Newsline 14 November 2014

Not a member? The most tangible way of supporting our work is by becoming a member and contributing funds to enable us to campaign effectively; the more we have, the more we can do. If you believe, as we do, that a secular Britain is our best chance to achieve true equality for all citizens, regardless of their religious beliefs, then please join us and become part of what is possibly the most important debate of the 21st century. Together we can create a fairer and more equal society.

News, Blogs & Opinion

	NSS alert Ofsted after Jewish faith school tells pupils not to answer exam questions that conflict with school’s religious ethos News \| Thu, 13th Nov 2014 The National Secular Society has called on Ofsted and the Department for Education (DfE) to ensure that all schools teach the National Curriculum in full after the head of a publicly funded Jewish faith school admitted to advising students not to answer exam questions which conflict with the school's strict Orthodox religious beliefs. The head of the Yesodey Hatorah secondary girls' school has stated that he will "discourage pupils from answering 'halachically questionable' exam questions", according to the Hackney Citizen. This comes after the school was found to be redacting exam questions on science papers following an investigation by the National Secular Society. After being warned against blacking out exam questions, Rabbi Avraham Pinter said that "if we can't redact [questions], then we won't redact them." However, the Rabbi went on to state that "our children will be aware of which questions they should be answering and which ones they shouldn't be." Pinter also said that evolution was not compatible with the school's strict, Orthodox ethos. It is now clear that rather than redacting questions as they had in the past, the school is advising students not to address the questions. The schools is now said to be "defiant" over the practice of telling children not to answer exam questions, and the secondary has been downgraded from "outstanding" to "good" after a recent 'no-notice' Ofsted inspection. The National Secular Society has written to Ofsted Chief Inspector Sir Michael Wilshaw and the DfE raising concerns that the school, and potentially other faith schools, may be failing to teach the National Curriculum in full when scientific facts clash with the school's ethos. In the letter to the schools regulator and the DfE, the NSS also raise concerns that children's "sexual and reproductive health rights are being impeded by the refusal to teach such key areas of the National Curriculum as human reproduction". The letter warns that "children are entitled to be taught about these issues in preparation for life, and it is likely that the parents who send children to these schools are materially less likely than other parents to be teaching them this vital information at home." The NSS has also asked the schools regulator to investigate comments made by Rabbi Pinter which indicate that he regards homosexuality to be incompatible with the school's religious ethos. In 2013, the National Secular Society revealed that the school was redacting exam questions on topics such as human reproduction and evolution, which did not conform to strict, Orthodox beliefs. The exam regulator Ofqual subsequently made clear to exam boards that schools should not be allowed to redact questions and that any attempt to do so should be treated as "malpractice". Stephen Evans, campaign manager at the National Secular Society, said: "advising young people not to answer exam questions clearly isn't in the students' best interests, as it prevents them from demonstrating their ability in the subject they should have been taught as part of the National Curriculum. But the school's attitude clearly extends beyond exams and into science classes, where children and young people are being deprived of vital scientific knowledge. "We hope Ofsted and the DfE will share our concern that such behaviour by schools could disadvantage pupils by failing to promote their individual autonomy, leaving them ill-equipped for life outside of a religious community, and by denying them the opportunity to reach their full potential. "This represents the intellectual betrayal of children, whose independent interests are being sidelined by schools more intent on pushing their own religious agenda. "Unfortunately this is another example of a common problem throughout our state education system – children's education being compromised by the influence of religious organisations. The time has surely come to question the appropriateness religious organisations running publicly funded schools in 21st century Britain." According to the school's 2010 Ofsted inspection report, all of the Yesodey Hatorah's students come from "strictly Orthodox Jewish homes." A 2013 school prospectus noted that "Charedi homes do not have TV or other inappropriate media. Parents ensure that their children do not have access to the Internet or any other media which do not meet the stringent moral criteria of the Charedi community".
	Promotion of 'British values' undermines Christian teaching, says Church of England: NSS responds News \| Fri, 14th Nov 2014 The Church of England has complained that the promotion of fundamental values such as democracy, the rule of law, individual liberty and mutual respect and tolerance in schools could undermine Christian teaching. The Church has said the "Christian commandment" to "love your neighbour" should be included in the "British values" taught to schoolchildren. It also described the government's approach to tackling religious extremism in schools as "potentially dangerous, divisive and undemocratic". Responding to the Church's comments, Stephen Evans, National Secular Society campaigns manager, said: "It's rather divisive in itself for the Church of England to insist that the secular ethic of reciprocity should be promoted in schools as the 'Christian commandment' to love your neighbour. "It's not as if Christians have a monopoly on morality and the truth is that the 'Golden Rule' is a universal value shared by people of all faiths and none – and is already firmly embodied in the ethos of schools up and down the country." In its own response to the DfE's consultation, the NSS questioned whether the values explicitly expressed by the Department were exclusively "British" values and suggested a more outward looking approach to teaching about values might be beneficial as part of a broader-based intercultural education so as not reinforce a "them and us" culture. A DfE spokesperson said: "The fundamental British values of democracy, the rule of law, individual liberty and mutual respect and tolerance were set out by the Government four years ago and have been commonly used since. Clearly Christian principles such as 'loving your neighbour' are integral to these. We believe that all young people should develop an appreciation for these values as this will help them to contribute to and succeed in modern Britain." Meanwhile, writing on the Church of England blog this week, the Church's chief education officer, the Rev Nigel Genders, has also warned against "rejecting all forms of religion from our schools". He insisted "Church schools are not, and never have been, about indoctrination or recruitment." However the National Secular Society pointed out that his claim was fundamentally undermined by comments made by John Pritchard, the former Chair of the Church of England's former Board of Education, who said "We don't need to attract [children] to church... they're already there, if we embrace our church schools fully." Mr Evans, said: "With the long and continuing decline in church attendance, our state schools are clearly regarded by the church as the primary method of recruiting the next generation of Anglicans – and it should at least be upfront about this." Earlier this week, in a blog published by the Guardian, a church school governor revealed how the Church's promotion of Christianity in her school had started to resemble a form of evangelism.
	“Learning Jihad”: new report on campus extremism has launch event cancelled by the University of West London News \| Tue, 11th Nov 2014 A new report from Sharia Watch UK (SWUK) has revealed the shocking reach of Islamist speakers on UK university campuses. The report, which warned of the dangers of censorship on campuses, was due to be released on Wednesday 12 November at an event at the University of West London. However, the University has now cancelled the launch, apparently citing concerns over "PR" and the "balance" of the event. The SWUK research is littered with examples of Islamist speakers making anti-Semitic remarks, deriding 'Western' notions of Human Rights, advocating female genital mutilation and calling for a raft of strict sharia punishments like stoning adulterers to death. The speakers (all male) in question have all appeared between February and July of 2014 at events on British university campuses. They include men like Saleem Chagtai, who equated apostasy with "treason", and Yusuf Chambers, who "supports the death penalty for homosexuality". Other men to have spoken at UK universities include Azzam Tamini, who described suicide bombing as "a noble cause" and told an audience that "you shouldn't be afraid of being labelled extreme, radical or terrorist". Tamini is quoted as saying, "if fighting for your home land is terrorism, I take pride in being a terrorist. The Koran tells me if I die for my homeland, I'm a martyr and I long to be a martyr". Another guest speaker, Asim Qureshi, made statements that Sharia Watch have called "direct incitement to engage in acts of terror". Qureshi said that suicide bombings should be called "martyrdom operations" and that it was "incumbent" upon all Muslims to "support the jihad of our brothers and sisters" when they are "facing the oppression of the west". One of the common themes throughout the statements cited in the report is a complete rejection of any human-made law, in principle. Abu Salahudeen said his belief that, "voting for man to make law is shirk [forbidden]," was what "made him a Muslim", alongside "rising against the apostate leaders of Muslim countries today" and "believing that all innovations are bad". Murtaza Khan, whom Sharia Watch call a "staunch misogynist, Islamic supremacist, and anti-Semite", argued that "the reality of Islamic law" is that "it has come to supersede, to override all other ways of life". Many of the men in question are affiliated with the Islamic Education and Research Academy (iERA), which is currently under investigation by the Charity Commission. The Council of Ex-Muslims of Britain published research in May which labelled the organisation a hate group. It found iERA affiliated speakers had praised the holocaust, advocated for the "divine mandate" of domestic abuse of women and called jihad a "responsibility" for all Muslims. Aside from collating statements made by Islamist speakers, the Sharia Watch report also draws attention to