Welcome to the first new-look edition of Newsline. The new format gives you the opportunity to prioritise the stories of most interest to you. Click the headlines to link directly to the full story on our website. A complete version of Newsline is available as a PDF here. We hope you like the new look. To find out more about why we've made changes click here.
News, Blogs & Opinion
NSS calls on scouts to welcome non-believers – Sign the petition!News | Thu, 1st Nov 2012 The National Secular Society has launched a petition calling on the Scouts to make the religious oath in the Scout Promise optional. The Scout Promise in its present form requires new members to "do their duty by God", which acts as a barrier to prevent non-believers from joining. Earlier this year, George Pratt, an 11-year old boy from Somerset, was told he could not join his local Scout troop because he didn't believe in God and didn't want to make the Scout Promise in its present form. The Equality Act 2010 outlaws discrimination against a person on the grounds of their religion or belief (including non-belief). However, the Scouts successfully lobbied for an exemption which enables non-religious charities to refuse membership to anyone who does not sign up to a religious oath – providing this has been their custom. Despite different variations of the oath being used to accommodate those of other faiths, the Scouts refuse to allow a secular variation to be used. An alternative promise, known as the "Outlander Oath", believed to have been written by Scouts founder Baden-Powell, was intended for those who, for reasons of conscience, could not recognize a "duty to God" and did not worship a deity. It omitted any reference to God or a monarch and, according to scout leaders, was in use as late as the 1990s. Stephen Evans, campaigns manager at the NSS said: "It is unfortunate that the Scouting Movement has become less tolerant in recent years, in marked contrast to the rest of society. "They persist in describing themselves as an "open and inclusive organisation" while refusing all calls to reconsider their insistence on the religious oath that clearly excludes atheists. Restricting membership in this way forces young people who wish to join the scouts to make a hypocritical and dishonest statement, or risk being refused full membership of the Scouts. "In 1886, the founder of the National Secular Society, Charles Bradlaugh, won a long-fought battle to be admitted to parliament without the need to swear a religious oath that he did not believe. It's incredible that we're still having to challenge this sort of discrimination to this day. In the 21stcentury, it is simply unacceptable for the Scouts to single out atheists for exclusion – particularly while claiming to be an "open and inclusive" organisation." Please sign the petition - add your voice to make sure scouting really is for all, regardless of religious belief." Sign the petition to open up scouting to non-believers at Change.org See also: Read recent correspondence between the NSS and The Scout Association | |
European secularists raise concerns about nomination of Maltese reactionary to European CommissionNews | Thu, 1st Nov 2012 Secular groups around Europe are preparing to oppose the nomination of the Maltese Foreign Affairs Minister Tonio Borg to replace the recently resigned European Commissioner for Health and Consumer Protection. The European Humanist Federation (EHF), to which the NSS is affiliated, said in a statement this week:
EHF President Pierre Galand wrote to Mr Barroso, President of the European Commission, to express these concerns. In his letter he says:
Pierre Arnaud Perouty, director-general of Belgium's Centre d'Action Laïque, told the MaltaToday newspaper why his organisation will be joining the initiative against Borg's appointment to the Commission.
Similar objections have already been raised by political blocs represented in the European Parliament. The European Greens have declared they will not support Borg's nomination, and the Liberals are understood to share similar reservations. With the European People's Party (a platform Christian Democrats from 40 nations of which Borg's party is a member) welcoming his nomination, this leaves the decision largely in the hands of the European Socialists... whose president, Hannes Swoboda, has already publicly aired misgivings. "In view of some comments from Mr Borg on the rights of homosexuals we intend to question him closely on whether his views are compatible withEurope's fundamental values on civil liberties and non-discrimination." Significantly, Swoboda cited the former failed candidacy of Italian right wing politician Rocco Buttiglione, whose similar outspoken views on homosexual rights had cost him the Commissionership. In a MaltaToday blog, Raphael Vassallo wrote: "Many MEPS were horrified to learn that the man proposed to administer the European health (!) portfolio not only firmly believes that women should be imprisoned for procuring an abortion ... but even spearheaded a campaign, in 2004, to entrench that same disgusting law into the Constitution... just to make sure that his own mediaeval views on the subject become permanently fossilized, and continue to be foisted, without discussion, on generations of future (unborn) citizens." Terry Sanderson, President of the National Secular Society, said: "We strongly oppose Mr Borg's nomination. That President Barroso reportedly endorsed the nomination of someone so opposed to fundamental rights for such a sensitive appointment beggars belief, and I hope he will be held to account for this. We certainly hope that the protests about Mr Borg's nomination will snowball and that his candidacy will go the same way as Buttiglione's did. The prospect of his taking up this post is horrific. "That Mr Borg succeeded even this far is a stark warning of the need to fight back against the growing assault by religious conservatives on Human Rights, particularly those affecting women, LGBTs, start and end of life questions and bio ethics." You can write to your MEP to alert her or him to this situation through this site. | |
