Newsline 22 April 2016

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

	Faith schools selecting pupils from more affluent backgrounds News \| Fri, 15th Apr 2016 A new report by the Sutton Trust has revealed how the most socially selective schools are likely to be faith schools using oversubscription criteria to select disproportionately wealthy pupils. Analysis of primary schools by Dr Rebecca Allen and Dr Meenakshi Parameshwaran has shown that over 1500 schools in England are "highly socially selective" and that Catholic faith schools are particularly selective in their intake. "It is generally true that non-religious schools are not particularly socially selective and that Roman Catholic and other religious primary schools are, regardless of governance status," the researchers said. They found that the "socially selective primary schools are more likely to be found in London and other urban areas" and that they are "often schools with a religious character who have chosen to apply religious oversubscription criteria." Faith schools are able to use particularly complex oversubscription criteria when allocating places, and one school was found to be using 18 different criteria. The Sutton Trust said that the most socially selective schools "tend to use lengthy and more complex oversubscription criteria to decide who is allocated a place" and these can be "complex for parents to navigate." According to the research, "There are well over 1,000 primary schools where the free school meals proportion is over 10 percentage points lower than that found in the neighbourhoods from which they recruit," meaning these schools have selected pupils from disproportionately affluent backgrounds, leaving the school population unrepresentative of the surrounding area. Analysing the results, Conor Ryan of the Sutton Trust wrote that the "pattern seems strongest in some – though not all – London boroughs and in areas outside London where there are strong faith-based, particularly Catholic, state schools." In response to the findings, the Trust has recommended that faith schools "should consider prioritising pupil premium pupils ahead of others in their admissions criteria" and that the Admissions Code is "properly enforced." Secretary of State for Education Nicky Morgan recently announced a clampdown on complaints about faith schools admissions and the Department for Education said that "secular campaign groups have targeted faith school admissions as part of a particular agenda. We plan to put a stop to this by restricting who can object to school admissions arrangements to local parents and the local authority." The result of this will be that challenges to faith schools can only be made by parents; and civil society organisations will not be able to identify and complain about problems on their own. NSS Campaigns Director Stephen Evans commented: "The Admissions Code needs to be enforced but the Secretary of State seems determined to make that harder despite evidence of widespread abuses." The Sutton Trust has proposed that "All religious schools should make places open to the local community with simple and consistent religious admissions criteria." Mr Evans said that while that would address some of the issues around social selection, it would not be a solution to the problems caused by faith schools, "because it would leave, for instance, a Catholic ethos being imposed on non-Catholic pupils and families in a taxpayer funded school." The researchers called for "greater scrutiny" of legacy criteria at existing faith schools – a recommendation the NSS has welcomed.
	Secular medics welcome religious circumcision ruling News \| Fri, 22nd Apr 2016 A High Court judge has ruled against a devout Muslim who wanted his children circumcised, finding that the boys should be able to make the choice themselves in a judgement welcomed by the Secular Medical Forum. Dr Antony Lempert of the SMF described the ruling as a small but "welcome" step "towards safeguarding children from forced genital cutting." Religious requirements "should not be allowed to override a person's most fundamental right to grow up with an intact body and to make their own choices about permanent bodily modifications," he said. "It is a procedure that permanently removes healthy, erogenous and functional tissue from the most intimate part of a person's body without that person's consent and for no medical reason. "That it should take a parental disagreement in court for a child to be protected from forced genital cutting remains a serious concern from a child safeguarding perspective." The judge said that the boys' mother was "resolutely opposed" to having the children circumcised and ruled that "There is no guarantee that these boys will wish to continue to observe the Muslim faith with the devotion demonstrated by their father, although that may very well be their choice." She added: "They are still very young and there is no way of anticipating at this stage how the different influences in their respective parental homes will shape and guide their development over the coming years." James Chegwidden, who acted as junior counsel for the mother in the case, said that while he could not comment on the specifics of the case, the ruling was "an encouraging step towards the legal protection every child deserves." He said that the decision was "a reminder that, together with the freedom to practise a religion or philosophy for oneself, comes the necessary obligation not to impose that religion or philosophy on others." But he warned that the case revealed "just how limited our current legal protection of our children is." "Bodily autonomy is a right of every child – it cannot be reduced or ignored simply because both its parents happen to be religious. For a right so fundamental as bodily autonomy for a child to depend totally