Newsline 25 November 2016

There isn't long until the Government's consultation on expanding faith school discrimination closes. Be sure to respond and speak out against these deeply damaging plans. Our message for the Government is clear: don't expand religious discrimination - end it.

If you are a member we look forward to seeing you tomorrow at our AGM. If you aren't, join us today!

News, Blogs & Opinion

	Britain has “turned a blind eye” to abuse of women by sharia ‘courts’ News \| Wed, 23rd Nov 2016 Powerful testimony from Muslim women has been published by MPs on the Home Affairs Committee as part of their investigation into sharia, while activists have warned that its approach so far has favoured those who support sharia councils. Submissions received from Muslim women on their experiences of sharia 'law' have now been published by the Committee. The evidence was gathered by One Law For All, who sent the personal testimonies to the committee for their investigation into sharia 'law' in the UK. One woman whose evidence was included for the Select Committee's consideration is Habiba Jan who was trapped in an abusive Islamic 'marriage' and was unable to escape without a sharia 'divorce'. Jan ended up being referred to Anjem Choudary for a 'divorce', without knowing who he was. Jan asked the committee, "Now as a women's right activist, I am alarmed that I had been sitting with a Jihadi extremist who wants Sharia law to take over this country, a misogynist. He is a dangerous man; how many more like him are running these mosques or sharia courts that women who are escaping forced marriages and domestic violence from, have to use?" She warned that "many" imams who pose as "moderate clerics" allow polygamous marriages, "leaving Muslim women with no rights." "The state has ignored the abuse that goes on in our communities," she wrote, adding that the state was "turning a blind eye". Meanwhile activists and groups including the National Secular Society have criticised the approach taken by the Select Committee. During a recent hearing of the Home Affairs Select Committee to gather evidence for their inquiry, committee member Naz Shah MP said: "the people I have been talking to in the last 24 hours have told me that there is an air of Islamophobia and racism about this whole debate" about sharia. Ms Shah also accused witness Maryam Namazie, a secularist campaigner who was recently awarded the International Secularism Prize by the French Prime Minister Manuel Valls, and who was named Secularist of the Year in 2005, of wanting to discriminate against all religious believers. During the hearing Shah claimed of Namazie: "If we were to look at implementing your view of the world, the majority of discrimination would be faced by the 33 million Christians of this country because you would have away with Christianity and any religious institutions". Keith Porteous Wood, executive director of the National Secular Society, wrote to the chair of the Home Affairs Committee Yvette Cooper MP that Shah's comments were "a bizarre and totally unjustified portrayal of Ms Namazie's secularist worldview. "Secularism seeks to ensure and protect freedom of religious belief and practice for all citizens. It does not seek to challenge the tenets of any particular religion or belief, neither does it seek to impose atheism on anyone. "We regard Ms Shah's questioning as being emblematic of a view that treats anyone with concerns about sharia with suspicion. It is wrong to insist that only Muslims can talk about sharia, and that only Muslims can fix it. Wider society, non-Muslims and ex-Muslims all have legitimate concerns and the right to articulate them." While Muslim women can be "powerful advocates on the need to challenge sharia codes," Mr Wood wrote, "There are serious problems in limiting the conversation around sharia to Muslim women alone." Several other campaign groups complained about the nature of the Select Committee's hearing. Southall Black Sisters, the Iranian and Kurdish Women's Rights Organisation, the Centre for Secular Space, One Law for All, British Muslims for Secular Democracy and the Culture Project wrote that the evidence session was "highly unbalanced and weighted in favour of those who support Sharia Councils".
	Bangladeshi society being destroyed by Islamic fundamentalism, says exiled writer News \| Thu, 24th Nov 2016 Exiled Bangladeshi writer Taslima Nasreen, who lives under constant protection, has told AFP that Islamic fundamentalism has destroyed Bangladeshi society. Nasreen said that in the 1980s she "wrote about Islamic fundamentalists. I said that they should not go unopposed or they will destroy our society, that's exactly what's happened now. "Islamisation started in Bangladesh in the 1980s and in the 80s I was very worried." Several fatwas were issued calling for her death for secular writing, and Nasreen has not returned to Bangladesh in over twenty years. There has been a spate of killings in Bangladesh, with secular writers targeted by Islamists and attacked with machetes. Nasreen said that the current government had failed to respond strongly enough to the attacks. The father of one murdered writer said the government was showing "silent support" for the killings. "I am very worried. Bangladesh was born as a secular state but now it's a kind of fundamentalist state," Nasreen said to AFP. But now "Islamic fundamentalists are very powerful, they can kill anyone if they want. "And because those atheist bloggers criticise Islam ― they criticise other religions too ― but because they criticised Islam they were hacked to death and the government didn't take any action against those killers." The writer said that she was used to living under guard with persistent death threats. "I think I've got used to it, you have to. "You cannot think of death all the time, then it's not a living. If I think of death all the time then I would not have been able to write so many books. "Of course every time a fatwa is issued I get shocked, I get sad, I get scared and then you know you have to live your everyday life." Discussing Islamist attacks on secular writers and the attack on Charlie Hebdo, Nasreen said that "Freedom of expression cannot exist without the right to offend." "Many of my books, people say they hurt their religious feelings. "But I think that if we believe in freedom of expression then we should believe also that everybody should have the right to express their opinions and everybody has the right to offend others and nobody has the right to live their entire life without being offended." Nasreen recently published In Exile: A Memoir See also: 2015: A year of terror for Bangladesh's secularist writers
