Becoming a member of the National Secular Society is a declaration of your support for the separation of the state from religious institutions. Make a stand for freedom, fairness and human rights by adding your voice to the call for a secular society. Join today.
Read this week's Newsline in full (PDF)
News, Blogs & Opinion
Census analysis shows Christianity in dramatic decline, and a youthful Muslim population on the riseNews | Fri, 17th May 2013 According to census data analysis published yesterday, the number of British-born Christians is falling significantly, whilst the number of young Muslims is on the rise. The figures suggest Christianity is in long-term decline in the UK; there are 5.3 million fewer British-born people describing themselves as Christians, representing a decline of 15% in just a decade, despite a growth in the overall population, calling into question the establishment of the Church of England. Notably, the proportion of young people who describe themselves as even nominal Christians has dropped below half for the first time. Younger people also drove a shift away from religion altogether, with 6.4 million more people describing themselves as having no religion than 10 years earlier. Whilst initial results from the 2011 census, published last year, showed that the total number of people in England and Wales who described themselves as Christian fell by 4.1 million, equaling a decline of 10%, this figure masked the fact that for British-born Christians the decline was even larger. This is because the figures had been bolstered by 1.2 million foreign born Christians, including Polish Christians and evangelical Christians from places such as Nigeria. Keith Porteous Wood, executive director of the National Secular Society, commented: "Realistically, this trend is irreversible, and the number has dropped below critical mass for which there is no longer any justification for an established Church". Whilst there has been a drop in those subscribing to the Christian faith, the number of Muslims in England and Wales has surged by 75% – boosted by almost 600,000 more foreign born followers of the Islamic faith. While almost half of British Muslims are under the age of 25, almost a quarter of Christians are over 65. The average age of a British Muslim is just 25, not far off half that of a British Christian. David Coleman, Professor of Demography at the University of Oxford, told The Times that the findings showed how Christianity was declining with each generation. "Each large age group, as time progresses, receives less inculcation into Christianity than its predecessor ten years earlier," he said. Professor Coleman contrasted the decline of the Christian faith through the generations with what happens among Muslims. "We have a Muslim faith where most studies suggest adherence to Islam is not only transmitted through the generations but appears to get stronger," he said. "Indeed, there seems to be some evidence that the second generation Muslims in Britain are more Muslim than their parents." A spokesman for the Church of England acknowledged: "One of the reasons may well be fewer people identifying as 'cultural Christians', that is those who have no active involvement with churches and who may previously have identified as Christian for cultural or historical reasons. Terry Sanderson, President of the National Secular Society, said that the Church was well aware of its parlous position which is why it is so anxious to reinforce its position in education; "The early indoctrination of children is very important for the continuation of any religion," he said. "Christians know this and Muslims know it. The Church of England has far more primary schools under its control than secondary ones. It knows it needs to start the process earlier in order to keep people in the fold. "Muslim clerics also know that early indoctrination is essential, which explains the widespread use of madrassas – which, if we are honest, are little more than brainwashing institutions. There is little wonder that young Muslims are more religious than their parents with such heavy-handed, inescapable religious propaganda being forced on them." Mr Sanderson said that the institutionalisation of secularism should now be an urgent priority for this government. "Within a few generations we are going to have a battle for supremacy between religions, and the non-religious are being further marginalised despite being a growing group. For the safety of us all we need to ensure that no religion can take control of the state again." Key points • In 2011, Christianity had the oldest age profile of the main religious groups. • The number of Christians has fallen and this was largely for people aged under 60. • The number of people with no religion has increased across all age groups, particularly for those aged 20 to 24 and the 40 to 44. • In England and Wales, over nine in ten Christians (93%) were White and nine in ten (89%) were born in the UK, though the numbers have