Newsline 14 August 2015

Newsline 14 August 2015

If you aren't a member already please consider joining the NSS today to help support our campaign work, which is entirely funded by our members' and supporters' contributions. Read on to see all of our news (and more) from the past week.

News, Blogs & Opinion

Minister for Faith role officially abolished

News | Mon, 10th Aug 2015

Premier Christian Radio has revealed that the Minister for Faith role has officially been scrapped, and the duties transferred to a junior ministerial post at the DCLG.

The President of the National Secular Society, Terry Sanderson, welcomed the news: "The NSS has repeatedly called for the Minister for Faith role to be scrapped, and we are very pleased to learn that the post will not be filled.

"Having such a position implied that so-called 'people of faith' should be privileged or given privileged treatment. And it would be no better if there were also to be a 'Minister of no faith'; that would split the population in an entirely unnecessary way. I prefer the French model where the state is blind to citizen's religion.

"The role has been abused by both previous Ministers who used their position to favour their own particular religious views. Neither of them had a balanced approach.

"The fact that no replacement has been appointed calls into question just how substantive the role actually was when it was first held by Baroness Warsi, for whom this strange position was created."

Conservative peer Sayeeda Warsi served as the first Minister for Faith and Communities under the coalition Government, declaring that faith was "back at the heart of Government" before she resigned in 2014 and the role was taken on by Eric Pickles, then Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government. He said that the "contribution of faith" in the UK was a "source of constant inspiration".

No minister was appointed to the post after the 2015 General Election, and Baroness Williams was given responsibility for "integration and faith".

However Premier Christian Radio report that there was widespread "confusion" in the Government over who held the brief directly after the election, with one official claiming that Lord Ahmed, in the Department for Transport, held the title, while the Department for Communities and Local Government claimed the ministerial responsibilities remained in the DCLG.

The Government have now said that title of Minister for Faith "was a specific one given to first Baroness Warsi and then to Eric Pickles when she left the coalition Government."

Labour have criticised the abolition of the post however, and Premier Christian Radio have quoted Shadow Work and Pensions Minister Stephen Timms labelling the decision a "mistake".

Mr Timms, who is the chair of Christians on the Left, complained that the Government had abolished the role and said the move 'failed to recognise' how important faith is in the UK.

He commented: "I think [the Government] should recognise just how important these matters are in modern Britain and the current structure of government and of ministerial posts fails to recognise that."

Mr Sanderson added that Stephen Timms' comments were predictable – "he has been trying for years to get more and more religion into parliament and is Labour's own equivalent of a 'minister for faith'. It is good that the Government are now recognising that a very large number of people in the UK are not religious, are not interested in religion, and do not want religion 'at the heart' of the Government. It's long past time that politicians accepted that demographics have shifted.

"The non-religious don't want a special minister just for their philosophical views; neither should the religious have one.

"Both Faith Ministers used their position to criticise their straw-man conception of secularism, and used their ministerial influence to push an inappropriate and divisive religious agenda."

See also: "After initial crisis, nation struggles on without Minister for Faith".

The BBC is failing to respond to fair criticism of its religious output

Opinion | Tue, 11th Aug 2015

The NSS has objected numerous times over the past half century to the exclusion of non-believers from BBC Radio 4's Thought for the Day but it now seems as though the BBC will not even consider objections to the programme, raising questions about how the Corporation handles criticism.

Over the years the National Secular Society has repeatedly objected to the way Thought for the Day privileges religion and excludes non-believers, and the Society has even initiated legal action. But it increasingly seems like the programme is a 'no-go' area for criticism, and a recent experience causes concern that the BBC will not accept or respond to any reasonable complaints about the show.

Feedback on BBC Radio 4 is billed as a "forum for comments, queries, criticisms and congratulations". It is presented by producer Rev Roger Boulton, whose keenness for religious broadcasting is well known. The NSS made a bid to be included on the programme to discuss our concerns about Thought for the Day, namely that it excludes non-religious voices, and that it is inappropriately situated in a primetime news broadcast in a context where contributors are not challenged.

Strangely, our contribution was not used or mentioned, but the programme did include a member of the public who actually complained that the National Secular Society had not been featured in the previous episode, which was about the BBC's approach to religious broadcasting.