the growing danger of "censorship that is widespread on UK campuses on matters deemed insulting to Islam". This also follows news last month that the National Union of Students had refused to condemn the Islamic State, after fears that the move could be seen as 'Islamophobic'. A vote on a new motion with alternative wording is now to be considered, but the University of Exeter is already holding a student referendum on whether to disaffiliate from the NUS after the Union's failure to condemn ISIS. Anne-Marie Waters, of Sharia Watch UK, said that "none of the information we have put together in this report should come as any surprise. For decades now, Islamists have had a tight grip on British universities - much of it propped up by Saudi Arabia. We've seen a rise in anti-Semitism - even from lecturers towards Jewish students - gender segregation, anti-Western rhetoric, and all of it is facilitated and defended by a Left-wing elitism within student unions". Waters added, "it is high time it was acknowledged and tackled, and it is time we recognised the impact that Islam on campus is having on young British Muslims, and their increasing contribution to global terrorism". One 'judge' of the Islamic Sharia Council of East London, who spoke at British universities this year, is quoted asking: "Who is going to put a system to stop fornication? Or to lash those who fornicate? Who can put a legislation to stone the adulterers and the adulterer? Who can do that? It is the lawmakers. Those who can do that are the people in charge. Those who are having power. Those people they can establish the Islamic system in its totality." The National Secular Society, which campaigns for the separation of Church and State, said that the "prevalence of Islamist speakers on UK campuses is extremely disturbing. Attempts to undermine, or replace, the institutions of the British state with parallel sharia systems must be exposed." The Sharia Watch research also takes note of formalised links between British universities and the Islamic world, and the large number of donations to UK institutions from majority Muslim countries. The report cites the example of the London School of Economics, who accepted a gift of £1.5 million from Saif al-Islam Gaddafi, and names Oxford, Cambridge, Durham, University College London, the London School of Economics, Exeter, Dundee, and City University as recipients of donations from "Arab and Muslim donors". The "Learning Jihad" dossier raises concerns that these donations are influencing the teaching at recipient universities, and serving to promote Islamism in British institutions. The report is due to be released on the Sharia Watch UK website on the 13 November. At the time of writing, the University of West London has not commented on their decision to cancel the debate.
	Victims of historic child sex abuse speak out, after Catholic Church refuses to accept “liability” for the crimes of their priests News \| Mon, 10th Nov 2014 The Catholic Church is refusing to accept "liability" for long-term sex abuse that went on at the Mirfield Junior Seminary, despite paying out £120,000 to eleven victims of child sex abuse. The seminary, which closed down in 1984, was run by the Verona Fathers (now known as the Comboni Missionaries) and saw sexual abuse perpetrated by priests against children as young as 11. Three Catholic priests of the Verona Fathers are said to have repeatedly abused boys in their care. Now twelve of their victims have joined together to campaign for justice. The former pupils have launched a website to share their experiences of the seminary, called Mirfield Memories, and to offer support for their fellow victims. The men's efforts have led to many of their fellow pupils coming forward to describe their own experiences of abuse at the Mirfield Seminary. In a press release the "Mirfield 12" describe some of the abuse they suffered at the hands of the Verona Fathers. One of three priests accused of abuse, Fr Pinkman, "used to bring boys, as young as 11 to his bedroom, to explain the facts of life to them and ask them to remove their clothes so that he could explain further. He went on to abuse many of them". One of the boys, Anthony Smith, recalls how Pinkman "pinned me against the wall and kissed me all over my face, rubbing himself against me". Smith, then 11 years old, felt unable to report the abuse to his parents, as the Missionaries read every letter the children sent to the outside world. Eventually, he informed the Rector of the seminary who "didn't say a word" in response to the allegations. Another victim, Gerry McLaughlin, recounts how Fr Valmaggia (who ran the seminary's infirmary) would "lock the door" before touching McLaughlin's genitals for spurious medical reasons. The "Mirfield 12" believe that the Catholic Church is still refusing to take responsibility for the culture of sexual abuse that existed at Mirfield. The sole surviving priest, Fr Romano Nardo, is still living with the Verona Fathers in Italy. On one occasion during the period of the sex abuse, a child was spotted leaving Nardo's bedroom at night and the priest was immediately moved away from the seminary. West Yorkshire Police have reviewed evidence and concluded that crimes were committed, but are "unable to get an extradition order" to bring Nardo to the UK for questioning. The Comboni Missionary order have stated that the priest is "not in a mentally stable enough condition to travel". Two of the priests, John Pinkman and Fr Valmaggia, are now dead and were never reported to the police by the Church. One of the victims claims the abuse was carried out over two decades. The campaigners note that when Fr Valmaggia was reported, he was immediately sent away to Italy, whilst Nardo was dispatched to Uganda when one child was seen leaving his bedroom at 6am one morning. The child in question, Mark Murray, reported Valmaggia to the Church and the police in 1997; however the priest was simply returned to Italy. According to the campaign, "none of the priests were ever reported to the police by the Comboni Missionaries, they were simply moved elsewhere". Francis Barnes, another former student, told the Guardian that "the abuse was widespread, the whole culture. I knew celibacy wasn't right, that it was producing people who would veer in that direction". Frank Warner, a pupil who raised the alarm in 1966, said that he thinks Valmaggia and Pinkman knew of each-others activities, reinforcing suspicions that the culture at the seminary tolerated the sexual abuse of children. As reported in the Guardian, many of the victims have suffered a range of psychological problems as a direct result of the sexual assaults. Many of the men report struggling with alcoholism, difficulty in forming relationships and drug use, along with what victim Bede Mullen calls the "most pernicious" aspect of childhood abuse, "the fear that the victim of abuse will complete the cycle and go on to abuse others". Recent years have seen a raft of such cases coming to light, and Pope Francis "begged" for forgiveness from the victims and condemned the Church's "complicity". For the Mirfield 12 however, the Catholic Church still has a "long way to go before true and honest dialogue and change occurs". Nardo remains safe from extradition, and not a single priest involved in the abuse, or the subsequent cover-up, has ever faced prosecution. The Verona Fathers claim that the sex abuse "had not been proven" and after the compensation money was paid by the Comboni Missionaries, a spokesman for the order claimed that "given the passage of almost half a century, we will never know the truth of what happened". For the victims, this isn't enough. After the victims settled their civil case out of court, the Catholic Insurance Association said "the 11 claims which have now been resolved were all settled on a purely commercial basis and with no admission of liability". On the website, Murray recounts an exchange he recently had with the Bishop of Verona, Giuseppe Zenti, who offered "prayers" to the victims. Murray complains that "I am not short of people praying for me", and described his frustration with the stonewalling by Church authorities. The forum of the website is full of comments and experiences from victims, a sad testament to the widespread nature of the sex abuse that went on at Mirfield. At the time of writing more victims plan to speak to West Yorkshire Police about their experiences at Mirfield, and the Mirfield 12's website has drawn significant attention from former pupils, some of whom believed they were the only victims of Valmaggia, Pinkman and Nardo, before seeing the many testimonies collected on the Mirfield Memories website.
	Operation Christmas Child Opinion \| Thu, 13th Nov 2014 Every year the National Secular Society is contacted by parents upset to discover that a festive charitable project in their children's school is unwittingly making them tools for evangelisation. Alastair Lichten looks at some of their concerns. It seems to get earlier every year. The first chocolate Santa Clauses are marching onto supermarket shelves, the first seasonal gift catalogues are being dropped into recycling bins and the NSS has begun to receive phone calls, emails and messages from parents concerned about Operation Christmas Child (OCC). Schools (and often workplaces) are encouraged to promote OCC run by the Samaritan's Purse. On the surface it seems quite nice and is supported by plenty of well-intentioned parents, staff and pupils. Children at public schools of all faiths and none are encouraged to decorate a shoebox, pack it with gifts and maybe a personal note. The shoeboxes are then collected and shipped to children in poorer and developing countries. What many schools and parents don't know is that the Samaritan's Purse is an evangelical organisation and that the Christmas gifts they have put together will be used as an evangelising tool, alongside promotional, conversion focused, literature to invite the children receiving it to follow up Bible studies. In 2012, in earthquake hit Haiti, the organisation boasted of more than 10,000 children who received a shoe box and completed the follow up course. Here's a quote from a copy of one of Samaritan's Purse's inserts sent to us by a parent. "Sin is our biggest problem. We all need to be rescued from sin. Sin is when we disobey God. Sin is when we don't live the way we are designed to live. You can see sin all around us...Sin must be punished. The right punishment for sin is death and to be separated from God and everything good forever. This is called Hell...Can you Believe and Follow Jesus? Anyone who believes him will not die but will have eternal life...Do you want to be a friend and follower of Jesus. If you do, you can speak to Him right now by praying the prayer below..." Their charitable aim is "the advancement of the Christian faith through educational projects and the relief of poverty". The NSS has been concerned about the scheme since it was discovered that evangelical Christian literature was being