on the whim of an adult is simply unacceptable. "The court has still yet to classify infant circumcision as 'significant harm', despite the significant evidence that male genital cutting is at least as invasive as some forms of FGM." The father, an Algerian-born Muslim who has lived in England for fifteen years, is now separated from the boys' mother, whom he had met ten years ago and subsequently lived with. He entered the UK using false travel documents but was subsequently given a British passport. The couple separated after the mother, from Devon, and the two boys had to flee their home when he violently attacked her in 2012. He was described as "an increasingly controlling and violent individual who sought to impose restrictions on how she lived her life." He had previously "threatened many times that he will abduct the children to Algeria" and was "violent, threatening and controlling towards the mother." Mrs Justice Roberts said that the father was a "devout Muslim" committed to ensuring that as part of his son's "dual heritage" they "grow up as Muslims observing all the tenets and practices" of Islam. The children are currently aged six and four, and the judge said that she had reached a "clear conclusion" about the "irreversible procedure" and that the children should have the right to choose for themselves. "I am simply deferring that decision to the point where each of the boys themselves will make their individual choices once they have the maturity and insight to appreciate the consequences and longer-term effects of the decisions which they reach," the judge said. "There are risks, albeit small, associated with the surgery, regardless of the expertise with which the operation is performed. "There must be clear benefits which outweigh these risks which point towards circumcision at this point in time being in their best interests before I can sanction it as an appropriate course at this stage of their young lives." The judge's warning about the risks of circumcision came as a medical tribunal heard the case of Dr Muhammad Chaudhary, a doctor accused of bungling a circumcision on a two month old baby, who then allegedly tried to bribe the child's family into dropping a claim against him. He reportedly told the Muslim family that "Litigation in Muslim culture is not usually a route to adopt especially in ritual matters" in an attempt to stop action being taken against him. Dr Chaudhary failed to repair the damage he had caused during four further surgeries. After he failed to fix the damage he had caused in the initial operation, he advised the family to "treat him [their son] like the Quran and be gentle." The child was finally referred to a specialist surgeon, the Mirror reported, and had to endure three additional operations in a hospital. Doctor Lempert said these cases occurred with "nauseating regularity." "There are practically no restrictions on who can perform forced genital cutting on young (male) children in the UK. The procedure is almost wholly unregulated in the UK. The reality is that we simply don't know the extent of harm caused to young children by ritual circumcision. We do know that many such children turn up in A&E and some need treatment in paediatric Intensive Care Units as a direct result of non-therapeutic circumcision. "Dr Chaudhary is being investigated because he is a doctor who is alleged to have behaved dishonestly. Ironically, should Dr Chaudhary be removed from the medical register, he would no longer be required to satisfy even the limited requirements of the GMC in this matter and would be free to continue cutting young boys' genitals."
	Orthodox school bans mention of “evolution or prehistoric events” News \| Tue, 19th Apr 2016 Ofsted have written a scathing criticism of an independent orthodox Jewish school which has a policy of not referencing "evolution or prehistoric events" that would "predate the creation of the world 5776 years ago". The Getters Talmud Torah School was found to not be meeting the standards required of independent schools when it was inspected by Ofsted in March 2016, after previous inspections found a string of serious failures. The school's curriculum "contains no reference to cultural and aesthetic subjects" and teaching of non-religious subjects is "restricted to between 45 minutes and 1 hour per day for the older year groups, with no provision for the younger years." There was "very limited" teaching which even "reference" "aspects of geography, history and citizenship" and pupils had "not heard of drama" and were not taught any music or art. Ofsted accused the school of promoting "the teaching of incorrect content" and noted that the school's own policy states that "our curricula for Science, Geography and History will not reference evolution or prehistoric events that would de facto predate the creation of the world 5776 years ago". There was no reference whatsoever to sex and relationships education because senior leaders said it would "contravene the precepts of their faith" and any mention of homosexual people in the school was 'prohibited'. The school was failing to prepare pupils for future careers and "Pupils demonstrated stereotypical views on the roles of men and women, with men 'going to work' and women 'cooking and cleaning'." Inspectors found that "Classroom resources have everyday images of children singing and swimming obscured." The alarm was also sounded about pupils' safety and the inspectors learnt that the school doesn't use an application form for recruitment, doesn't check the employment history of applicants and was ignorant of some safeguarding checks. The quality of the teaching was found to be very poor, and the inspection found that "Teachers continue to lack guidance on how to structure learning in the secular curriculum or plan for different ages or aptitudes. As a result, lessons are unstructured and do not promote learning." NSS Campaigns Director Stephen Evans said: "Action needs to be taken against independent schools like this which are continuing to fail countless children who deserve an education that prepares them for adult life. It is appalling that so many are given a sub-standard education and are left totally ignorant about life in modern Britain, science, history, and a whole range of subjects. "Individuals should of course be free to practice their religion, but the state should step in when young people's rights and freedoms are being curtailed in the name of religion, tradition or culture." The school currently has 241 pupils, all boys aged from three to 13 years old.