Charity Commission is “anti-religious”, claims Tory MPNews | Thu, 1st Nov 2012 The Civil Society website reports: Conservative MP Charlie Elphicke (right) has accused the Charity Commission of trying to suppress religion and predicted that the Plymouth Brethren case, where the organisation has been refused charity status, will be the first of many. Elphicke, a member of the Public Administration Select Committee, made the comments at a PASC hearing on public benefit and charitable status on Wednesday. Elders from the Plymouth Brethren, an exclusive and evangelical Christian sect, had been giving evidence about the Charity Commission's refusal to continue their charitable status when Elphicke asked them if they thought the Commission was "actively trying to suppress religion in theUK, particularly the Christian religion". Elder Garth Christie responded: "I think we would share those concerns." Asked by Elphicke whether the elders thought the Charity Commission's actions amounted to incompetence, or deliberate wickedness, Christie said: "It does seem very odd." Labour MP Paul Flynn said it was ridiculous to suggest Christians are discriminated against in this country, given the immense position and privilege enjoyed by the Church of England. But Elphicke told the elders: "I think they [the Commission] are committed to the suppression of religion and you are the little guys being picked on to start off a whole series of other churches who will follow you there." | |
New calls from Islamists for international blasphemy law at UNNews | Thu, 1st Nov 2012 Soon after the Organisation of Islamic Co-operation (OIC) announced that it had abandoned its plans to persuade the UN to impose a global blasphemy law, the Arab League has stepped in to take up the cry. On Wednesday, the head of the Arab League, Nabil Elaraby, spoke at the UN Security Council during a debate on Syria. He called on the international community to criminalise blasphemy, warning that insults to religion pose a serious threat to global peace and security. Elaraby told the U.N. Security Council that if the west has criminalised acts that result in bodily harm, it must also criminalise acts that insult or cause offense to religions. He condemned the violence that erupted throughout the Muslim world in response to an anti-Islam film produced in theUnited States. But, he said that unless blasphemy laws are enacted and enforced, similar incidents could happen again. "While we fully reject such actions that are not justifiable in any way, we would like to ring the warning bell," Elaraby said. "We are warning that offending religions, faiths and symbols is indeed a matter that threatens in international peace and security now." "If the international community has criminalized bodily harm, it must just as well criminalize psychological and spiritual harm," he said. "The League of Arab States calls for the development of an international legal framework which is binding ... in order to confront insulting religions and ensuring that religious faith and its symbols are respected." Elaraby maintained that the 21-member Arab League valued freedom of speech but stressed that "we don't see any relation between freedom of expression which aims at enriching culture and building civilization [on] the one hand and activities that merely offend and insult the beliefs, culture and civilization of others." Individual members of the Arab League, including Egyptian President Mohammed Morsi, have issued similar calls. And last Saturday, the King of Saudi Arabia joined the chorus with another demand for an international blasphemy law. King Abdullah bin Abdulaziz said: "I demand a UN resolution that condemns any country or group that insults religions and prophets," he reportedly said. "It is our duty and that of every Muslim to protect Islam and defend the prophets." Abdullah also stressed the important of the "unity of the Islamic nation...to face the nation's enemies." | |
We’re not in Kansas now: why targeting the “faith vote” is a hopeless cause in BritainOpinion | Tue, 30th Oct 2012 The latest polls in Corby, Northamptonshire, where a parliamentary by-election is due to take place on November 15, seem to indicate that the Tories are facing a heavy defeat. Despite this, according to the Conservative Home website, the Tories will take the opportunity to "road test" an appeal to the "faith vote" in Corby. They want to know — as do we — whether there is really an organised and significant religious voting bloc in the town – or anywhere in Britain come to that. If it were to be significant, no doubt the party would roll it out at the general election, and we'd be subjected to a sudden surfeit of American-style piety in our politicians. The Conservative candidate in Corby is Christine Emmett, who is a practising Christian. She has used a local newspaper (pdf) to target local churches to tell of her personal faith. She writes:
A local councillor, David Sims, gives his backing to Christine, also mentioning her faith:
Interestingly, Christine Emmett lets her co-faithful know that she supports same-sex marriage.