	Record numbers attending Jewish faith schools as Orthodox numbers grow News \| Mon, 21st Nov 2016 Almost two-thirds of Jewish children in Britain attend Jewish faith schools, the majority of which are "strictly Orthodox", according to new research. A report published by the Board of Deputies and the Institute for Jewish Policy Research found that Jewish pupils are disproportionately more likely to attend a faith school than non-Jewish children. 63% of Jewish schoolchildren attend a faith school, compared to one in four of all children in the UK. The Chief Executive of the Board of Deputies Gillian Merron said the growth in Jewish schools was "huge". The report, 'The rise and rise of Jewish schools in the United Kingdom', found that "Both the number of Jewish schools and the number of Jewish pupils in these schools have almost doubled since the mid-1990s." Despite a "declining Jewish population" in the UK between the 1950s and the present day, the percentage of Jewish parents sending their children to a Jewish faith school has dramatically increased, the research found. "Whereas one in five children attended Jewish schools in the 1970s, today the proportion is about two-thirds," the report notes. Among the most striking of the research's findings was the dominance of ultra-Orthodox schools. Many more Jewish children are enrolled in "strictly Orthodox" than what the authors call "mainstream" Jewish faith schools. "Of the 30,900 Jewish children enrolled in Jewish schools across the United Kingdom in the academic year 2014/15, 13,400 were in mainstream Jewish schools and 17,500 were in strictly Orthodox Jewish schools," the report found. Ultra-Orthodox Jewish schools overwhelmingly outnumber "mainstream" schools, with 97 "strictly Orthodox" schools compared with 42 "mainstream" ones. The report also noted that "as children age in the strictly Orthodox sector, they become increasingly unlikely to be found within the registered school system." "About half of strictly Orthodox boys aged 11-15 years do not appear in the strictly Orthodox school system," the research found. The authors of the report also warned that "there is little discussion about the effects of the concurrent decline in the number of Jews in non-Jewish schools". The Board of Deputies had been lobbying the Government to remove the 50% faith-based admissions cap on new faith academies for some time. When Government plans to remove the cap were announced Vice President of the Board of Deputies, Sheila Gewolb, said: "We have been advocating for this for some time ... We look forward to working with the Government to enable more Jewish free schools to open and developing more effective means of their contributing to community cohesion." NSS campaigns director Stephen Evans said, "It is worrying to see segregation on such a large scale of Jewish children away from children of other backgrounds. It is very hard to see how this helps to build an integrated and cohesive society. If as a society we are to break down the barriers that too often divide us, children need more contact with their peers from other backgrounds, not more division."
	Clerics shouldn’t be the gatekeepers to publicly funded schools Opinion \| Fri, 25th Nov 2016 A progressive education policy would seek to break down barriers between people of different faiths and beliefs, not erect them, writes NSS campaigns director Stephen Evans. The schools adjudicator recently ruled against a new policy across all Catholic schools under which priests certify on a pupil-by-pupil basis whether a family is sufficiently pious for the pupil to merit a place at the local Catholic school. So incensed is the Catholic church that it is considering taking the Government's schools admissions watchdog to court to protect the rights of priests to decide who can, or cannot, attend the local Catholic controlled school. Under the policy parents wishing to apply for a school place are forced to obtain a Certificate of Catholic Practice (CCP), signed by a priest, to prove that their child is from a practising Catholic family. This arbitrary approach clearly falls foul of the Admissions Code which requires admissions arrangements to be "fair, clear and objective". As one of the objectors pointed out, the CCP could lead to different priests applying different measures of practice. That said, other mechanisms of proving your religious credentials are no less problematic. It's equally unfair to demand that parents regularly attend church in order for their children to attend the local school. This has resulted in many middle-class parents pretending to be religious in order to manipulate the system and get a place at their school. One oversubscribed Church of England school in Lancashire is now considering insisting that parents attend worship for a minimum of two years in order secure a place. I'm sure this helps prop up church attendance figures, but where does this leave Justin Welby's claim that church schools must be "places of welcome for all, not cosy clubs for Anglicans"? The relationship between religious adherence and school admissions in a liberal, secular democracy like Britain is an outrage that needs to end. Yet the Government's regressive plans to open a new wave of fully religiously selective schools means we can look forward to a lot more religious discrimination in years to come. Department for Education guidance on 'promoting fundamental British values' calls it "unacceptable" for schools to "promote discrimination against people or groups on the basis of their belief, opinion or background". I quite agree. But by dropping the 50% faith-based admissions cap, this is exactly the sort of discrimination that the Government is promoting. Perhaps Ofsted should consider putting the Government under special measures until it adequately promotes its own fundamental British values? At the same time, the dropping of the 50% faith-based admissions cap will pave the way for yet more mono-religious and often mono-ethnic minority faith schools, which we all know will be disaster for social cohesion. If our multi-racial, multi-cultural, increasingly secularised yet religiously diverse society is to succeed, pupils from an early age are going to need to learn to live respectfully and harmoniously alongside one another. You don't achieve that by fetishising faith and segregating children based on their religious background. The collaboration between religion and state goes back a long way in Britain. What seemed reasonable and sensible in the 19^th century today leads to division and discrimination. A progressive education policy would seek to break down barriers between people of different faiths and beliefs, not erect them. Theresa May's plan to open up a new wave of discriminatory religious schools embodies retrograde thinking and sustains religious privilege. The National Secular Society's message to Theresa May is clear. Don't extend religious discrimination and segregation in schools – end it.