	Cross-party call by MPs for more inclusive faith school admissions News \| Wed, 20th Apr 2016 A cross-party group of MPs has called on the Government to make faith school admissions more inclusive and bolster social cohesion. Five parliamentarians from the Conservative Party, Labour Party, Liberal Democrats and Green MP Caroline Lucas have signed the Early Day Motion which aims to tackle exclusive admissions policies which discriminate on the grounds of religion. The motion calls on the House of Commons to acknowledge "that mutual trust and understanding between people of different backgrounds grows when they are schooled together, which also benefits social cohesion in society at large". The motion "therefore urges that the current policy where new faith free schools in England cannot select more than half their pupils on faith grounds is extended to all types of state-funded faith schools." NSS Campaigns Director Stephen Evans urged supporters of the National Secular Society to write to their MP asking them to sign the motion. "It's vital that the Government come to understand the long-term damage to society being caused by social segregation. School is a chance to build a more cohesive future. Sadly we're squandering that opportunity. "If you want to see a more cohesive society, without the division of exclusive faith schools, this is a good place to start." The motion was signed by Conservative MPs Crispin Blunt and Peter Bottomley, LibDem MP Norman Lamb, Caroline Lucas and Labour MP Barry Sheerman. In 2005 Barry Sheerman, an honorary associate of the NSS, warned about the rise of a "ghettoised education system" and said that "Schools play a crucial role in integrating different communities and the growth of faith schools poses a real threat to this. These things need to be thought through very carefully before they are implemented." In 2015 Demos said that there was de facto ethnic segregation in minority faith schools and that many British schools are "highly segregated" with some faith schools effectively excluding other ethnic groups. Early Day Motions (EDMs) are rarely debated in the House of Commons but allow parliamentarians to draw attention to particular areas of concern. Mr Evans added that it was "important to take every opportunity to highlight the problems caused by dividing our education system along religious lines." *Write to your MP here.*
	Faith schools add to the angst of school offer day Opinion \| Mon, 18th Apr 2016 National Offer Day is when many parents fall victim to religious discrimination or discover they've been allocated a religious school against their wishes. Stephen Evans argues that a move towards a secular education system might make school offer day a little less fraught. Anxious parents find out today if their child has managed to get into the primary school of their choice. In some cases, where parents haven't been successful, they may well be the victims of religious discrimination. Year upon year another tranche of parents discover first-hand some of the injustices that occur when religion and state entwines to educate the nation's children. In some cases parents will discover that their preferred local school is oversubscribed, and being a faith school has prioritised children whose parents are members of, or who practise, a particular faith – or any faith at all in some cases. The non-religious often have to get to the very back of the queue. Maybe the successful applicants' parents had their children baptised, perhaps their family dutifully attend church every Sunday. Whatever hoops they've jumped through, they've managed to get the vicar's precious blessing. How ridiculous it is that in modern Britain clergy act as gatekeepers to publicly funded services. In this way faith schools perpetuate a form of discrimination that simply wouldn't be tolerated in any another area of public life. An absence of a secularist political framework results in discrimination. The equality law exemptions that make discrimination against children on the grounds of their (or their parents') religion or belief legal in school admissions exist only at the insistence of religious groups to facilitate their schools – for which the taxpayer picks up the bill. In other cases, where faith-based schools are undersubscribed, the opposite problem often occurs, and children are allocated places at religious school that their parents don't want them to attend. In recent years the shortage of school places has seen local authorities attempting to place children of non-religious parents in religious schools, children of Christian parents in Sikh schools and in one case a child from a Muslim family was allocated a place in an Orthodox Jewish school. Both of these vexing issues concerning school admissions have the same solution. A move towards a secular education system would mean no child would be discriminated against on account of their parents' religion or belief. At the same time it would mean no child would ever be compelled to attend a school of a different religious tradition to their own, or their parents'. It would of course mean that parents would have to take responsibility for their child's religious upbringing – but that really is their responsibility anyway, rather than the state's. And wouldn't it better all-round if our publicly funded schools educated children of all faith backgrounds together and stuck to promoting the societal values we share without trying to stick religious labels on either those values or the children they teach? This should be done as a matter of principle, but an end to faith schools and the resulting discrimination might also make school offer day a little less fraught than it currently is.