This is fascinating from a tactical viewpoint. It is in churches where resistance to same-sex marriage is likely to be most keenly organised. So, on the one hand Ms Emmett lets her Christian credentials be known, but then, on the other, she takes a liberal stance on same-sex marriage. Already the constituency she is appealing to is likely to be split on this issue, so she is likely to alienate as many as she impresses. So, how is this likely to play out at the ballot box? First of all, opinion polls seem to suggest that there isn't any significant religious vote to be targeted. Most people don't go to a church, synagogue or temple, and although they are not in the main anti-religious, and might even define themselves as Christians, they can't be reached through any organised religious structure. And even the ones who do go to church, and can be reached through their place of worship, are unlikely to make their voting decisions based on their religion. Other polls show that church-goers are just as likely as the population at large to make their voting decisions based on a range of issues rather than on religious considerations alone. Catholics in particular seem to be at odds with their church on social issues. Demands by priests that their communicants vote in accordance with Catholic doctrine generally fall on deaf ears. So, even if she could reach a large number of religiously-active voters, it is unlikely that they would cast their vote based on the teachings of their church. Like everyone else, they tend to take into account wider considerations, such as the economy, whether the local hospital will close, how the current government is performing on jobs and welfare etc. Another finding from polls is that more than 80 per cent of the population do not want religion to be involved in public policy-making. Nor do they don't want religious leaders to have influence on parliamentary decisions. So, in emphasising her faith she risks alienating another section of potential supporters – those who are suspicious of and even maybe hostile to religiously-motivated politicians. It will be very interesting to see whether Ms Emmett's tactic has any influence at all on the final result. Although I think, in the end, it will be next to impossible to measure. Having said all this, there is the question of the "Muslim vote" in constituencies where Muslim communities are concentrated. Again, is this a voting bloc that can be corralled and targeted by politicians? Less is known about the voting habits of Muslims except that they have traditionally supported Labour. Since Tony Blair started the war on terror that can no longer be guaranteed. George Galloway appeared to gain his victory by appealing directly to the disaffected Muslim vote in Bradford West and other politicians in constituencies with large Muslim populations have taken note of that. There is now a suspicion that MPs in such areas are playing to the gallery (in the mosque) more and more. The appointment of Baroness Sayeeda Warsi as Minister for Faith is probably designed to appeal to Muslim voters, who politicians seem to think have only one mind between them. Of course, these constituencies with large concentrations of Muslims are relatively few, but they can be important in tightly-fought elections. It seems the "Christian vote" is too diffuse and split for it to be reachable by candidates in elections. We have yet to see if reaching for the "Muslim vote" is any more realistic. | |
Callous treatment of raped girl in Poland leads to condemnation in Human Rights CourtNews | Thu, 1st Nov 2012 Poland's harsh anti-abortion laws were condemned this week by the European Court of Human Rights after an almost unbelievably callous series of events were inflicted on a teenage victim of rape. The girl — who was 14 when she was raped in 2008 — became pregnant and tried to have a termination but was forced into hiding after harassment from anti-abortion groups led to her being turned away from hospitals. Terminations are only permitted in Poland in cases of rape, incest or when the life of the mother or foetus is in danger. The girl, known only as "P", obtained a certificate from the public prosecutor confirming that her pregnancy was due to rape. The girl went to two different hospitals in the southern town of Lublin where she lived. At the first one, a Roman Catholic priest tried to persuade her to keep the baby. The hospital then issued a press release announcing that they had refused to perform the procedure. This resulted in her being targeted by anti-abortion fanatics who made the case public. She then travelled to Warsaw, where the hospital said that they were under pressure not to help her. The court documents say the girl and her mother left the hospital "feeling manipulated and helpless", after which they were harassed by pro-life groups and eventually taken in for several hours of police questioning. The authorities then accused the mother of trying to force her daughter into having an abortion and had "P" placed in a juvenile shelter. The girl eventually had the abortion in Gdansk after the Ministry of Health intervened in the case. In their ruling, which is subject to appeal, a panel of judges at the European Court of Human Rights found that there had been numerous breaches of the girl's rights. The court found that she should have had unhindered access to lawful abortion and that the details of her case should not have been made public by hospital authorities. The Polish state was ordered to pay the teenager and her mother 61,000 euros (£49,000) in compensation. The Catholic Church is relentless in its opposition to any relaxation of the abortion laws in Poland– the strictest in Europe. Its tactics, as in this case, are often pitiless towards desperate women who want terminations. Its influence is such that it can pressure hospitals to turn women away even when they qualify on one of the very limited legal grounds. The topic of abortion is a constant cause of controversy in Poland, with liberal pro-abortion groups arguing that the Church should be removed from political influence. See also: Court rules against "blasphemous" Polish rocker who tore up Bible | |