Radio 4's Today programme provides the most informed start to the day for me as for many listeners, and I wrote to Feedback to put across our case on TftD, on behalf of the many people who feel it has no place during a news programme

The daily interruption of Thought for the Day (TftD) in the middle of a news programme flies in the face of the BBC's obligation to reflect its audience and to make sure a balance of views are heard.

With only a small and diminishing proportion of the audience interested in religion, and even fewer looking to religious figures for moral guidance, it is deliberately scheduled to be broadcast during the peak listening time and explicitly discriminates against non-religious contributors (who arguably represent the majority of the population) in a way that would be unthinkable for any other group. And it further privileges religion by uniquely offering often contentious opinions without challenge. Sometimes those opinions are shamelessly political; religious objections to same-sex marriage for example, aired when equal marriage was being debated in Parliament, without any equivalent, non-contended spot for proponents.

TftD has also been used by contributors to attack and misrepresent secularism and the non-religious or their beliefs, but criticism of other religions are not permitted.

These were all points I raised with Feedback, and offered to discuss with them, but sadly they did not present our criticism of the programme and made quite clear during the episode that there was no prospect of the current arrangement being altered.

Of course the BBC can't always be expected to get the balance perfect all of the time, and should certainly not be free from controversial or morally challenging ideas. And of course many religious thinkers and commentators can offer valuable moral insights and reflections on the moral issues of the day. It would be ludicrous to suggest otherwise, as ludicrous as suggesting that someone has to have a religious belief/identity in order to offer such a reflection. However that is exactly what the ban on non-religious contributors implies.

The National Secular Society has been objecting to TftD and its predecessors since 1962, during which time the content of all other BBC services have evolved in recognition of the changing nature of our society. Our numerous complaints, including to the BBC Trust, have been made through numerous procedures, and in most cases we have reason to believe they have been handled unfairly. This suggests that TftD has an untouchable status, seemingly confirmed by the most recent incident. That was echoed when I was told by a peer last year that he had been told by a named former Director General that, despite being Director General, the only matter where he had no autonomy was dispensing with TftD.

The UK is an increasingly religiously diverse and increasingly majority non-religious nation. While TftD has expanded the diversity of its religious contributors the majority of the country who are non-religious remain barred.

A 2012 Radio Times online article, on Today co-host Evan Davis' support for opening the TftD slot up to non-religious contributors, included a poll of over 2,000 people, over 95% of whom agreed. If that's not persuasive feedback, I'm not sure what is.

Sadly our contribution was rejected, and the BBC continues on with the inappropriate placement of TftD. It seems peculiar that they broadcast the aforementioned complaint that we had not been asked to contribute, while ignoring our actual comments on the programme.

While we have our concerns about TftD itself, the way our concerns have been handled in this case once more raise issues of process, over how the BBC dealt with our points, and whether they will even consider any measured argument in the future.

Sikh Federation UK refuses to condemn “thugs” who forcibly stopped an interfaith marriage

News | Wed, 12th Aug 2015

Sikh Federation UK, the "leading" Sikh lobbying organisation, has refused to condemn the actions of a group of men who disrupted an interfaith wedding.

The Independent reports that a group of "up to 22 people" arrived at a Sikh temple in Southall on Friday 9 August, while "final preparations were underway" for the wedding of a Sikh woman and a "white, non-Sikh" man. The couple were forced to cancel their wedding day after the gang stormed into the temple.

Sohan Singh Sumra, vice-president of the Sri Guru Singh Sabha Gurdwara, told the Independent that the men "were all thugs" who objected to the ceremony simply because it was a "mixed marriage."

Mr Sumra said the group wanted to "intimidate" the bride and groom, and that police had to be called.

The journalist Sunny Hundal later confronted the Sikh Federation UK on Twitter about the incident, and asked them to condemn the actions of the gang but they refused, stating only that what happened at the temple in Southall "should be avoided".

The Sikh Federation said those who "understand" and "respect" the Anand Karaj will "realise it is more important" than the couples' "'big day'".

Mr Hundal warned that "gang-mentality puritanism" would lead to a "Sikh version of the Taliban". He also posted comments made against him by "fundamentalist Sikhs" who objected to his criticism of the Sikh Federation.