	‘Blasphemy’ accusation after academic calls for separation of religion and politics News \| Mon, 18th Apr 2016 A Kuwaiti philosopher was questioned over blasphemy charges after she said that religion and politics should be separate and that placing the Koran above the constitution was "undoing" democracy. In an interview on Kuwaiti TV in March 2016, Dr Sheikha Al-Jassem said that "The constitution stipulates that the Kuwaiti regime is democratic" rather than a religious state, and she warned that putting the Koran above the constitution was "the undoing of our democratic regime." She went on to clarify her remarks on the Koran by explaining that in her view "you cannot compare" the Koran and the constitution of Kuwait because they each had a distinct role. "We are trying to run a state. Are we supposed to do it with the Koran?" she asked. The academic also said that "every religion gets hijacked at some point by the politicians" and argued that political religion was just used as "a tool for oppressing people." At one point towards the end of the interview Al-Jassem said there was no freedom of speech in Kuwait and that she had to speak in "code." The host argued that she was free to "say whatever you want," to which Dr Al-Jassem replied, "No, I can't." She said that she was "aware of the things that I am allowed and not allowed to say." The discussion also touched on a wide-range of other issues, including gender segregation at universities. Dr Al-Jassem said this was "totally unnecessary" and that "the purpose of … segregation was to impose control over society", as the niqab was. As a result of her comments in the interview calls were made for her dismissal from Kuwait University and she told the BBC that she received "terrifying" abuse from Islamists in Kuwait and Saudi Arabia. If charges are pressed Dr Al-Jassem could face a year in prison and/or a fine equivalent to more than £2000. The End Blasphemy Laws campaign said that the Kuwaiti government has been "actively enforcing" blasphemy and anti-apostasy laws and that recent years have "seen a notable crack-down on freedom of expression in the country."
	All Noah’s Ark theme park staff must “profess Christ as their saviour” News \| Thu, 21st Apr 2016 All workers at the Kentucky 'replica' of Noah's Ark – including cleaners and ticket staff – will have to sign a statement "professing Christ as their saviour"; after a judge ruled that the park can discriminate even though it benefits from tax incentives. A US District Court found that Ark Encounters is allowed to have a religious requirement for its employees, and the group has said that all employees, regardless of their role, will have to sign statements affirming evangelical Christian beliefs. "We're requiring them to be Christians, that's the bottom line," said Ken Ham, founder of Answers in Genesis, the ministry behind the attraction. 400 posts will be advertised and Ham said that all applicants will have to sign the documents after the judge ruled that the theme park can "choose to hire people who adhere to certain religious beliefs while still being in compliance with state and federal law". Ham, described on the Ark Encounter's website as "the visionary" behind the theme park, complained that attempts to stop the group benefiting from tax exemptions were "blatantly violating our rights under the federal and state constitutions, as well as the federal Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the Kentucky Civil Rights Act." He complained that these efforts represented discrimination against Christian groups – before welcoming the fact that his park can now discriminate against non-Creationists. The president of the Kentucky Paleontological Society, Dan Phelps, questioned if Ham would discriminate against non-creationist Christians. Americans United for Separation of Church and State said on the case: "Officials were warm to the idea at first, but they soured on the Ark Park after it became clear that Ham intended to restrict hiring to members of his own faith and use the attraction to evangelize visitors. They announced that Ham's project didn't qualify for funding. "Americans United has said all along that Ham has the right to open the Ark Park attraction – with his own money. Indeed, if Ham's followers thought the park was a good idea, they would have dug deep into their pockets to make it a reality. That is how religion has traditionally been funded in the United States – through the voluntary donations of the faithful. "Unfortunately, Ham and some others have decided to go down another route. When the believers don't come through, they look to the taxpayer for help." NSS Campaigns Director Stephen Evans said: "This demonstrates the absurdity of allowing broad religious exemptions to employment and equality law. Unless the requirement to have a particular religion or belief is genuinely necessary to do a particular job, no employer should be permitted to discriminate in this way. "Of course, it's not only in America where such unjustifiable discrimination occurs. Many state funded schools in the UK can place religious requirements on teaching posts without any legitimate reason for doing so. You hardly need to be a practicing Catholic to teach maths in a faith school."