inserted into the shoeboxes. As long ago as 2003, awareness raising by the NSS led to the Co-operative Society and other supporters dropping out. In subsequent years other high-profile supporters such as HMRC and multiple schools have stopped supporting the scheme citing concerns over its effectiveness and evangelical nature. In 2005 an internal memo at HMRC, then the Inland Revenue, stated: "We were informed that people who participate in the shoe box appeal were probably unaware that Christian evangelical literature is distributed along with their gifts and the recipients get follow-up materials encouraging them to participate in Bible study classes." In the face of such public criticism OCC stopped including their evangelical literature in the shoeboxes. The booklets are now sent and distributed alongside the packages. While Christian organisations are within their rights to raise money and spend it on promoting their faith, we should be concerned when they seek to involve publicly-funded schools in their evangelising efforts – especially given the efforts they go to downplay their evangelical nature. This year I spoke to an NSS member in Solihull. She had first become concerned about OCC 3 years ago and told her son's school that he would not be participating. Only to be informed that the school had decided to make participation mandatory and pupils would receive 'penalties' for not taking part. Another parent sent me a copy of a school newsletter which downplayed the evangelical nature of the programme, saying: "The volunteers (at a warehouse the children visited) have to make sure that there are no items linked to any form of religion". The newsletter explicitly claims that shoeboxes are given to the children with no "strings attached!" Big money evangelical (and Pentecostal) organisations (mainly in the US but to a lesser extent in the UK) feel that the 'culture wars' – their term for resisting the move towards more pluralistic, tolerant and secular societies – has been lost in the West. Many conservative evangelical organisations are increasing their efforts to spread the faith in Africa and other parts of the developing world. Where war, conflict and poverty have left many people without access to education and reliant on aid, some pastorpreneurs see an opportunity for growth. The scheme has echoes of a colonial style missionary approach. The organisation's language and choice of images on their website certainly don't help. Nor does their record. In 2001 Samaritan's Purse was under contract to deliver US aid to the victims of the El Salvador earthquake. Residents of several villages reported that they needed to sit through a half hour prayer meeting before receiving assistance. The problem with this approach, apart from its historical links to colonialism and imperialism, is that even when explicit links aren't made between the aid and conversion / religious participation, the link is strongly implied and a social pressure is created. As any salesperson knows giving a 'free' gift alongside an invitation is intended to create a feeling of obligation. Creating the impression that those sending the gifts are all Christian is intended to subconscious link prosperity with Christianity. OCC is just the seasonal iteration of a problem that is with us all year. In 2013 the National Secular Society published a report into evangelism in schools, mapping the growing problem of external visitors using access to public schools to promote their religious agenda and suggesting ways that this could be challenged by parents, staff and pupils. Alongside OCC Samaritan's Purse often deliver collective worship, assemblies or even RE classes on the 'true meaning of Christmas' and their view of the Christian nature of charity. Many schools eager to enrich their curriculum with the participation of external groups remain naïve about the intentions of evangelical groups – and are clearly unaware of the concerns with OCC. This year James Carrol, an NSS member in Colchester, joined other parents to raise their concerns over their children's (CofE) school's involvement in the scheme. After reviewing the parents' research into the organisation the headteacher cancelled cooperation with the scheme and is now looking for a secular alternative. Given that it was a governor level decision to invite OCC, we are hopeful that the governors will support their headteacher's decision and exercise greater diligence in future. However, many parents, pupils and teachers wishing to raise valid objections about the manipulative nature of the shoebox scheme probably stay quiet in fear of being represented as Scrooge-like figures. It's unfortunate they're being put in this position. If you would like to support a charity this Christmas, there are many alternatives to the Samaritan's Purse who may make better use of your donation and don't come with the proselytization baggage. Sending shoe boxes full of gifts is a horrendously inefficient way of making charitable donations but there are many other ways your school, club or office can help those in need this Christmas by supporting schemes, such as those run by Plan UK, who work with the world's poorest children, Save the Children, who carry out vital work saving children's lives across the world, and Good Gifts who provide practical help directly to those in need.
	Assisted Dying: It is now a case of ‘when’, rather than ‘if’ Opinion \| Tue, 11th Nov 2014 On Friday 7 November the Assisted Dying Bill was debated in the House of Lords. The executive director of the National Secular Society, Keith Porteous Wood, who attended last Friday's debate, reports back about the debate and the Bill's progress. Although the Assisted Dying Bill is unlikely to make it to the statute book this session, the progress made during the debate on Friday means that it is now a case of 'when', rather than 'if', some form of assisted dying legislation is passed for England and Wales. The National Secular Society have long supported attempts to legalise voluntary euthanasia in the UK, and I am very pleased that much further progress was made on Friday. No previous Bill has made it to committee stage, the second major debate in a Bill's passage. The task before the Bill's promoters on Friday was daunting; almost 200 amendments had been tabled, mainly by opponents, some of which were intended to bog down the debate, if not to wreck the Bill altogether. There were quite a number of peers, mainly on the Conservative benches, who rarely attend the House, but had come on Friday - almost certainly to oppose the Bill. They were led by a number of big hitters including Lords (Alex) Carlile QC, (David) Alton, (Brian) Mawhinney and former Conservative Lord Chancellor Lord Mackay. No one was confident of the outcome: some even predicted filibusters. Former Lord Chancellor Lord Falconer, who had introduced the Bill, skilfully and patiently manoeuvred his way through these amendments for seven hours. Sometimes he accepted suggestions or technical improvements that would be incorporated at a later stage, but generally he gave convincing counterarguments and expressed an unwillingness to concede the central aims of the Bill. Despite this Lord Falconer, together with NSS Honorary Associate Baroness Murphy and Baroness Jay of Paddington, deftly avoided any defeats. The success was not without cost, however. The promoters decided tactically to accept an amendment requiring judicial oversight in addition to the relevant doctors' certificates. Having made this change, it was clear that the overwhelming majority of the House were happy for the Bill to proceed. Opponents, largely coming from a religious perspective, sensed this so decided early on that they would not risk calling a division that would reveal the paucity of their support. Unsurprisingly, the mountain of amendments could not all be debated on Friday. More time is needed, and it is far from clear if this will be provided. Even if the Bill were to clear all of its hurdles in the Lords, it would then only become law if it passed through the Commons. This is highly unlikely as the Prime Minister has expressed his disinclination to assist the Bill in its passage, and there isn't enough time before the election. It is therefore relatively academic whether any more time is allocated; the Bill will not complete its passage through Parliament. Supporters hope, however, that after the General Election the government of the day will recognise the support the Bill received in the Lords, and of course in the country as a whole (where 73% are in favour), and that a new government will hopefully give time for a private members' Bill to start in the Commons. This does not require the government to endorse the Bill; support would be a question of conscience, just as it was for the Marriage (Same-Sex Couples) Bill, now Act. Dr Michael Irwin, the NSS honorary associate and long-time campaigner for voluntary euthanasia both in the UK and internationally, described Friday's debate as "a positive step". Lord Falconer and his colleagues, and Dignity in Dying, have made significant progress.
	Glasgow University investigates impact and extent of religious privilege News \| Fri, 14th Nov 2014 Researchers in the history and law departments of Glasgow University are beginning a research project to map the historical and current religious privileges in Scotland's laws. The report will look at many areas including education and marriage as well as religious exemptions to equality laws. The 10 month project will be led by History professor Callum Brown and law professor Jane Mair along with Dr Thomas Green, a research assistant in the School of Law. Dr Green, who holds a PhD in ecclesiastical history from the University of Edinburgh's School of Divinity, will be carrying out much of the research. Dr Green told the Herald Scotland that such studies were previously carried out by ecclesiastical lawyers but that his research would be a 21st century version. Professor Callum Brown, a social and cultural historian whose research interests include the social and cultural history of religion and secularisation, said that project would be the most complete guide to the role of religion in the Scottish state since the Victorian Age. Professor Mair said that legal study of religion has long been seen as an historical rather than living subject and that contemporary legal systems were viewed as essentially secular. However recently "Driven by a combination of different and quite separate forces religion has re-emerged in law as a complex and highly contested concept." Mair, who has written extensively on discrimination in employment and family law – including the implications of religious exemptions, said some of the rise in the interest could be attributed to, "the protection of religious thought and belief through human rights and equality legislation; by the strong sound of religious voices in public debate and political consultation and by the visible presence of migrant communities who wish to live according to their own