Excellence for the Illusion of Equality