Quotes of the Week

"Despite being home to some of the world's most progressed democracies, Europe also is a place where blasphemy and insulting heads of states continue to be illegal under certain conditions."
Rick Noack, Washington Post.

"Medical ethics dictates that the bodily integrity of the child must take precedence over any spiritual feelings expressed by the parents."
Professor Morten Frisch, an epidemiology researcher at the University of Copenhagen, on the ethics of male circumcision.

Essays of the Week

Sectarianism is on the rise in Britain – as any Ahmadiyya Muslim can tell you.
Hussein Kesvani, Spectator.

Disbelief in belief: understanding religious terrorism in a secular age.
Maarten Boudry, 3 Quarks Daily.

How a global games giant exploited Ireland's Catholic Magdalene women.
JP O'Malley, Little Atoms.

Upcoming Events

Day Conference on Sharia Law, Legal Pluralism and Access to Justice

Sat, 30th Apr 2016

NSS 150th anniversary conference - Secularism 2016: living better together

Sat, 3rd Sep 2016

	Faith schools selecting pupils from more affluent backgrounds News \| Fri, 15th Apr 2016 A new report by the Sutton Trust has revealed how the most socially selective schools are likely to be faith schools using oversubscription criteria to select disproportionately wealthy pupils. Analysis of primary schools by Dr Rebecca Allen and Dr Meenakshi Parameshwaran has shown that over 1500 schools in England are "highly socially selective" and that Catholic faith schools are particularly selective in their intake. "It is generally true that non-religious schools are not particularly socially selective and that Roman Catholic and other religious primary schools are, regardless of governance status," the researchers said. They found that the "socially selective primary schools are more likely to be found in London and other urban areas" and that they are "often schools with a religious character who have chosen to apply religious oversubscription criteria." Faith schools are able to use particularly complex oversubscription criteria when allocating places, and one school was found to be using 18 different criteria. The Sutton Trust said that the most socially selective schools "tend to use lengthy and more complex oversubscription criteria to decide who is allocated a place" and these can be "complex for parents to navigate." According to the research, "There are well over 1,000 primary schools where the free school meals proportion is over 10 percentage points lower than that found in the neighbourhoods from which they recruit," meaning these schools have selected pupils from disproportionately affluent backgrounds, leaving the school population unrepresentative of the surrounding area. Analysing the results, Conor Ryan of the Sutton Trust wrote that the "pattern seems strongest in some – though not all – London boroughs and in areas outside London where there are strong faith-based, particularly Catholic, state schools." In response to the findings, the Trust has recommended that faith schools "should consider prioritising pupil premium pupils ahead of others in their admissions criteria" and that the Admissions Code is "properly enforced." Secretary of State for Education Nicky Morgan recently announced a clampdown on complaints about faith schools admissions and the Department for Education said that "secular campaign groups have targeted faith school admissions as part of a particular agenda. We plan to put a stop to this by restricting who can object to school admissions arrangements to local parents and the local authority." The result of this will be that challenges to faith schools can only be made by parents; and civil society organisations will not be able to identify and complain about problems on their own. NSS Campaigns Director Stephen Evans commented: "The Admissions Code needs to be enforced but the Secretary of State seems determined to make that harder despite evidence of widespread abuses." The Sutton Trust has proposed that "All religious schools should make places open to the local community with simple and consistent religious admissions criteria." Mr Evans said that while that would address some of the issues around social selection, it would not be a solution to the problems caused by faith schools, "because it would leave, for instance, a Catholic ethos being imposed on non-Catholic pupils and families in a taxpayer funded school." The researchers called for "greater scrutiny" of legacy criteria at existing faith schools – a recommendation the NSS has welcomed.
	Secular medics welcome religious circumcision ruling News \| Fri, 22nd Apr 2016 A High Court judge has ruled against a devout Muslim who wanted his children circumcised, finding that the boys should be able to make the choice themselves in a judgement welcomed by the Secular Medical Forum. Dr Antony Lempert of the SMF described the ruling as a small but "welcome" step "towards safeguarding children from forced genital cutting." Religious requirements "should not be allowed to override a person's most fundamental right to grow up with an intact body and to make their own choices about permanent bodily modifications," he said. "It is a procedure that permanently removes healthy, erogenous and functional tissue from the most intimate part of a person's body without that person's consent and for no medical reason. "That it should take a parental disagreement in court for a child to be protected from forced genital cutting remains a serious concern from a child safeguarding perspective." The judge said that the boys' mother was "resolutely opposed" to having the children circumcised and ruled that "There is no guarantee that these boys will wish to continue to observe the Muslim faith with the devotion demonstrated by their father, although that may very well be their choice." She added: "They are still very young and there is no way of anticipating at this stage how the different influences in their respective parental homes will shape and guide their development over the coming years." James Chegwidden, who acted as junior counsel for the mother in