religion." Mair added that such issues are not only the subject of public debate but are increasingly being tested in courts: "With increasing regularity, judges are being faced with very difficult decisions: what is religion, how should it be defined and how, if it all, can or should it be distinguished from other forms of belief; to what extent should religious employees be permitted to wear the symbols of their belief at work; should civil courts take account of religious arbitration in resolving family disputes and how should religious beliefs be measured against the belief in equality?" Humanist Society Scotland (HSS) chief executive Douglas McLellan told the Herald Scotland that he was "delighted that this opportunity has arisen. The HSS is investing £40,000 in this project to provide an exceptional level of research into the privileges enjoyed by religion in Scots law." "The HSS believes that for Scotland to progress as a fair and equal nation, it needs to be a nation with no special laws, practises or exemptions for religions or religious organisations." Professor Brown said: "We're interested in religious privilege, which is by and large now being eroded by human rights legislation from the EU, Westminster and Holyrood. Recent legislation has specifically sought to create an equality between those who have a religious belief and those who do not." The National Secular Society said it was looking forward to reading the projects findings and expressed hope that it could lead to a renewed academic interest in studying religious privilege as a legal and social phenomenon, in the same way that other forms of privilege have been increasingly well studied over the last three decades. The research, which covers all religions, was labelled 'anti-Christian propaganda' by Rev David Robertson, recently named as the new moderator of the Free Church of Scotland Robertson appeared to suggest that Professor Brown identifying as a humanist would inherently bias the academic study. A spokesperson for the University of Glasgow however welcomed the "area of legitimate research". Alastair McBay, the National Secular Society's spokesperson for Scotland, said: "The study of privilege is well-respected and covered in countless university courses across Scotland. To object to such an academic study simply because the form of privilege under investigation is religious reflects a desperate desire to keep such privileges beyond question." See also: A Religious Revival, an article by Jane Mair on why her research is an important area of legal interest.
	Who are the true Muslims – all or none? Opinion \| Thu, 13th Nov 2014 Moderate believers argue that Isis has misinterpreted the Koran. But no one can determine who is right or wrong, argues Matthew Syed. Who are the real Muslims? Who are the bona fide, authentic, true-to-the-core followers of the Islamic faith? Now, that might seem like an easy question. Surely, the people who are Muslims are those who say, when asked: "I am a Muslim." But there is a problem with this approach. As you may have noticed, Sunnis, many of them, tell us that they are the real Muslims and that the Shias are impostors. The Shias tell us the exact opposite. The Sufis have a quite different perspective: they reckon that both the Sunni and Shia brigades have it wrong, and that they have it right. Some Muslims are pretty ecumenical. There are moderate Muslim groups in the UK who say that Islam is a broad church. They say they don't really have a problem with Sunni or Shia. But guess what? They don't extend this embrace to Islamic State (Isis). They describe its approach as "a perversion of Islam". Barack Obama and Tony Blair have it in for Isis, too. Blair said that Isis possesses "an ideology that distorts and warps Islam's true message" while Obama went even further, saying: "[Isis] is not Islamic. No religion condones the killing of innocents, and the vast majority of [its] victims have been Muslim . . . [it] is a terrorist organisation, pure and simple." But what is their evidence for this? Members of Isis say that they are real Muslims. They say that they are inspired by the Koran. They say that they are killing and maiming people because that is what Allah wants them to do. They talk about their love of God and the glories of martyrdom. I reckon that, if we are going to take other Muslims at their word, we should take members of Isis at their word, too. You see, the idea of "real" and "false" Muslims is ephemeral. With something like science, people who disagree with each other examine the evidence. They debate, they argue, they perform experiments. Sadly, this approach is not available for religious disputes. People with theological differences tend to appeal to divine revelation and differing interpretations of manuscripts that were written centuries ago. This is a problem when it comes to resolving differences, particularly when those manuscripts contain passages that seem, on a cursory reading, to condone violence. It is no good Blair or Obama, or anyone else, saying that Isis has got it wrong, or that it is distorting Islam's "true message" because, when it comes to religious truth, there is no such thing as "wrong" — unless, of course, you happen to be the one person, one group, one faction, that is wired up to God. And think of the hypocrisy, too. Blair is a Catholic. He doesn't believe in Allah (unless he is the same as Jehovah/Yahweh/the God of Moses). Nevertheless, he feels entitled to rule on the question of who are Allah's chosen people. In other words, he is happy to second guess the views of a deity he thinks is fictional. Other western politicians are engaged in the same duplicitous charade, as the philosopher Daniel Dennett has noted. Senator Rand Paul, of Kentucky said: "I think it is important not only to the American public but for the world and the Islamic world to point out this is not a true form of Islam". David Cameron and Ed Miliband have also jumped on the bandwagon, claiming that jihadists are motivated, not by Allah, but by hatred. This is surely untrue. To a man, the jihadists say they are motivated by faith. Instead of pontificating on who are the real Muslims, isn't it time to acknowledge that the entire debate is senseless? Moderate Muslims would not like such a stance, of course. They would hate to be told that their interpretation of Islam is no more legitimate than that of Isis. But the alternative is far worse because it perpetuates the idea that there is a rational means of figuring out which of the subgroups has a hotline to God. This takes us to the elephant in the room. The fundamental problem in the Middle East today is not with the Sunni or the Shia or even with Isis. The problem is with religion itself. It is the idea of received wisdom, divine revelation, the notion that "I have heard the Truth" and that everyone else is deluded. This is the corrupting, anti-rational, distorting engine of religious violence in the Middle East, just as it once triggered Christianity into a bloody civil war. Truth divorced from evidence (or anything that counts as evidence) is perilous. Religion is not the only cause of violence, of course, but it has a particular virulence. Members of my family have argued for jihad, not because they are crazy or unsympathetic, but because they think this is the will of God. They think this because the Koran, a bit like the Bible, has elements that can (rather easily) be interpreted as authorising violence. Christianity has improved its record on violence in recent centuries, but only because it has become less religious. The farther it has retreated from the idea of revealed truth, the less it has killed people who take a different view. Most Christians today associate truth with evidence, reason and other Enlightenment ideals. For all the debate over foreign policy, this is the only solution to the bloodshed in the Middle East, too. Matthew Syed is a columnist and feature writer for The Times. This article first appeared in the Times (£) and is reproduced here with the author's permission. The views expressed in this article are those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of the NSS.
	A ‘New Magna Carta’: time for a codified constitution? News \| Thu, 2nd Oct 2014 As the 800^th anniversary of Magna Carta approaches, has the time come for the UK to have a codified constitution? And if so, what form should it take? These issues will be discussed at a public event at Conway Hall on Thursday 4 December, by Graham Allen MP, chair of the Parliamentary Political and Constitutional Reform Select Committee, and Bob Morris, from the UCL Constitution Unit. The speakers will set out the pros and cons and consider the possible implications for secularism. The Political and Constitutional Reform Select Committee has launched a major consultation into the UK's current and future democratic settlement, which could potentially lead to the constitution being codified in what is being called a 'New Magna Carta'. The committee have recommended three possible ways forward: Constitutional Code – a document that doesn't have legal force, but which would set out the existing principles of the constitution and the workings of government. Constitutional Consolidation Act – a document which would consolidate existing constitutional laws in one place. Written Constitution – a document of basic law by which the UK would be governed, setting out the relationship between the state and its citizens. Graham Alan, the Labour MP for Nottingham North, is an honorary associate of the National Secular Society, and a high profile supporter of constitutional reform. Bob Morris is a former Home Office civil servant, now working at the UCL Constitution Unit. Bob has worked on a number of ecclesiastical and royal issues, including their 2009 report on Church and State in 21st century Britain. The event will be hosted by the National Secular Society, which campaigns for the separation of religion and state. Terry Sanderson, President of the National Secular Society, said: "This welcome consultation raises vital questions for secularists – and indeed everyone else in the country. Our two distinguished speakers will be well-placed to discuss them and answer questions about where this might lead. "While many see codified constitutional law as the best way to protect secularism and equality, others are concerned at the possibility that current inequalities and religious privileges could become entrenched in a written constitution, which could not be easily amended. "We would like to see a new Constitution incorporating principles in Human Rights instruments, equality law and the NSS's Secular Charter could usefully be incorporated in a new constitution." The event is free and open to all but attendees must either register online or reserve places by calling 020 7404 3126. If you'd like to take part in the consultation, you can submitted your comments via the Committee's website or by post to the Political and Constitutional Reform Select Committee, House of Commons, London, SW1A 0AA.