	It’s blasphemy to oppose having prayers in meetings, blasts councillor News \| Fri, 25th Nov 2016 A Cheadle town councillor has rejected objections to the council holding prayers in its meetings, saying it was blasphemous to deny that the UK was a "Christian country". A local resident had written to Cheadle Town Council to object to the saying of prayers during meetings. Chris Addis wrote: "I attended a town council meeting in September as an observer, interested particularly in the future of the hospital. "I was very disturbed to discover that at the commencement of the meeting all those present were asked to stand and share a moment of prayer." Mr Addis said it was a "huge presumption" to assume that "every person in the room subscribes to the same religious viewpoint. "We know that cannot be the case. Ours is a multi-ethnic society which hosts a variety of outlooks and religious beliefs." He wrote that it was a "fact that some people in the room will be made uncomfortable by this request to stand and pray" and accused the council of failing to accept that the UK was no longer a majority Christian country. "Are council members happy that their decision to open the proceedings with prayer will make some uncomfortable?" Mr Addis asked. "Britain is not a 'Christian country'. The label is and always has been incorrect, because it implies that every subject is, by choice, a Christian. "In 2016 many UK residents are Christians, many are not. "I am aware of the legal ruling following the Secular Society's complaint against Bideford Town Council, and of the March 2015 debates in the House of Lords. "But I would ask you to ensure that Council members are aware that in opening the meeting with a prayer they are making some members of the public uncomfortable." According to the local paper, Councillor Ian Whitehouse reacted to the letter by saying, "I don't agree that Britain isn't a Christian country; that's blasphemy." "I propose we keep the prayer and the Mayor can say if anyone doesn't want to take part they can leave," he suggested. Several other councillors agreed that the council should not change its policy on holding a prayer in meetings. "Once we let the tail wag the dog it's a downward slope," said Councillor Gary Bentley. NSS campaigns director Stephen Evans said "This is by far the strangest set of arguments we've heard in favour of local authorities having official prayers in their meetings. Meetings should be welcoming to all; they are not opportunities to force religious beliefs on others."
	Evangelical ‘shoebox’ scheme faces legal challenge in American schools News \| Thu, 24th Nov 2016 The American Humanist Association has filed a lawsuit in Colorado to challenge 'Operation Christmas Child', an evangelical charity scheme, being promoted by public schools. Samaritan's Purse, which organises Operation Christmas Child, is run by Franklin Graham, son of evangelist Billy Graham. In 2015 Graham backed Donald Trump's proposal to bar Muslims from entering the United States. The scheme supports "the advancement of the Christian faith through educational projects and the relief of poverty" and uses the shoeboxes to proselytise and promote a literalist, hard-line interpretation of Christianity. David Niose, the legal director of the American Humanist Association (AHA) said: "As taxpaying citizens with children in the school district, these families object to their schools supporting the efforts of Christian missions to convert children in developing countries. "Pressuring students to participate in religious programs in their public schools flies in the face of the separation of church and state that the Establishment Clause demands." The AHA initially filed the lawsuit against a school district in 2014, on behalf of local parents. The scheme has faced international criticism and the National Secular Society has raised objections to the scheme in the UK, and regularly advises parents and schools on alternative charitable projects to support instead of the Shoebox Appeal. NSS campaigns director Stephen Evans said the scheme was a "Trojan horse to use people's goodwill and generosity to fund the spreading of literalist Christianity." "It really is a deeply unethical and wholly inefficient way of providing aid. We would always urge schools, clubs and workplaces to find alternative ways of assisting children in need." The London School of Economics (LSE) recently distanced itself from Operation Christmas Child after the NSS raised a number of concerns about its promotion of the scheme in previous years. The LSE said it had previously been run by the REJOICE staff network, but that there were no plans to run the same campaign this year. Last year Girlguiding UK confirmed to the NSS that it "does not support the Samaritan's Purse Operation Christmas Child initiative" and that it would not be encouraging groups to support the scheme. A school in Buckingham has also decided to end its association with the scheme, after an NSS member raised concerns about the organisation's anti-LGBT agenda. Once information was bought to the school's attention senior management agreed that Samaritan's Purse was "not an appropriate organisation for the school to be involved with". Although it was too late for the school to change scheme this year, they have said there will be no further collaboration with the organisation, and are looking into more appropriate charitable projects to support next Christmas. See also: Advice for parents on the ethical, educational and efficiency case against the Samaritan's Purse Operation Christmas Child