the case, said that while he could not comment on the specifics of the case, the ruling was "an encouraging step towards the legal protection every child deserves." He said that the decision was "a reminder that, together with the freedom to practise a religion or philosophy for oneself, comes the necessary obligation not to impose that religion or philosophy on others." But he warned that the case revealed "just how limited our current legal protection of our children is." "Bodily autonomy is a right of every child – it cannot be reduced or ignored simply because both its parents happen to be religious. For a right so fundamental as bodily autonomy for a child to depend totally on the whim of an adult is simply unacceptable. "The court has still yet to classify infant circumcision as 'significant harm', despite the significant evidence that male genital cutting is at least as invasive as some forms of FGM." The father, an Algerian-born Muslim who has lived in England for fifteen years, is now separated from the boys' mother, whom he had met ten years ago and subsequently lived with. He entered the UK using false travel documents but was subsequently given a British passport. The couple separated after the mother, from Devon, and the two boys had to flee their home when he violently attacked her in 2012. He was described as "an increasingly controlling and violent individual who sought to impose restrictions on how she lived her life." He had previously "threatened many times that he will abduct the children to Algeria" and was "violent, threatening and controlling towards the mother." Mrs Justice Roberts said that the father was a "devout Muslim" committed to ensuring that as part of his son's "dual heritage" they "grow up as Muslims observing all the tenets and practices" of Islam. The children are currently aged six and four, and the judge said that she had reached a "clear conclusion" about the "irreversible procedure" and that the children should have the right to choose for themselves. "I am simply deferring that decision to the point where each of the boys themselves will make their individual choices once they have the maturity and insight to appreciate the consequences and longer-term effects of the decisions which they reach," the judge said. "There are risks, albeit small, associated with the surgery, regardless of the expertise with which the operation is performed. "There must be clear benefits which outweigh these risks which point towards circumcision at this point in time being in their best interests before I can sanction it as an appropriate course at this stage of their young lives." The judge's warning about the risks of circumcision came as a medical tribunal heard the case of Dr Muhammad Chaudhary, a doctor accused of bungling a circumcision on a two month old baby, who then allegedly tried to bribe the child's family into dropping a claim against him. He reportedly told the Muslim family that "Litigation in Muslim culture is not usually a route to adopt especially in ritual matters" in an attempt to stop action being taken against him. Dr Chaudhary failed to repair the damage he had caused during four further surgeries. After he failed to fix the damage he had caused in the initial operation, he advised the family to "treat him [their son] like the Quran and be gentle." The child was finally referred to a specialist surgeon, the Mirror reported, and had to endure three additional operations in a hospital. Doctor Lempert said these cases occurred with "nauseating regularity." "There are practically no restrictions on who can perform forced genital cutting on young (male) children in the UK. The procedure is almost wholly unregulated in the UK. The reality is that we simply don't know the extent of harm caused to young children by ritual circumcision. We do know that many such children turn up in A&E and some need treatment in paediatric Intensive Care Units as a direct result of non-therapeutic circumcision. "Dr Chaudhary is being investigated because he is a doctor who is alleged to have behaved dishonestly. Ironically, should Dr Chaudhary be removed from the medical register, he would no longer be required to satisfy even the limited requirements of the GMC in this matter and would be free to continue cutting young boys' genitals."
	Orthodox school bans mention of “evolution or prehistoric events” News \| Tue, 19th Apr 2016 Ofsted have written a scathing criticism of an independent orthodox Jewish school which has a policy of not referencing "evolution or prehistoric events" that would "predate the creation of the world 5776 years ago". The Getters Talmud Torah School was found to not be meeting the standards required of independent schools when it was inspected by Ofsted in March 2016, after previous inspections found a string of serious failures. The school's curriculum "contains no reference to cultural and aesthetic subjects" and teaching of non-religious subjects is "restricted to between 45 minutes and 1 hour per day for the older year groups, with no provision for the younger years." There was "very limited" teaching which even "reference" "aspects of geography, history and citizenship" and pupils had "not heard of drama" and were not taught any music or art. Ofsted accused the school of promoting "the teaching of incorrect content" and noted that the school's own policy states that "our curricula for Science, Geography and History will not reference evolution or prehistoric events that would de facto predate the creation of the world 5776 years ago". There was no reference whatsoever to sex and relationships education because senior leaders said it would "contravene the precepts of their faith" and any mention of homosexual people in the school was 'prohibited'. The school was failing to prepare pupils for future careers and "Pupils demonstrated stereotypical views on the roles of men and women, with men 'going to work' and women 'cooking and cleaning'." Inspectors found that "Classroom resources have everyday images of children singing and swimming obscured." The alarm was also sounded about pupils' safety and