NSS Speaks Out

Our call for a secular ceremony of remembrance was featured on BBC R4's Sunday Programme, and NSS executive director Keith Porteous Wood also discussed the need to secularise remembrance with Iain Dale on LBC. Keith also represented the NSS at this week's European Parliament Platform for Secularism in Politics (EPPSP) meeting in Brussels.

Our campaigns manager Stephen Evans appeared on a BBC South West News headline story about plans for an independent school to be run by the controversial Winners Chapel Church, which has links to the 'witch-slapping' Bishop David Oyedepo. Stephen also appeared across a number of local BBC radio stations to discuss the role of the Church in education. Additionally, he spoke at a Policy Exchange event in Westminster on animal welfare, where he called for an end to the exemption that allows religious communities to slaughter animals without pre-stunning.

Quotes of the Week

"Apostasy is a terrible crime in Islam, as the ex-Muslim Kiran Opal explains. Even in America, young Muslims who have lost their faith are frightened of 'coming out'; indeed, two of them can live in the same apartment and not know about each other's atheism, so great is the taboo against unbelief. Opal adds that this taboo is reinforced by 'liberal apologists' who sanctify Islamic hatred of apostates with their identity politics."
Damian Thompson, Spectator

"UWL's hyper-sensitive approach is symptomatic of a highly dysfunctional relationship between Islam and British universities. No matter what people's concerns are about Islam, universities seem intent on pressing a self-destruct button. They will stop at nothing to avoid an open discussion about Islam. If we can't discuss ideas in a place of learning, where can we discuss them?"
Charlie Klendjian, Secretary of the Lawyers Secular Society speaking after the University of West London cancelled the launch event of a Sharia Watch UK report about Islamism on British campuses

Essays of the Week

Secret governor: have we let the Trojan horse into our school?
An anonymous school governor

Pakistan's blasphemy law is a relentless guillotine for minorities
Kunwar Shahid, Left Foot Forward

Upcoming Events

AHS Regional Convention - Secularism South-East 2014

Sat, 15th Nov 2014

A ‘New Magna Carta’?

