The Archbishop of Canterbury has condemned the suppression of Christian unions in some universities, arguing that trying to ban them because of their traditional views on homosexuality was like trying to ban the Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament.

Dr Rowan Williams, who spoke out this week over the debate on Trident, said that a refusal to recognise Christian unions by some student unions because of their stance on gay sex risked being viewed as “fear of open argument”.

Writing in The Times Higher Education Supplement, he said that no one was suggesting banning CND from making moral judgments about people involved in the nuclear industry. But quite often, the views of traditional Christians on gay sex were taken as “on a par” with an expression of hate.

The Times revealed last month that Christian unions at Exeter, Birmingham, Edinburgh and Heriot-Watt universities had been suspended by student guilds or had privileges removed after claims that they discriminated against non-Christians. The unions, who believe that they are being singled out as soft targets, are considering legal action.

In a subsequent letter to The Times, eight Church of England and Roman Catholic bishops, as well as Lord Carey of Clifton, the former Archbishop of Canterbury, were among those who urged student associations and university authorities to take action to halt the alleged discrimination.

Christians on campuses across Britain are claiming that their right to freedom of expression is being challenged by student associations attempting to force Christian unions to allow anybody, regardless of faith, ethnicity or sexuality, to sit on committees and address meetings. The Christian unions say that they should be allowed to restrict committee membership to those who share their beliefs.

In his first intervention in the debate, Dr Williams said that it was becoming impossible for traditional Christians and Muslims to state their views without being accused of something “akin to holocaust denial or racial bigotry”.

He said in his article that any kind of behaviour or policy freely opted for by a responsible adult was likely to be challenged and sexual activity was no different from any other area of conscious choice.

To challenge behaviour may be “deeply unwelcome and offensive” in a personal sense but was not a matter for legislative action, he said. “If disagreement is to be silenced because offence may be caused, that is not good for intellectual life.”

Dr Williams added that there was such a thing as offence that should be legally actionable as it undermined human respect and denied a person or a group’s dignity.

“But a moral challenge to someone on the grounds of their choices is a tribute to human dignity. If I challenge what you do, I take you seriously as a moral agent, a free person whose choices matter, whether they are about sex, money or whether to take a job in the Ministry of Defence.”

Explore UK News

• Crime News

• Education News

• Health News

• Science News

• Scotland News

Times Recommends

• An officer and a gentle woman
• Dame Helen Mirren is worthy of the Epidaurus
• Foods that can help to prevent swine flu