fallen since 2001. • Nearly four in ten Muslims (38%) reported their ethnicity as Pakistani, a 371,000 increase (from 658,000 to over a million) since 2001. Nearly half of all Muslims were born in the UK. • The majority of people with no religion were White (93%) and born in the UK (93%) and these groups have increased since 2001. • People with no religion had the highest proportion of people who were economically active, Christians and Muslims the lowest. Jewish people had the highest level of employment and Muslim people the highest level of unemployment. • The main reason for Christians being economically inactive was retirement, for Muslims economic inactivity was mainly because they were students, or because they were looking after the home or family. | |
Gove under pressure to give CofE more power over schoolsNews | Tue, 14th May 2013 The Education Secretary, Michael Gove, is to meet bishops from every Church of England diocese to discuss the "special relationship" the Government has with the Church over its participation in education. The announcement of the meeting, to be held at Lambeth Palace on 3 July, comes after the Bishop of Oxford, John Pritchard – who is the chairman of the CofE's Board of Education – told a private conference in London that the settlement reached between state and church over provision of education, which has been in place since 1944, is now "bust". "It is dead. It is not coming back," he told the conference, organised by the Board of Education's legal advisers, Lee Bolton Monier-Williams, and attended by representatives of diocesan education boards and other educationists. The Bishops said the state-church "partnership" was under pressure from the demand for minority faith schools and from the creation of academies or free schools which were open to competing interests – some of them commercial. The Church Times says that the bishop's "straight talking" was aimed at focusing minds on the C of E's future role in a multi-system approach to schooling. Although the range of providers was growing, with newcomers ranging from local backers of one-off free schools – including many other religious groups – to professional academy chains operating nationally, the C of E was still the largest provider of schools after the Government with just under 5,000 schools, including more than 300 academies. "We have the national coverage and a network of expertise," Bishop Pritchard said. But the Gove reforms have significantly expanded the task of school providers, making them directly responsible for standards. This responsibility had formerly been shouldered by local authorities, but these had been deprived of their resources by central Government. As a result, community as well as church schools were seeking help from dioceses, which were now being seen as a local focus of support. "We are increasingly sharing expertise through multi-academy trusts and less formal collaboration projects. Both might include academies, voluntary aided, voluntary controlled, and community schools," Bishop Pritchard said. "The Government will not accept mediocre standards; so we have to develop a culture of delivery," he said. This meant "tooling up", recruiting skilled staff on a diocesan or regional basis, a move that had considerable financial implications. Here again, Bishop Pritchard spoke aloud what his audience was thinking: who was going to pay? "We have to convince my fellow bishops to reconsider the balance between the funds going to parishes and what is needed for our schools." Keith Porteous Wood, executive director of the National Secular Society, said: "This move to surreptitiously bring the education system, including community schools, under religious control will lead to the further alienation of school children who are from non-religious or religiously unconcerned families. Despite now being the majority, they are becoming increasingly disadvantaged in admissions and by the growing religionisation of publicly funded schools. The move is also motivated by the Church of England's desperation to give itself a new reason for existing, given that so few young people attend Church is precipitating an unsustainable decline in attendance. "The tragedy is that once schools have been taken over by religious interests, it will be almost impossible to ever bring them back under community control." | |