the inspectors learnt that the school doesn't use an application form for recruitment, doesn't check the employment history of applicants and was ignorant of some safeguarding checks. The quality of the teaching was found to be very poor, and the inspection found that "Teachers continue to lack guidance on how to structure learning in the secular curriculum or plan for different ages or aptitudes. As a result, lessons are unstructured and do not promote learning." NSS Campaigns Director Stephen Evans said: "Action needs to be taken against independent schools like this which are continuing to fail countless children who deserve an education that prepares them for adult life. It is appalling that so many are given a sub-standard education and are left totally ignorant about life in modern Britain, science, history, and a whole range of subjects. "Individuals should of course be free to practice their religion, but the state should step in when young people's rights and freedoms are being curtailed in the name of religion, tradition or culture." The school currently has 241 pupils, all boys aged from three to 13 years old.
	Cross-party call by MPs for more inclusive faith school admissions News \| Wed, 20th Apr 2016 A cross-party group of MPs has called on the Government to make faith school admissions more inclusive and bolster social cohesion. Five parliamentarians from the Conservative Party, Labour Party, Liberal Democrats and Green MP Caroline Lucas have signed the Early Day Motion which aims to tackle exclusive admissions policies which discriminate on the grounds of religion. The motion calls on the House of Commons to acknowledge "that mutual trust and understanding between people of different backgrounds grows when they are schooled together, which also benefits social cohesion in society at large". The motion "therefore urges that the current policy where new faith free schools in England cannot select more than half their pupils on faith grounds is extended to all types of state-funded faith schools." NSS Campaigns Director Stephen Evans urged supporters of the National Secular Society to write to their MP asking them to sign the motion. "It's vital that the Government come to understand the long-term damage to society being caused by social segregation. School is a chance to build a more cohesive future. Sadly we're squandering that opportunity. "If you want to see a more cohesive society, without the division of exclusive faith schools, this is a good place to start." The motion was signed by Conservative MPs Crispin Blunt and Peter Bottomley, LibDem MP Norman Lamb, Caroline Lucas and Labour MP Barry Sheerman. In 2005 Barry Sheerman, an honorary associate of the NSS, warned about the rise of a "ghettoised education system" and said that "Schools play a crucial role in integrating different communities and the growth of faith schools poses a real threat to this. These things need to be thought through very carefully before they are implemented." In 2015 Demos said that there was de facto ethnic segregation in minority faith schools and that many British schools are "highly segregated" with some faith schools effectively excluding other ethnic groups. Early Day Motions (EDMs) are rarely debated in the House of Commons but allow parliamentarians to draw attention to particular areas of concern. Mr Evans added that it was "important to take every opportunity to highlight the problems caused by dividing our education system along religious lines." *Write to your MP here.*
	Faith schools add to the angst of school offer day Opinion \| Mon, 18th Apr 2016 National Offer Day is when many parents fall victim to religious discrimination or discover they've been allocated a religious school against their wishes. Stephen Evans argues that a move towards a secular education system might make school offer day a little less fraught. Anxious parents find out today if their child has managed to get into the primary school of their choice. In some cases, where parents haven't been successful, they may well be the victims of religious discrimination. Year upon year another tranche of parents discover first-hand some of the injustices that occur when religion and state entwines to educate the nation's children. In some cases parents will discover that their preferred local school is oversubscribed, and being a faith school has prioritised children whose parents are members of, or who practise, a particular faith – or any faith at all in some cases. The non-religious often have to get to the very back of the queue. Maybe the successful applicants' parents had their children baptised, perhaps their family dutifully attend church every Sunday. Whatever hoops they've jumped through, they've managed to get the vicar's precious blessing. How ridiculous it is that in modern Britain clergy act as gatekeepers to publicly funded services. In this way faith schools perpetuate a form of discrimination that simply wouldn't be tolerated in any another area of public life. An absence of a secularist political framework results in discrimination. The equality law exemptions that make discrimination against children on the grounds of their (or their parents') religion or belief legal in school admissions exist only at the insistence of religious groups to facilitate their schools – for which the taxpayer picks up the bill. In other cases, where faith-based schools are undersubscribed, the opposite problem often occurs, and children are allocated places at religious school that their parents don't want them to attend. In recent years the shortage of school places has seen local authorities attempting to place children of non-religious parents in religious schools, children of Christian parents in Sikh schools and in one case a child from a Muslim family was allocated a place in an Orthodox Jewish school. Both of these vexing issues concerning school admissions have the same solution. A move towards a secular education system would mean no child would be discriminated against on account of their parents' religion or belief. At the same time it would mean no child would ever be compelled to attend a school of a different religious tradition to their own, or their parents'. It would of course mean that parents would have to take responsibility for their child's religious upbringing – but that really is their responsibility anyway, rather than the state's. And wouldn't it better all-round if our publicly funded schools educated children of all faith backgrounds together and stuck to promoting the societal values we share without trying to stick religious labels on either those values or the children they teach? This should be done as a matter of principle, but an end to faith schools and the resulting discrimination might also make school offer day a little less fraught than it currently is.