Thu, 4th Dec 2014

	NSS alert Ofsted after Jewish faith school tells pupils not to answer exam questions that conflict with school’s religious ethos News \| Thu, 13th Nov 2014 The National Secular Society has called on Ofsted and the Department for Education (DfE) to ensure that all schools teach the National Curriculum in full after the head of a publicly funded Jewish faith school admitted to advising students not to answer exam questions which conflict with the school's strict Orthodox religious beliefs. The head of the Yesodey Hatorah secondary girls' school has stated that he will "discourage pupils from answering 'halachically questionable' exam questions", according to the Hackney Citizen. This comes after the school was found to be redacting exam questions on science papers following an investigation by the National Secular Society. After being warned against blacking out exam questions, Rabbi Avraham Pinter said that "if we can't redact [questions], then we won't redact them." However, the Rabbi went on to state that "our children will be aware of which questions they should be answering and which ones they shouldn't be." Pinter also said that evolution was not compatible with the school's strict, Orthodox ethos. It is now clear that rather than redacting questions as they had in the past, the school is advising students not to address the questions. The schools is now said to be "defiant" over the practice of telling children not to answer exam questions, and the secondary has been downgraded from "outstanding" to "good" after a recent 'no-notice' Ofsted inspection. The National Secular Society has written to Ofsted Chief Inspector Sir Michael Wilshaw and the DfE raising concerns that the school, and potentially other faith schools, may be failing to teach the National Curriculum in full when scientific facts clash with the school's ethos. In the letter to the schools regulator and the DfE, the NSS also raise concerns that children's "sexual and reproductive health rights are being impeded by the refusal to teach such key areas of the National Curriculum as human reproduction". The letter warns that "children are entitled to be taught about these issues in preparation for life, and it is likely that the parents who send children to these schools are materially less likely than other parents to be teaching them this vital information at home." The NSS has also asked the schools regulator to investigate comments made by Rabbi Pinter which indicate that he regards homosexuality to be incompatible with the school's religious ethos. In 2013, the National Secular Society revealed that the school was redacting exam questions on topics such as human reproduction and evolution, which did not conform to strict, Orthodox beliefs. The exam regulator Ofqual subsequently made clear to exam boards that schools should not be allowed to redact questions and that any attempt to do so should be treated as "malpractice". Stephen Evans, campaign manager at the National Secular Society, said: "advising young people not to answer exam questions clearly isn't in the students' best interests, as it prevents them from demonstrating their ability in the subject they should have been taught as part of the National Curriculum. But the school's attitude clearly extends beyond exams and into science classes, where children and young people are being deprived of vital scientific knowledge. "We hope Ofsted and the DfE will share our concern that such behaviour by schools could disadvantage pupils by failing to promote their individual autonomy, leaving them ill-equipped for life outside of a religious community, and by denying them the opportunity to reach their full potential. "This represents the intellectual betrayal of children, whose independent interests are being sidelined by schools more intent on pushing their own religious agenda. "Unfortunately this is another example of a common problem throughout our state education system – children's education being compromised by the influence of religious organisations. The time has surely come to question the appropriateness religious organisations running publicly funded schools in 21st century Britain." According to the school's 2010 Ofsted inspection report, all of the Yesodey Hatorah's students come from "strictly Orthodox Jewish homes." A 2013 school prospectus noted that "Charedi homes do not have TV or other inappropriate media. Parents ensure that their children do not have access to the Internet or any other media which do not meet the stringent moral criteria of the Charedi community".
	Promotion of 'British values' undermines Christian teaching, says Church of England: NSS responds News \| Fri, 14th Nov 2014 The Church of England has complained that the promotion of fundamental values such as democracy, the rule of law, individual liberty and mutual respect and tolerance in schools could undermine Christian teaching. The Church has said the "Christian commandment" to "love your neighbour" should be included in the "British values" taught to schoolchildren. It also described the government's approach to tackling religious extremism in schools as "potentially dangerous, divisive and undemocratic". Responding to the Church's comments, Stephen Evans, National Secular Society campaigns manager, said: "It's rather divisive in itself for the Church of England to insist that the secular ethic of reciprocity should be promoted in schools as the 'Christian commandment' to love your neighbour. "It's not as if Christians have a monopoly on morality and the truth is that the 'Golden Rule' is a universal value shared by people of all faiths and none – and is already firmly embodied in the ethos of schools up and down the country." In its own response to the DfE's consultation, the NSS questioned whether the values explicitly expressed by the Department were exclusively "British" values and suggested a more outward looking approach to teaching about values might be beneficial as part of a broader-based intercultural education so as not reinforce a "them and us" culture. A DfE spokesperson said: "The fundamental British values of democracy, the rule of law, individual liberty and mutual respect and tolerance were set out by the Government four years ago and have been commonly used since. Clearly Christian principles such as 'loving your neighbour' are integral to these. We believe that all young people should develop an appreciation for these values as this will help them to contribute to and succeed in modern Britain." Meanwhile, writing on the Church of England blog this week, the Church's chief education officer, the Rev Nigel Genders, has also warned against "rejecting all forms of religion from our schools". He insisted "Church schools are not, and never have been, about indoctrination or recruitment." However the National Secular Society pointed out that his claim was fundamentally undermined by comments made by John Pritchard, the former Chair of the Church of England's former Board of Education, who said "We don't need to attract [children] to church... they're already there, if we embrace our church schools fully." Mr Evans, said: "With the long and continuing decline in church attendance, our state schools are clearly regarded by the church as the primary method of recruiting the next generation of Anglicans – and it should at least be upfront about this." Earlier this week, in a blog published by the Guardian, a church school governor revealed how the Church's promotion of Christianity in her school had started to resemble a form of evangelism.
	“Learning Jihad”: new report on campus extremism has launch event cancelled by the University of West London News \| Tue, 11th Nov 2014 A new report from Sharia Watch UK (SWUK) has revealed the shocking reach of Islamist speakers on UK university campuses. The report, which warned of the dangers of censorship on campuses, was due to be released on Wednesday 12 November at an event at the University of West London. However, the University has now cancelled the launch, apparently citing concerns over "PR" and the "balance" of the event. The SWUK research is littered with examples of Islamist speakers making anti-Semitic remarks, deriding 'Western' notions of Human Rights, advocating female genital mutilation and calling for a raft of strict sharia punishments like stoning adulterers to death. The speakers (all male) in question have all appeared between February and July of 2014 at events on British university campuses. They include men like Saleem Chagtai, who equated apostasy with "treason", and Yusuf Chambers, who "supports the death penalty for homosexuality". Other men to have spoken at UK universities include Azzam Tamini, who described suicide bombing as "a noble cause" and told an audience that "you shouldn't be afraid of being labelled extreme, radical or terrorist". Tamini is quoted as saying, "if fighting for your home land is terrorism, I take pride in being a terrorist. The Koran tells me if I die for my homeland, I'm a martyr and I long to be a martyr". Another guest speaker, Asim Qureshi, made statements that Sharia Watch have called "direct incitement to engage in acts of terror". Qureshi said that suicide bombings should be called "martyrdom operations" and that it was "incumbent" upon all Muslims to "support the jihad of our brothers and sisters" when they are "facing the oppression of the west". One of the common themes throughout the statements cited in the report is a complete rejection of any human-made law, in principle. Abu Salahudeen said his belief that, "voting for man to make law is shirk [forbidden]," was what "made him a Muslim", alongside "rising against the apostate leaders of Muslim countries today" and "believing that all innovations are bad". Murtaza Khan, whom Sharia Watch call a "staunch misogynist, Islamic supremacist, and anti-Semite", argued that "the reality of Islamic law" is that "it has come to supersede, to override all other ways of life". Many of the men in question are affiliated with the Islamic Education and Research Academy (iERA), which is currently under investigation by the Charity Commission. The Council of Ex-Muslims of Britain published research in May which labelled the organisation a hate group. It found iERA affiliated speakers had praised the holocaust, advocated for the "divine mandate" of domestic abuse of women and called jihad a "responsibility" for all Muslims. Aside from collating statements made by Islamist speakers, the Sharia Watch report also draws attention to the growing danger of "censorship that is widespread on UK campuses on matters deemed insulting to Islam". This also follows news last month that the National Union of Students had refused to condemn the Islamic State, after fears that the move could be seen as 'Islamophobic'. A vote on a new motion with alternative wording is now to be considered, but the University of Exeter is already holding a student referendum on whether to disaffiliate from the NUS after the Union's failure to condemn ISIS. Anne-Marie Waters, of Sharia Watch UK, said that "none of the information we have put together in this report should come as any surprise. For decades now, Islamists have had a tight grip on British universities - much of it propped up by Saudi Arabia. We've seen a rise in anti-Semitism - even from lecturers towards Jewish students - gender segregation, anti-Western rhetoric, and all of it is facilitated and defended by a Left-wing elitism within student unions". Waters added, "it is high time it was acknowledged and tackled, and it is time we recognised the impact that Islam on campus is having on young British Muslims, and their increasing contribution to global terrorism". One 'judge' of the Islamic Sharia Council of East London, who spoke at British universities this year, is quoted asking: "Who is going to put a system to stop fornication? Or to lash those who fornicate? Who can put a legislation to stone the adulterers and the adulterer? Who can do that? It is the lawmakers. Those who can do that are the people in charge. Those who are having power. Those people they can establish the Islamic system in its totality." The National Secular Society, which campaigns for the separation of Church and State, said that the "prevalence of Islamist speakers on UK campuses is extremely disturbing. Attempts to undermine, or replace, the institutions of the British state with parallel sharia systems must be exposed." The Sharia Watch research also takes note of formalised links between British universities and the Islamic world, and the large number of donations to UK institutions from majority Muslim countries. The report cites the example of the London School of Economics, who accepted a gift of £1.5 million from Saif al-Islam Gaddafi, and names Oxford, Cambridge, Durham, University College London, the London School of Economics, Exeter, Dundee, and City University as recipients of donations from "Arab and Muslim donors". The "Learning Jihad" dossier raises concerns that these donations are influencing the teaching at recipient universities, and serving to promote Islamism in British institutions. The report is due to be released on the Sharia Watch UK website on the 13 November. At the time of writing, the University of West London has not commented on their decision to cancel the debate.