He added that instances of "hypocritical and fanatical thugs" arriving to disrupt interfaith weddings were becoming more common.

When asked by Sunny Hundal if they "support or condemn these thugs going around disrupting inter-faith marriages at Gurdwaras?" the Sikh Federation replied obliquely that they "stand by and defend" the tenets of the "Sikh faith".

The Sikh Federation states that it believes "temporal and spiritual goals are indivisible".

A letter published in the Times on 21 July warned of a "recently placed" ban on Sikh temples "solemnising marriages between Sikh and non-Sikh". However, advice from 2007 stipulated that the Anand Karaj should only be between two Sikhs.

Guidelines published by the Sikh Council UK in October 2014 state that "Any person wishing to exercise the choice to marry in a Gurdwara Sahib through the Anand Karaj ceremony must sign a declaration" that "He or she is a Sikh, believes in the tenets of the Sikh faith and owes no allegiance to another faith."

They must also pledge to "endeavour to bring up any children from his or her marriage as Sikhs".

NSS president Terry Sanderson commented: "This kind of fundamentalism is very dangerous. It may amount only to bullying at the moment, but as fanaticism increases it can escalate to frightening levels of violence.

"The Government should stamp down on this now before it gets out of control. They must learn from the experience with Islamism that ignoring the problem on grounds of political correctness will only allow it to fester and get worse."

NSS asks Government to clarify religious influence on exhumations from public cemeteries

News | Tue, 11th Aug 2015

The National Secular Society has written to the Government to clarify whether the Church of England is seeking to block the exhumation of remains not buried on Church land.

The Church of England has objected on doctrinal grounds to an increase in the number of people seeking to move the buried remains of relatives if they relocate away from the burial site, a trend which is becoming more popular with an average of 25 such applications being received by the Ministry of Justice every week.

"The permanent burial of the physical body, or the burial of cremated remains, should be seen as a symbol of our entrusting the person to God for resurrection," a Church spokesperson said, stressing that burials should be "permanent".

NSS executive director Keith Porteous Wood has written to Caroline Dinenage MP, the Minister responsible for burials and cremation policy, and asked that the Government not heed the Church's theological objections to applications for exhumation of remains over which the Ministry of Justice, rather than the Church, has control.

While the NSS accepts that the Church is "entitled to refuse" requests for exhumation on Church land, the National Secular Society hopes that the Church will take "compassionate factors into account" when making these decisions.

Mr Porteous Wood commented: "Relatives of the bereaved derive great comfort from visiting graves, and many visit them weekly. If the relatives move a long way this would be impractical on grounds of cost and time, and possibly disability or age.

"Where the body is buried in land not under the control of religious bodies, and the decision on exhumation falls to the Ministry of Justice, we believe it inappropriate that religious objections should play any part in their decision," he added.

The Church however believes: "We are commending the person to God, saying farewell to them (for their 'journey'), entrusting them in peace for their ultimate destination, with us, the heavenly Jerusalem. This commending, entrusting, resting in peace does not sit easily with 'portable remains', which suggests the opposite: a holding on to the 'symbol' of a human life rather than a giving back to God."

While applications to the Ministry of Justice are on the rise, the Church has declined several requests relating to the exhumation of remains on Church lands in recent years, including applications from elderly relatives and people not physically able to visit the graves of their loved ones.

In 2014, a judge in a Church of England consistory (ecclesiastical) court declined to allow a daughter to have her father's cremated remains exhumed so that they could be scattered together with her recently deceased mother.

In a similar case in July 2015, another Church of England ecclesiastical court refused the request of a wheelchair-bound pensioner to move her mother's cremated remains, despite the fact that the elderly woman was not able to visit the grave.

In October 2006, a widow who was too unwell to maintain her late husband's burial plot requested that his ashes be exhumed, but her request was refused by a Church of England ecclesiastical court which said that remains were not "portable". The judge in the case said, "The general principle is that exhumation will only be granted in exceptional circumstances."

The National Secular Society is calling on the Church to take personal considerations into account compassionately, and has urged the Government to clarify whether theological objections are playing an influence on exhumation requests from non-Church grounds.

NSS Speaks Out

This week the NSS was quoted by Premier Christian Radio welcoming the abolition of the 'Minister for Faith' title.