Same-sex marriage – is Cameron’s commitment wobbling?Opinion | Thu, 16th May 2013 When the issue of same-sex marriage began to arise around the world, the Catholic Church foolishly decided that it would make opposition to it a main plank in its attempts to revive itself. Allied with the Religious Right in America it thought it had a real winner in trying to use it against Barack Obama in the last presidential election. It didn't work. Obama is still in the White House – with a firm and clearly-stated commitment to gay marriage - and the protestant Religious Right is licking its wounds and wondering how to change its disastrous approach. The Vatican is engaged in no such navel gazing, though. The new pope has not yet spoken out quite so aggressively on the topic as his predecessor (who is now ensconced in his brand new Vatican apartment with his faithful "secretary", Georg), but his previous writings make clear that he supports the party line. But then, so did Scotland's homophobic foghorn Cardinal Keith O'Brien – and look what happened to him. The Church – at least under Ratzinger – had entirely misjudged the international mood. Instead of it leading what he hoped would be a populist and revivalist worldwide crusade against gay marriage, Ratzinger saw some of the greatest Catholic strongholds enshrine it in law. In trying to flex its muscles against the will of independent states, the Church has lost over and over again. Instead of enhancing its reputation as a beacon of morality in a world gone bad (long ago smashed by the child abuse scandals) it appeared narrow-minded and persecutory. In Spain, Portugal, Argentina and Uruguay and many other countries that have been claimed as "Catholic", gay marriage is now legal. And this week in Brazil, where the new pope will shortly attend "World Youth Day", the Justice's National Council legalised same-sex marriage in the entire country in a 14-1 vote by issuing a ruling that ordered all civil registers of the country to perform same-sex marriages and convert any existing civil unions into marriages if such a couple desires. In the US, 13 states have now legislated in favour of same-sex marriage, with several others on the point of following suit. Only in France did the Church manage to garner any significant opposition that manifested itself in large-scale demonstrations in the streets. Even so, the majority of the population were in favour and the will of the state prevailed. Same-sex marriage is now legal in France. In Northern Ireland, of course, the matter didn't even get off the starting blocks – such is the power of extremely conservative religious bodies in its assembly. In Scotland the issue is crawling through parliament with a strong possibility that it will pass. In England the issue is returning to parliament in the coming weeks. The churches have been strongly opposed to the proposals. The Government has gone out of its way to reassure them that it will be a purely secular matter, in which they will in no way be involved – unless they want to be. But that has not placated them. Now that it is to be debated in the House of Lords, the chorus of prelates starts up again, issuing dire warnings of the end of civilisation, the termination of religious freedom, the wholesale destruction of everything we hold dear - and probably even a rise in the price of beer. The new Archbishop of Canterbury met NSS honorary associate Peter Tatchell recently to talk about the issue. Again, like his predecessor, Rowan Williams, he is treading on eggshells, but his Church continues its hysterical opposition. It seemed until quite recently that the Government was resolved to see the matter through. Then came the local elections and the triumph of UKIP. The opponents of gay marriage immediately claimed that it was this issue that had caused the rise of Nigel Farage's anti-European group. People were voting against the Coalition because gay people were to be given equal rights! According to them, it had nothing to do with the economy, the loss of jobs, the destruction of the health service, the dismantling of the welfare state, the brutal Victorian-style demand that disabled people should be forced to find jobs that aren't there or risk losing their benefits. Nothing to do with the widespread alarm about immigration that UKIP so skilfully played into. It will be interesting to see whether David Cameron's previous firm support for this legislation holds in the face of all this. Or whether, at last, the Church is going to be able to chalk up a victory in its opposition to gay marriage. | |
As the country struggles with its finances, new tax perks for churches are brought inNews | Thu, 16th May 2013 A new deal between the Government and the Catholic Church will see millions more of taxpayers' money flowing into the church's coffers. Recent changes to the Gift Aid scheme mean that charities can now claim Gift Aid on smaller donations. Catholic parish churches will be able to claim from HM Revenue and Customs (HMRC) an extra 20% for each donation of up to £20 without requiring the giver to complete a form. It is estimated that every church could benefit by up to £1,250 a year. If all 2,400 Catholic churches in England and Wales claim, around £3 million could be claimed each year. The money could help dioceses cope with the loss of thousands of pounds following the cut that could be claimed in Gift Aid in 2011 from 23p to 20p in the pound. Under the scheme, which came into effect last month, parish churches are for the first time being treated as individual charities. Previously the Church's 22 dioceses were each treated as registered charities rather than the