	Victims of historic child sex abuse speak out, after Catholic Church refuses to accept “liability” for the crimes of their priests News \| Mon, 10th Nov 2014 The Catholic Church is refusing to accept "liability" for long-term sex abuse that went on at the Mirfield Junior Seminary, despite paying out £120,000 to eleven victims of child sex abuse. The seminary, which closed down in 1984, was run by the Verona Fathers (now known as the Comboni Missionaries) and saw sexual abuse perpetrated by priests against children as young as 11. Three Catholic priests of the Verona Fathers are said to have repeatedly abused boys in their care. Now twelve of their victims have joined together to campaign for justice. The former pupils have launched a website to share their experiences of the seminary, called Mirfield Memories, and to offer support for their fellow victims. The men's efforts have led to many of their fellow pupils coming forward to describe their own experiences of abuse at the Mirfield Seminary. In a press release the "Mirfield 12" describe some of the abuse they suffered at the hands of the Verona Fathers. One of three priests accused of abuse, Fr Pinkman, "used to bring boys, as young as 11 to his bedroom, to explain the facts of life to them and ask them to remove their clothes so that he could explain further. He went on to abuse many of them". One of the boys, Anthony Smith, recalls how Pinkman "pinned me against the wall and kissed me all over my face, rubbing himself against me". Smith, then 11 years old, felt unable to report the abuse to his parents, as the Missionaries read every letter the children sent to the outside world. Eventually, he informed the Rector of the seminary who "didn't say a word" in response to the allegations. Another victim, Gerry McLaughlin, recounts how Fr Valmaggia (who ran the seminary's infirmary) would "lock the door" before touching McLaughlin's genitals for spurious medical reasons. The "Mirfield 12" believe that the Catholic Church is still refusing to take responsibility for the culture of sexual abuse that existed at Mirfield. The sole surviving priest, Fr Romano Nardo, is still living with the Verona Fathers in Italy. On one occasion during the period of the sex abuse, a child was spotted leaving Nardo's bedroom at night and the priest was immediately moved away from the seminary. West Yorkshire Police have reviewed evidence and concluded that crimes were committed, but are "unable to get an extradition order" to bring Nardo to the UK for questioning. The Comboni Missionary order have stated that the priest is "not in a mentally stable enough condition to travel". Two of the priests, John Pinkman and Fr Valmaggia, are now dead and were never reported to the police by the Church. One of the victims claims the abuse was carried out over two decades. The campaigners note that when Fr Valmaggia was reported, he was immediately sent away to Italy, whilst Nardo was dispatched to Uganda when one child was seen leaving his bedroom at 6am one morning. The child in question, Mark Murray, reported Valmaggia to the Church and the police in 1997; however the priest was simply returned to Italy. According to the campaign, "none of the priests were ever reported to the police by the Comboni Missionaries, they were simply moved elsewhere". Francis Barnes, another former student, told the Guardian that "the abuse was widespread, the whole culture. I knew celibacy wasn't right, that it was producing people who would veer in that direction". Frank Warner, a pupil who raised the alarm in 1966, said that he thinks Valmaggia and Pinkman knew of each-others activities, reinforcing suspicions that the culture at the seminary tolerated the sexual abuse of children. As reported in the Guardian, many of the victims have suffered a range of psychological problems as a direct result of the sexual assaults. Many of the men report struggling with alcoholism, difficulty in forming relationships and drug use, along with what victim Bede Mullen calls the "most pernicious" aspect of childhood abuse, "the fear that the victim of abuse will complete the cycle and go on to abuse others". Recent years have seen a raft of such cases coming to light, and Pope Francis "begged" for forgiveness from the victims and condemned the Church's "complicity". For the Mirfield 12 however, the Catholic Church still has a "long way to go before true and honest dialogue and change occurs". Nardo remains safe from extradition, and not a single priest involved in the abuse, or the subsequent cover-up, has ever faced prosecution. The Verona Fathers claim that the sex abuse "had not been proven" and after the compensation money was paid by the Comboni Missionaries, a spokesman for the order claimed that "given the passage of almost half a century, we will never know the truth of what happened". For the victims, this isn't enough. After the victims settled their civil case out of court, the Catholic Insurance Association said "the 11 claims which have now been resolved were all settled on a purely commercial basis and with no admission of liability". On the website, Murray recounts an exchange he recently had with the Bishop of Verona, Giuseppe Zenti, who offered "prayers" to the victims. Murray complains that "I am not short of people praying for me", and described his frustration with the stonewalling by Church authorities. The forum of the website is full of comments and experiences from victims, a sad testament to the widespread nature of the sex abuse that went on at Mirfield. At the time of writing more victims plan to speak to West Yorkshire Police about their experiences at Mirfield, and the Mirfield 12's website has drawn significant attention from former pupils, some of whom believed they were the only victims of Valmaggia, Pinkman and Nardo, before seeing the many testimonies collected on the Mirfield Memories website.
	Operation Christmas Child Opinion \| Thu, 13th Nov 2014 Every year the National Secular Society is contacted by parents upset to discover that a festive charitable project in their children's school is unwittingly making them tools for evangelisation. Alastair Lichten looks at some of their concerns. It seems to get earlier every year. The first chocolate Santa Clauses are marching onto supermarket shelves, the first seasonal gift catalogues are being dropped into recycling bins and the NSS has begun to receive phone calls, emails and messages from parents concerned about Operation Christmas Child (OCC). Schools (and often workplaces) are encouraged to promote OCC run by the Samaritan's Purse. On the surface it seems quite nice and is supported by plenty of well-intentioned parents, staff and pupils. Children at public schools of all faiths and none are encouraged to decorate a shoebox, pack it with gifts and maybe a personal note. The shoeboxes are then collected and shipped to children in poorer and developing countries. What many schools and parents don't know is that the Samaritan's Purse is an evangelical organisation and that the Christmas gifts they have put together will be used as an evangelising tool, alongside promotional, conversion focused, literature to invite the children receiving it to follow up Bible studies. In 2012, in earthquake hit Haiti, the organisation boasted of more than 10,000 children who received a shoe box and completed the follow up course. Here's a quote from a copy of one of Samaritan's Purse's inserts sent to us by a parent. "Sin is our biggest problem. We all need to be rescued from sin. Sin is when we disobey God. Sin is when we don't live the way we are designed to live. You can see sin all around us...Sin must be punished. The right punishment for sin is death and to be separated from God and everything good forever. This is called Hell...Can you Believe and Follow Jesus? Anyone who believes him will not die but will have eternal life...Do you want to be a friend and follower of Jesus. If you do, you can speak to Him right now by praying the prayer below..." Their charitable aim is "the advancement of the Christian faith through educational projects and the relief of poverty". The NSS has been concerned about the scheme since it was discovered that evangelical Christian literature was being inserted into the shoeboxes. As long ago as 2003, awareness raising by the NSS led to the Co-operative Society and other supporters dropping out. In subsequent years other high-profile supporters such as HMRC and multiple schools have stopped supporting the scheme citing concerns over its effectiveness and evangelical nature. In 2005 an internal memo at HMRC, then the Inland Revenue, stated: "We were informed that people who participate in the shoe box appeal were probably unaware that Christian evangelical literature is distributed along with their gifts and the recipients get follow-up materials encouraging them to participate in Bible study classes." In the face of such public criticism OCC stopped including their evangelical literature in the shoeboxes. The booklets are now sent and distributed alongside the packages. While Christian organisations are within their rights to raise money and spend it on promoting their faith, we should be concerned when they seek to involve publicly-funded schools in their evangelising efforts – especially given the efforts they go to downplay their evangelical nature. This year I spoke to an NSS member in Solihull. She had first become concerned about OCC 3 years ago and told her son's school that he would not be participating. Only to be informed that the school had decided to make participation mandatory and pupils would receive 'penalties' for not taking part. Another parent sent me a copy of a school newsletter which downplayed the evangelical nature of the programme, saying: "The volunteers (at a warehouse the children visited) have to make sure that there are no items linked to any form of religion". The newsletter explicitly claims that shoeboxes are given to the children with no "strings attached!" Big money evangelical (and Pentecostal) organisations (mainly in the US but to a lesser extent in the UK) feel that the 'culture wars' – their term for resisting the move towards more pluralistic, tolerant and secular societies – has been lost in the West. Many conservative evangelical organisations are increasing their efforts to spread the faith in Africa and other parts of the developing world. Where war, conflict and poverty have left many people without access to education and reliant on aid, some pastorpreneurs see an opportunity for growth. The scheme has echoes of a colonial style missionary approach. The organisation's language and choice of images on their website certainly don't help. Nor does their record. In 2001 Samaritan's Purse was under contract to deliver US aid to the victims of the El Salvador earthquake. Residents of several villages reported that they needed to sit through a half hour prayer meeting before receiving assistance. The problem with this approach, apart from its historical links to colonialism and imperialism, is that even when explicit links aren't made between the aid and conversion / religious participation, the link is strongly implied and a social pressure is created. As any salesperson knows giving a 'free' gift alongside an invitation is intended to create a feeling of obligation. Creating the impression that those sending the gifts are all Christian is intended to subconscious link prosperity with Christianity. OCC is just the seasonal iteration of a problem that is with us all year. In 2013 the National Secular Society published a report into evangelism in schools, mapping the growing problem of external visitors using access to public schools to promote their religious agenda and suggesting ways that this could be challenged by parents, staff and pupils. Alongside OCC Samaritan's Purse often deliver collective worship, assemblies or even RE classes on the 'true meaning of Christmas' and their view of the Christian nature of charity. Many schools eager to enrich their curriculum with the participation of external groups remain naïve about the intentions of evangelical groups – and are clearly unaware of the concerns with OCC. This year James Carrol, an NSS member in Colchester, joined other parents to raise their concerns over their children's (CofE) school's involvement in the scheme. After reviewing the parents' research into the organisation the headteacher cancelled cooperation with the scheme and is now looking for a secular alternative. Given that it was a governor level decision to invite OCC, we are hopeful that the governors will support their headteacher's decision and exercise greater diligence in future. However, many parents, pupils and teachers wishing to raise valid objections about the manipulative nature of the shoebox scheme probably stay quiet in fear of being represented as Scrooge-like figures. It's unfortunate they're being put in this position. If you would like to support a charity this Christmas, there are many alternatives to the Samaritan's Purse who may make better use of your donation and don't come with the proselytization baggage. Sending shoe boxes full of gifts is a horrendously inefficient way of making charitable donations but there are many other ways your school, club or office can help those in need this Christmas by supporting schemes, such as those run by Plan UK, who work with the world's poorest children, Save the Children, who carry out vital work saving children's lives across the world, and Good Gifts who provide practical help directly to those in need.
	Assisted Dying: It is now a case of ‘when’, rather than ‘if’ Opinion \| Tue, 11th Nov 2014 On Friday 7 November the Assisted Dying Bill was debated in the House of Lords. The executive director of the National Secular Society, Keith Porteous Wood, who attended last Friday's debate, reports back about the debate and the Bill's progress. Although the Assisted Dying Bill is unlikely to make it to the statute book this session, the progress made during the debate on Friday means that it is now a case of 'when', rather than 'if', some form of assisted dying legislation is passed for England and Wales. The National Secular Society have long supported attempts to legalise voluntary euthanasia in the UK, and I am very pleased that much further progress was made on Friday. No previous Bill has made it to committee stage, the second major debate in a Bill's passage. The task before the Bill's promoters on Friday was daunting; almost 200 amendments had been tabled, mainly by opponents, some of which were intended to bog down the debate, if not to wreck the Bill altogether. There were quite a number of peers, mainly on the Conservative benches, who rarely attend the House, but had come on Friday - almost certainly to oppose the Bill. They were led by a number of big hitters including Lords (Alex) Carlile QC, (David) Alton, (Brian) Mawhinney and former Conservative Lord Chancellor Lord Mackay. No one was confident of the outcome: some even predicted filibusters. Former Lord Chancellor Lord Falconer, who had introduced the Bill, skilfully and patiently manoeuvred his way through these amendments for seven hours. Sometimes he accepted suggestions or technical improvements that would be incorporated at a later stage, but generally he gave convincing counterarguments and expressed an unwillingness to concede the central aims of the Bill. Despite this Lord Falconer, together with NSS Honorary Associate Baroness Murphy and Baroness Jay of Paddington, deftly avoided any defeats. The success was not without cost, however. The promoters decided tactically to accept an amendment requiring judicial oversight in addition to the relevant doctors' certificates. Having made this change, it was clear that the overwhelming majority of the House were happy for the Bill to proceed. Opponents, largely coming from a religious perspective, sensed this so decided early on that they would not risk calling a division that would reveal the paucity of their support. Unsurprisingly, the mountain of amendments could not all be debated on Friday. More time is needed, and it is far from clear if this will be provided. Even if the Bill were to clear all of its hurdles in the Lords, it would then only become law if it passed through the Commons. This is highly unlikely as the Prime Minister has expressed his disinclination to assist the Bill in its passage, and there isn't enough time before the election. It is therefore relatively academic whether any more time is allocated; the Bill will not complete its passage through Parliament. Supporters hope, however, that after the General Election the government of the day will recognise the support the Bill received in the Lords, and of course in the country as a whole (where 73% are in favour), and that a new government will hopefully give time for a private members' Bill to start in the Commons. This does not require the government to endorse the Bill; support would be a question of conscience, just as it was for the Marriage (Same-Sex Couples) Bill, now Act. Dr Michael Irwin, the NSS honorary associate and long-time campaigner for voluntary euthanasia both in the UK and internationally, described Friday's debate as "a positive step". Lord Falconer and his colleagues, and Dignity in Dying, have made significant progress.