French Government sticks to secular principles in dealings with VaticanNews | Thu, 1st Nov 2012 The new socialist Government in France is strictly observing the nation's secular etiquette in relation to its dealings with the Vatican. Instead of the President, Francois Hollande, attending the "canonisation" of a French Jesuit in Rome last week, the Government sent Manuel Valls, interior minister with a responsibility for relations with religion. This contrasts with the former President Nicolas Sarkozy who seemed unable to keep away from the Vatican and made many much-hyped trips to Rome. However, in line with tradition, President Hollande has accepted the honorary title of canon of the Basilica of Saint John Lateran – a title bestowed by the Vatican on each head of the French state since the fifteenth century (presumably as a means of emphasising the importance of the Church in French politics). But Monsieur Hollande has made clear he has no intention of going to the Vatican to be "installed". Manuel Valls also confirmed to the Vatican's Foreign Minister that his Government intended to go ahead with the legalisation of same-sex marriage despite Church opposition. See also: French opposition cranks up opposition to gay marriage | |
No religious harassment at The Times, rules tribunalNews | Thu, 1st Nov 2012 A sub-editor on The Times who was offended by a colleague shouting out an apparently derogatory comment about the Pope has lost his claim of religious harassment in the workplace. An Employment Tribunal ruled that there was no intention to cause offence and it was not reasonable for the comment to have had the effect of creating a hostile environment. Mr Heafield worked for The Times as a casual sub-editor. The paper was running a series of articles about allegations of child abuse, and cover-ups, in the Catholic Church. Mr Heafield – a practising Catholic – felt that the newspaper was portraying anti-Catholic feeling by running these articles. Before being given a specific headline, all news stories would be allocated a one word working title so that a mock-up of the newspaper could be made which set out where each article would be positioned. One of the stories which The Times was working on concerned an allegation that the Pope had, in a previous role, protected a paedophile priest. This story was allocated the title 'The Pope' for the purposes of the mock-up. As the deadline approached for the newspaper to be printed, one of Mr Heafield's colleagues realised that he had not seen the story. He shouted across the room 'Can anybody tell me what's happening to the f*** pope?' He received no response so repeated the question and raised his voice. A couple of days later, Mr Heafield sent an email complaining that he has found the remark offensive. Mr Heafield then brought a claim for harassment and victimisation, alleging that the comment had intended to insult his religion, even though no-one in the office knew he was Catholic. Alternatively, even if that was not intended, the comment was very clearly anti-Catholic and therefore it was reasonable for him, as a practising Catholic, to have been insulted. But the Tribunal found that the comment had not been intended to cause offence. The comment was not personal, and the subject of the comment was the news story, not the Pope himself; it was not reasonable for the comment to have had the effect of creating a hostile, intimidating, degrading, humiliating or offensive environment for Mr Heafield, as defined in the Employment Discrimination legislation. The Tribunal said the comment was just a 'trivial and transitory' comment. Nor was there any evidence to suggest that the comment had been made on religious grounds; there was no evidence that the individual who made the comment was using it as a precursor to create a hostile environment. Mr Heafield's claims were dismissed. | |
More Britons believe in aliens than GodNews | Thu, 1st Nov 2012 A recent survey carried out by Opinion Matters for the makers of the new video game 'XCOM: Enemy Unknown' found that more people believe in aliens from other planets than believe in God. The survey of 1,359 UK adults found:
|
NSS Speaks Out
Keith Porteous Wood was on LBC radio talking about Bring-a-Bible-to Work day. He was also on BBC Radio York talking about food banks.
Quote of the Week
"The silence of secular people and their inactivity have led to their marginalization and have fostered the emerging power of the Religious Right which espouses the belief that believing in God is synonymous with morality and righteousness, and secularism means chaos and wickedness."
(Reza Varjayand, OpEd News)
Essays of the Week
How did Humanism end up acting like a religion?
(Michael Ruse, Aeon Magazine)
UN set to outlaw female genital mutilation
(Emma Batha, Trust Law)
Only disestablishment will save Anglicanism
(Ed West, Telegraph)
Upcoming Events
Theatre: On Religion, by AC Grayling and Mick Gordon
Tue, 20th Nov 2012
NSS AGM
Sat, 24th Nov 2012
Secularist of the Year 2013
Sat, 23rd Mar 2013