parish churches within them. The Church of England already benefits from this scheme as all its churches are registered as individual charities. Under the new scheme, each church can claim from HMRC for every £1 of a "small" donation. HMRC said that it hoped the new scheme, which was agreed in consultation with representatives of the Catholic Church, would make it easier for small charities to claim top-up payments. It said that in the past, churches found it difficult to claim gift aid, because collection donations might be too small to warrant a Gift Aid declaration. Large dioceses such as Westminster and Birmingham, which each have more than 200 churches, could benefit to the tune of hundreds of thousands of pounds. Jim Whiston, the finance director in the Diocese of Middlesbrough, said that they hope to raise £80,000 under the new scheme. "It's going to make a difference," he said. Robert Meakin, a trustee for the Diocese of East Anglia and partner at charity lawyers Stone King, told The Tablet magazine that the change was good news for the Catholic Church. "The scheme took into account the peculiar structure of the Catholic Church which has 22 diocesan charities administering parish churches which are not constituted as a separate charities," he said. "If the scheme only allowed charities to claim then the Catholic Church would have been prejudiced (only having 22 diocesan charities) so it allowed each charity to make a claim in respect of each and every 'community building' which it owns which in the Catholic Church opens the scheme up to approximately 2,500 parish churches." Meanwhile, the Church of England announced some of its best financial results in recent years this week, with a 9.7% return on investments for 2012. The Church commissioners manage £5.5 billion in assets for the Church of England. Terry Sanderson, President of the National Secular Society, said: "The Archbishop of Canterbury – a former banker – lectures large financial institutions about the morality of their practices. But he doesn't seem to think that the vastly wealthy organisation he heads should pay taxes like the rest of us have to. Similarly with the Catholic Church – one of the wealthiest organisations in the world – why are they getting even more tax breaks when the country is on its financial uppers and front line services are being destroyed?" | |
Bishops in the House of Lords – too political or not political enough?Opinion | Fri, 10th May 2013 By Terry Sanderson The Labour MP Frank Field (right) has called on the Archbishop of Canterbury to hand over some of the seats that the Church of England bishops occupy in the House of Lords to representatives who would take a more active part in policy making. This call has added significance because Frank Field is a prominent Christian and a former member of the General Synod. But before we run away with the idea that Mr Field thinks the bishops have no business making law, we should look at what he actually said. Writing in The Independent, he called on Justin Welby, to revive Lords reform by handing most of the "25 seats" (actually 26 seats) to people from employers, trade unions, universities, the arts, armed forces, the law, the media and women's and children's groups. Mr Field, a former Welfare Reform minister, said that 43 bishops issued a statement criticising the Government's welfare cuts in March. But only six of the 16 who sit in the Lords turned up when the House debated them and only one took part in all four votes. "This turnout of bishops is the worst kind of gesture politics," he said. The voting record of bishops suggests their places in the second chamber are being "wasted", he added. Mr Field said: "It may be that the Church of England now appoints bishops who feel they have nothing to say to the nation on the great ethical issues of the day. Some could quite legitimately believe that their time would be better spent in their dioceses. But it surely cannot be impossible for bishops, who sign protest letters, to so organise their diaries that they can turn up and put their votes where their mouths are." The MP for Birkenhead said his proposal would enable the Lords to represent the "moral aspirations" of the nation, kickstart Lords reform after it was killed off by the Conservatives last year and strengthen the groups that make up David Cameron's Big Society. So, rather than wanting the bishops to return to their cathedrals and get on with their job of saving the nation's souls rather than interfering in politics, Mr Field wants them to get more involved. He wants them to butt into policy-making at every opportunity. But what qualifications do they have for such interference? We are told that because the new Archbishop of Canterbury once worked in the City, it is OK for him to pontificate about banking reform and how it should be achieved. But is it? What has that to do with the Archbishop of Canterbury's primary purpose? If he wants to be a banking regulator, let him go and be one. Otherwise he should stick to more generalised comments about the need for moral behaviour from bankers and others engaged in the business of greed. Proposing detailed solutions to the problem really is not his purpose. Strangely, it is someone with whom I often disagree who best summed up this "mission creep" by the bishops. Writing in the Church of England Newspaper, Andrew Carey (son of the increasingly silly former Archbishop of Canterbury, George Carey) said:
So there you have it. Two Church of England enthusiasts, one who thinks the bishops aren't political enough and the other who thinks they're too political. The appropriate answer to this conundrum is to get them out of parliament altogether and let them use their pulpits to spread their message. But they know that if they did that, no-one would be listening. | |
Plans to open Sikh faith school in Buckinghamshire village derailedNews | Wed, 15th May 2013 Controversial plans to open a Sikh free school in the Buckinghamshire village of Stoke Poges have been recommended for refusal by South Bucks District Council planning officers. The council received more than 1,100 letters regarding the application by Slough Sikh Education Trust to open a new 840-pupil Secondary Academy – more than 850 of them against the proposals. Stoke Poges Parish Council has argued that there is no identified need for a new school in the area. The school's recruitment drive has focused primarily on Sikh communities in neighbouring Slough, Southall and Harrow and local residents are concerned that the village does not have the adequate infrastructure to deal with additional traffic that will occur when pupils are bussed in from surrounding areas. The potential threat to social cohesion was amongst the concerns expressed to the local authority during its consultation process. Local parents also raised concerns that as the school will become the catchment school for the South Bucks area, families who choose not to send their children to the 'faith' school will lose their paid-for home to school transport. Considering the site in an 18-page report, planning officers concluded the detrimental impact on Green Belt land outweighed the national need for school places. The planning committee said the fact that the school would be a Sikh faith school had no bearing on the acceptability or otherwise of the scheme in planning terms. The proposals will be discussed formally on 22 May. Stephen Evans, campaigns manager at the National Secular Society said: "Children attending faith schools typically travel further to school than other children, and this proposal perfectly illustrates the inefficiently of segregated schooling. Aside from the obvious detriment to cohesion, there is an ecological argument against separating children along sectarian lines and then bussing them around to 'faith' schools instead of them attending a local inclusive community school." Meanwhile, Thurrock in Essex is the latest council to consider withdrawing free transport for pupils attending faith schools. The Council, like others around the country, is looking at ways to cut budgets and is consulting on several proposals for reducing the cost of school transport. As part of the consultation, the council will consider whether to withdraw funding for transport to "faith schools" entirely from September 2014 or to start to charge pupils for it. Details of the consultation are on the council's website. | |
We need answers to the doubts and distrust raised by the call for sharia lawOpinion | Fri, 10th May 2013 We have the privilege of living in a free society, in which the rights of the individual are not determined by their gender. We live in an open, tolerant country, which rightly welcomes people's different faiths and religious beliefs and is diverse and benefits socially, economically and culturally from that diversity. Many individuals have campaigned, fought and given their lives for the freedom and values that make up the United Kingdom. This is a special place, embracing democracy, free speech and, just as important, a justice system that has evolved over a millennium. One of the cornerstones of our justice system is that we are all equal in the eyes of the law. Embodied in the law of our country are the demands for equality, the challenge to the wrongs that appear in prejudice and discrimination in our lives. We can be proud – but we should not be complacent – that the vast majority of our judges, magistrates and clerks come from all backgrounds and are of both genders. When I read that my local council of mosques had issued a press release calling for the Government to recognise sharia councils – they are courts in any other country – and ensure that they are better resourced, I was greatly concerned. Exploring this issue, I find that most of the debate that reaches the public comes from far Right blogs and racist rhetoric. Little thoughtful contribution to understanding or exploring these issues comes to the fore. There are a couple of notable exceptions: the work