	Glasgow University investigates impact and extent of religious privilege News \| Fri, 14th Nov 2014 Researchers in the history and law departments of Glasgow University are beginning a research project to map the historical and current religious privileges in Scotland's laws. The report will look at many areas including education and marriage as well as religious exemptions to equality laws. The 10 month project will be led by History professor Callum Brown and law professor Jane Mair along with Dr Thomas Green, a research assistant in the School of Law. Dr Green, who holds a PhD in ecclesiastical history from the University of Edinburgh's School of Divinity, will be carrying out much of the research. Dr Green told the Herald Scotland that such studies were previously carried out by ecclesiastical lawyers but that his research would be a 21st century version. Professor Callum Brown, a social and cultural historian whose research interests include the social and cultural history of religion and secularisation, said that project would be the most complete guide to the role of religion in the Scottish state since the Victorian Age. Professor Mair said that legal study of religion has long been seen as an historical rather than living subject and that contemporary legal systems were viewed as essentially secular. However recently "Driven by a combination of different and quite separate forces religion has re-emerged in law as a complex and highly contested concept." Mair, who has written extensively on discrimination in employment and family law – including the implications of religious exemptions, said some of the rise in the interest could be attributed to, "the protection of religious thought and belief through human rights and equality legislation; by the strong sound of religious voices in public debate and political consultation and by the visible presence of migrant communities who wish to live according to their own religion." Mair added that such issues are not only the subject of public debate but are increasingly being tested in courts: "With increasing regularity, judges are being faced with very difficult decisions: what is religion, how should it be defined and how, if it all, can or should it be distinguished from other forms of belief; to what extent should religious employees be permitted to wear the symbols of their belief at work; should civil courts take account of religious arbitration in resolving family disputes and how should religious beliefs be measured against the belief in equality?" Humanist Society Scotland (HSS) chief executive Douglas McLellan told the Herald Scotland that he was "delighted that this opportunity has arisen. The HSS is investing £40,000 in this project to provide an exceptional level of research into the privileges enjoyed by religion in Scots law." "The HSS believes that for Scotland to progress as a fair and equal nation, it needs to be a nation with no special laws, practises or exemptions for religions or religious organisations." Professor Brown said: "We're interested in religious privilege, which is by and large now being eroded by human rights legislation from the EU, Westminster and Holyrood. Recent legislation has specifically sought to create an equality between those who have a religious belief and those who do not." The National Secular Society said it was looking forward to reading the projects findings and expressed hope that it could lead to a renewed academic interest in studying religious privilege as a legal and social phenomenon, in the same way that other forms of privilege have been increasingly well studied over the last three decades. The research, which covers all religions, was labelled 'anti-Christian propaganda' by Rev David Robertson, recently named as the new moderator of the Free Church of Scotland Robertson appeared to suggest that Professor Brown identifying as a humanist would inherently bias the academic study. A spokesperson for the University of Glasgow however welcomed the "area of legitimate research". Alastair McBay, the National Secular Society's spokesperson for Scotland, said: "The study of privilege is well-respected and covered in countless university courses across Scotland. To object to such an academic study simply because the form of privilege under investigation is religious reflects a desperate desire to keep such privileges beyond question." See also: A Religious Revival, an article by Jane Mair on why her research is an important area of legal interest.
	Who are the true Muslims – all or none? Opinion \| Thu, 13th Nov 2014 Moderate believers argue that Isis has misinterpreted the Koran. But no one can determine who is right or wrong, argues Matthew Syed. Who are the real Muslims? Who are the bona fide, authentic, true-to-the-core followers of the Islamic faith? Now, that might seem like an easy question. Surely, the people who are Muslims are those who say, when asked: "I am a Muslim." But there is a problem with this approach. As you may have noticed, Sunnis, many of them, tell us that they are the real Muslims and that the Shias are impostors. The Shias tell us the exact opposite. The Sufis have a quite different perspective: they reckon that both the Sunni and Shia brigades have it wrong, and that they have it right. Some Muslims are pretty ecumenical. There are moderate Muslim groups in the UK who say that Islam is a broad church. They say they don't really have a problem with Sunni or Shia. But guess what? They don't extend this embrace to Islamic State (Isis). They describe its approach as "a perversion of Islam". Barack Obama and Tony Blair have it in for Isis, too. Blair said that Isis possesses "an ideology that distorts and warps Islam's true message" while Obama went even further, saying: "[Isis] is not Islamic. No religion condones the killing of innocents, and the vast majority of [its] victims have been Muslim . . . [it] is a terrorist organisation, pure and simple." But what is their evidence for this? Members of Isis say that they are real Muslims. They say that they are inspired by the Koran. They say that they are killing and maiming people because that is what Allah wants them to do. They talk about their love of God and the glories of martyrdom. I reckon that, if we are going to take other Muslims at their word, we should take members of Isis at their word, too. You see, the idea of "real" and "false" Muslims is ephemeral. With something like science, people who disagree with each other examine the evidence. They debate, they argue, they perform experiments. Sadly, this approach is not available for religious disputes. People with theological differences tend to appeal to divine revelation and differing interpretations of manuscripts that were written centuries ago. This is a problem when it comes to resolving differences, particularly when those manuscripts contain passages that seem, on a cursory reading, to condone violence. It is no good Blair or Obama, or anyone else, saying that Isis has got it wrong, or that it is distorting Islam's "true message" because, when it comes to religious truth, there is no such thing as "wrong" — unless, of course, you happen to be the one person, one group, one faction, that is wired up to God. And think of the hypocrisy, too. Blair is a Catholic. He doesn't believe in Allah (unless he is the same as Jehovah/Yahweh/the God of Moses). Nevertheless, he feels entitled to rule on the question of who are Allah's chosen people. In other words, he is happy to second guess the views of a deity he thinks is fictional. Other western politicians are engaged in the same duplicitous charade, as the philosopher Daniel Dennett has noted. Senator Rand Paul, of Kentucky said: "I think it is important not only to the American public but for the world and the Islamic world to point out this is not a true form of Islam". David Cameron and Ed Miliband have also jumped on the bandwagon, claiming that jihadists are motivated, not by Allah, but by hatred. This is surely untrue. To a man, the jihadists say they are motivated by faith. Instead of pontificating on who are the real Muslims, isn't it time to acknowledge that the entire debate is senseless? Moderate Muslims would not like such a stance, of course. They would hate to be told that their interpretation of Islam is no more legitimate than that of Isis. But the alternative is far worse because it perpetuates the idea that there is a rational means of figuring out which of the subgroups has a hotline to God. This takes us to the elephant in the room. The fundamental problem in the Middle East today is not with the Sunni or the Shia or even with Isis. The problem is with religion itself. It is the idea of received wisdom, divine revelation, the notion that "I have heard the Truth" and that everyone else is deluded. This is the corrupting, anti-rational, distorting engine of religious violence in the Middle East, just as it once triggered Christianity into a bloody civil war. Truth divorced from evidence (or anything that counts as evidence) is perilous. Religion is not the only cause of violence, of course, but it has a particular virulence. Members of my family have argued for jihad, not because they are crazy or unsympathetic, but because they think this is the will of God. They think this because the Koran, a bit like the Bible, has elements that can (rather easily) be interpreted as authorising violence. Christianity has improved its record on violence in recent centuries, but only because it has become less religious. The farther it has retreated from the idea of revealed truth, the less it has killed people who take a different view. Most Christians today associate truth with evidence, reason and other Enlightenment ideals. For all the debate over foreign policy, this is the only solution to the bloodshed in the Middle East, too. Matthew Syed is a columnist and feature writer for The Times. This article first appeared in the Times (£) and is reproduced here with the author's permission. The views expressed in this article are those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of the NSS.
	A ‘New Magna Carta’: time for a codified constitution? News \| Thu, 2nd Oct 2014 As the 800^th anniversary of Magna Carta approaches, has the time come for the UK to have a codified constitution? And if so, what form should it take? These issues will be discussed at a public event at Conway Hall on Thursday 4 December, by Graham Allen MP, chair of the Parliamentary Political and Constitutional Reform Select Committee, and Bob Morris, from the UCL Constitution Unit. The speakers will set out the pros and cons and consider the possible implications for secularism. The Political and Constitutional Reform Select Committee has launched a major consultation into the UK's current and future democratic settlement, which could potentially lead to the constitution being codified in what is being called a 'New Magna Carta'. The committee have recommended three possible ways forward: Constitutional Code – a document that doesn't have legal force, but which would set out the existing principles of the constitution and the workings of government. Constitutional Consolidation Act – a document which would consolidate existing constitutional laws in one place. Written Constitution – a document of basic law by which the UK would be governed, setting out the relationship between the state and its citizens. Graham Alan, the Labour MP for Nottingham North, is an honorary associate of the National Secular Society, and a high profile supporter of constitutional reform. Bob Morris is a former Home Office civil servant, now working at the UCL Constitution Unit. Bob has worked on a number of ecclesiastical and royal issues, including their 2009 report on Church and State in 21st century Britain. The event will be hosted by the National Secular Society, which campaigns for the separation of religion and state. Terry Sanderson, President of the National Secular Society, said: "This welcome consultation raises vital questions for secularists – and indeed everyone else in the country. Our two distinguished speakers will be well-placed to discuss them and answer questions about where this might lead. "While many see codified constitutional law as the best way to protect secularism and equality, others are concerned at the possibility that current inequalities and religious privileges could become entrenched in a written constitution, which could not be easily amended. "We would like to see a new Constitution incorporating principles in Human Rights instruments, equality law and the NSS's Secular Charter could usefully be incorporated in a new constitution." The event is free and open to all but attendees must either register online or reserve places by calling 020 7404 3126. If you'd like to take part in the consultation, you can submitted your comments via the Committee's website or by post to the Political and Constitutional Reform Select Committee, House of Commons, London, SW1A 0AA.