	‘Blasphemy’ accusation after academic calls for separation of religion and politics News \| Mon, 18th Apr 2016 A Kuwaiti philosopher was questioned over blasphemy charges after she said that religion and politics should be separate and that placing the Koran above the constitution was "undoing" democracy. In an interview on Kuwaiti TV in March 2016, Dr Sheikha Al-Jassem said that "The constitution stipulates that the Kuwaiti regime is democratic" rather than a religious state, and she warned that putting the Koran above the constitution was "the undoing of our democratic regime." She went on to clarify her remarks on the Koran by explaining that in her view "you cannot compare" the Koran and the constitution of Kuwait because they each had a distinct role. "We are trying to run a state. Are we supposed to do it with the Koran?" she asked. The academic also said that "every religion gets hijacked at some point by the politicians" and argued that political religion was just used as "a tool for oppressing people." At one point towards the end of the interview Al-Jassem said there was no freedom of speech in Kuwait and that she had to speak in "code." The host argued that she was free to "say whatever you want," to which Dr Al-Jassem replied, "No, I can't." She said that she was "aware of the things that I am allowed and not allowed to say." The discussion also touched on a wide-range of other issues, including gender segregation at universities. Dr Al-Jassem said this was "totally unnecessary" and that "the purpose of … segregation was to impose control over society", as the niqab was. As a result of her comments in the interview calls were made for her dismissal from Kuwait University and she told the BBC that she received "terrifying" abuse from Islamists in Kuwait and Saudi Arabia. If charges are pressed Dr Al-Jassem could face a year in prison and/or a fine equivalent to more than £2000. The End Blasphemy Laws campaign said that the Kuwaiti government has been "actively enforcing" blasphemy and anti-apostasy laws and that recent years have "seen a notable crack-down on freedom of expression in the country."
	All Noah’s Ark theme park staff must “profess Christ as their saviour” News \| Thu, 21st Apr 2016 All workers at the Kentucky 'replica' of Noah's Ark – including cleaners and ticket staff – will have to sign a statement "professing Christ as their saviour"; after a judge ruled that the park can discriminate even though it benefits from tax incentives. A US District Court found that Ark Encounters is allowed to have a religious requirement for its employees, and the group has said that all employees, regardless of their role, will have to sign statements affirming evangelical Christian beliefs. "We're requiring them to be Christians, that's the bottom line," said Ken Ham, founder of Answers in Genesis, the ministry behind the attraction. 400 posts will be advertised and Ham said that all applicants will have to sign the documents after the judge ruled that the theme park can "choose to hire people who adhere to certain religious beliefs while still being in compliance with state and federal law". Ham, described on the Ark Encounter's website as "the visionary" behind the theme park, complained that attempts to stop the group benefiting from tax exemptions were "blatantly violating our rights under the federal and state constitutions, as well as the federal Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the Kentucky Civil Rights Act." He complained that these efforts represented discrimination against Christian groups – before welcoming the fact that his park can now discriminate against non-Creationists. The president of the Kentucky Paleontological Society, Dan Phelps, questioned if Ham would discriminate against non-creationist Christians. Americans United for Separation of Church and State said on the case: "Officials were warm to the idea at first, but they soured on the Ark Park after it became clear that Ham intended to restrict hiring to members of his own faith and use the attraction to evangelize visitors. They announced that Ham's project didn't qualify for funding. "Americans United has said all along that Ham has the right to open the Ark Park attraction – with his own money. Indeed, if Ham's followers thought the park was a good idea, they would have dug deep into their pockets to make it a reality. That is how religion has traditionally been funded in the United States – through the voluntary donations of the faithful. "Unfortunately, Ham and some others have decided to go down another route. When the believers don't come through, they look to the taxpayer for help." NSS Campaigns Director Stephen Evans said: "This demonstrates the absurdity of allowing broad religious exemptions to employment and equality law. Unless the requirement to have a particular religion or belief is genuinely necessary to do a particular job, no employer should be permitted to discriminate in this way. "Of course, it's not only in America where such unjustifiable discrimination occurs. Many state funded schools in the UK can place religious requirements on teaching posts without any legitimate reason for doing so. You hardly need to be a practicing Catholic to teach maths in a faith school."

Newsline 22 April 2016

News, Blogs & Opinion

Quotes of the Week

Essays of the Week

Upcoming Events

Sign up for our newsletter