of Baroness Cox and the work of the BBC's Panorama programme, led by the journalist Jane Corbin. Baroness Cox's exceptional work in the House of Lords seeks to ensure that sharia tribunals and councils operate within the law and should not form a concurrent legal system in the UK. With that aim in mind, I have four questions for the Government. First, I should like to hear from the Government that we have only one law in this country. Secondly, I want to hear that sharia councils must comply with UK law. That includes compliance with all equality and anti-discrimination laws and family law. Thirdly, I should like to understand how the Government will ensure compliance and what penalties will be applied to a council or court if it breaks the law. Fourthly, I should like to know what consideration the Government has given to ensuring that all sharia marriages are legally underpinned by a compulsory civil marriage. In the recent Panorama programme, it was evident that women were not being treated equally. In the so-called arbitration process, even a simple issue of cost was clearly discriminatory. Women pay £400 to get a divorce; men pay nothing. Women are encouraged not to report to the police. A woman was given a divorce only after she agreed to hand over her children to the husband. The council or court was only ever made up of men or a man. I understand that the act of determining child access or contact cannot be undertaken in law by a sharia council or court. I hope that, if evidence of wrongdoing can be established, those who have broken the law, as shown in the programme, will be pursued. On seeing the programme's evidence, the chief crown prosecutor for the Crown Prosecution Service in the North West said that he was disappointed, but not surprised. If the CPS is not surprised about such findings, why are we, as a Government, allowing such things to happen? The director of Inspire, an organisation with an impeccable reputation, issued a statement: "Panorama's programme on the unregulated and discriminatory practice of some of Britain's sharia councils has been of long concern to Inspire. "Secrets of Britain's Sharia Councils highlighted how some of the services provided by sharia councils, in particular arbitration and mediation services, operate in a way that is at times discriminatory towards women, undermining their human rights which should be protected by British law, especially with regards to child custody and domestic violence cases." That is part of a long, detailed release that is a thoughtful contribution to the debate. That paragraph in particular highlights problems that I am concerned about as well. I want to discuss underpinning religious marriage with civil law marriage. Some men are choosing not to marry through the civil law process, because it makes divorce simpler and does not enable a woman rightly to claim her share of the assets at the time of divorce. There is also an opportunity for men to marry a second wife, because the first sharia marriage is not recognised in law. We have to ensure that the rights of women are protected. I therefore concur with Inspire's call that all sharia marriages be simultaneously registered as civil marriages, thus offering much-needed protection to women. I believe that, sadly, the word 'sharia' has more negative connotations than positive images in our country. Only by exploring why will we begin to address those concerns. Unlike the far Right, I do not believe that Islam is evil. We should not underestimate the level of distrust and sometimes fear that exists. It is our responsibility to challenge the wrongdoing and allay those fears.
| |
It’s the Church’s Christian duty to support the health service, not leech off itOpinion | Mon, 13th May 2013 The Catholic Archbishop of Westminster, Vincent Nichols, says that hospital chaplaincy services "ought never to be seen as a luxury to be discarded when budgets are tight; or chapels as spaces to be sacrificed to other purposes when needs arise." Speaking at a service at St Bartholomew's hospital in London, the Archbishop made the case for retaining (at public expense) the religious input to hospitals because: "God's presence as one who heals should be welcomed. So chaplaincy services ought never to be seen as a luxury to be discarded when budgets are tight; or chapels as spaces to be sacrificed to other purposes when needs arise. People need spaces where they can come to pray for their sick relatives and friends. Those who are sick need places to pray, to receive the consoling touch of the divine. Healthcare professionals need somewhere to pray as part of their care for their sick brothers and sisters, as well as to receive strength for their ministry." The Archbishop made no mention of the financial collapse of several hospitals and the teetering state of many others, or the fact that lives are being lost because of lack of resources as he made the case for the NHS to pay the salaries of his priests. Indeed, in the same edition of The Tablet magazine that reports his sermon, there is an advertisement from Sheffield Teaching Hospitals for a Catholic Chaplain on a salary of £25,783 to £34,530. I cannot argue that removing the funding from chaplains would solve the gigantic problems of the NHS, but if the jobs of nurses are being sacrificed to keep priests and vicars and imams in hospitals, then serious questions need to be asked. Wouldn't this money be better spent helping to solve some of the more fundamental and pressing problems of the NHS? It is time for the churches, mosques and temples to fund their own input into hospitals. In Wales, Alan Rogers is proposing that religious bodies set up charitable trusts for the very purpose of funding hospital chaplains. This sounds like an excellent idea. If they are so important and popular with patients as the churches claim, there should be no problem gaining donations to support these services (which could become voluntary if push comes to shove). Also, as the funding crisis deepens, religious bodies might want to have a contingency plan in place because there are only so many nurses and doctors that can be made redundant before a hospital simply can't function. The axe must surely find its way to the chapel before much longer. The establishment of these charitable trusts would also release millions of pounds for spending on the thing that people really go to hospital for – medical treatment. Surely it is the religious duty of churches to take the burden off the NHS and assume it themselves? Let's ignore the flim-flam about "holistic" treatments that the advocates for chaplaincy use to justify dipping into health service funds. If you arrive at the A&E department with a broken leg, there are unlikely to be any miracle cures on offer from the chaplains. It's the tender loving care of the emergency medics that are going to make you better. | |
Abortion reforms in Spain: government accused of return to Franco eraNews | Fri, 10th May 2013 The Spanish Government is preparing a reform to the country's abortion law that, some have argued, will return Spain to a situation similar to the one that existed under General Franco's dictatorship. Whilst the government denies that its proposed reform comes in response to pressure from the Catholic Church, its announcement of the reform came just hours after the head of Spain's Catholic Church, Cardinal Antonio Maria Rouco Varela, called for an "urgent reform" of the current law, dating from 2010. At present in Spain, women can have an abortion up to 14 weeks without having to provide a reason, up to 22 weeks if there is a risk to the mother's health or when two doctors say the foetus has severe abnormalities. The new bill, which has yet to be presented to congress, will not only do away these time limits, but also, according to an interview given by Spain's justice minister, Alberto Alberto Ruiz Gallardon, to the Spanish newspaper La Razon, it will not include malformations of the foetus as a reason for interrupting a pregnancy. The minister said: "I don't understand why the foetus should be unprotected, allowing it to be aborted, just because it suffers some kind of disability or malformation". He has also said that "risk to physical and mental health cannot be considered as a pretext to not protect the life of a newborn". The right wing Popular Party has also promised that those under 18 would need the permission of their parents for a termination. Spain's Socialist opposition party, PSOE, is one of many to have claimed that it is the Catholic Church who is behind the reform; Elena Valenciano, the party's vice president, has stated that PSOE will downgrade its relations with the Vatican if more rules such as this one are introduced. She argued: "We can't accept that bishops continue to impose their moral position on the [Spanish] people". The vast majority of Spaniards, 81%, are against banning abortion in cases where a foetus is malformed, according to a poll published in July 2012 in the Spanish newspaper El Pais. |
Read this week's Newsline in full (PDF)
NSS Speaks Out
Terry Sanderson was on Radio Merseyside talking about religious education in schools. He was also quoted in an article in The Times (subscription) about the rise in hate preachers in British universities. He also spoke on Voice of Russia radio on this topic
Scottish spokesperson Alistair McBay had this letter in the Independent
Quotes of the Week
"I do think that in many Muslim societies the politicisation of Islam is becoming toxic."
(Mona Siddiqi, writer and academic, Church Times)
"To find most vehement objections to the behavior of the church hierarchy over its handling of sexual abuse cases, go to your local church. Many Catholics feel betrayed, that something they treasure has been tarnished."
(Editorial, New Jersey Times)
Essays of the Week
In a generation, everything has changed for Muslim women
(Irna Qureshi, New Statesman)
The dark side of home schooling: creating soldiers for the culture war
(Katherine Stewart, Guardian)