NSS Speaks Out

NSS president Terry Sanderson spoke on Premier Christian Radio about the importance of protecting equality laws from calls for religious exemptions. Our executive director Keith Porteous Wood was quoted in The Hindu on the need to outlaw discrimination based on caste.

Quote of the Week

"If we don't want extremists to take over our country and turn it into their own personal kingdom, if we don't want them to sit on thrones shouting "off with their heads" every time someone opens their mouth, if we don't want to see the literal version of Game of Thrones around us, secularism is the only way to ensure that does not happen."
Shamila Ghyas, Pakistani blogger, writer and human rights activist.

Essay of the Week

Book Review: 'The Battle For British Islam'.
Terri Murray, Conatus News.

Upcoming Events

NSS Annual General Meeting - members only event

Sat, 26th Nov 2016

International Conference on Freedom of Conscience and Expression in the 21st Century

Sat, 22nd Jul 2017

	Britain has “turned a blind eye” to abuse of women by sharia ‘courts’ News \| Wed, 23rd Nov 2016 Powerful testimony from Muslim women has been published by MPs on the Home Affairs Committee as part of their investigation into sharia, while activists have warned that its approach so far has favoured those who support sharia councils. Submissions received from Muslim women on their experiences of sharia 'law' have now been published by the Committee. The evidence was gathered by One Law For All, who sent the personal testimonies to the committee for their investigation into sharia 'law' in the UK. One woman whose evidence was included for the Select Committee's consideration is Habiba Jan who was trapped in an abusive Islamic 'marriage' and was unable to escape without a sharia 'divorce'. Jan ended up being referred to Anjem Choudary for a 'divorce', without knowing who he was. Jan asked the committee, "Now as a women's right activist, I am alarmed that I had been sitting with a Jihadi extremist who wants Sharia law to take over this country, a misogynist. He is a dangerous man; how many more like him are running these mosques or sharia courts that women who are escaping forced marriages and domestic violence from, have to use?" She warned that "many" imams who pose as "moderate clerics" allow polygamous marriages, "leaving Muslim women with no rights." "The state has ignored the abuse that goes on in our communities," she wrote, adding that the state was "turning a blind eye". Meanwhile activists and groups including the National Secular Society have criticised the approach taken by the Select Committee. During a recent hearing of the Home Affairs Select Committee to gather evidence for their inquiry, committee member Naz Shah MP said: "the people I have been talking to in the last 24 hours have told me that there is an air of Islamophobia and racism about this whole debate" about sharia. Ms Shah also accused witness Maryam Namazie, a secularist campaigner who was recently awarded the International Secularism Prize by the French Prime Minister Manuel Valls, and who was named Secularist of the Year in 2005, of wanting to discriminate against all religious believers. During the hearing Shah claimed of Namazie: "If we were to look at implementing your view of the world, the majority of discrimination would be faced by the 33 million Christians of this country because you would have away with Christianity and any religious institutions". Keith Porteous Wood, executive director of the National Secular Society, wrote to the chair of the Home Affairs Committee Yvette Cooper MP that Shah's comments were "a bizarre and totally unjustified portrayal of Ms Namazie's secularist worldview. "Secularism seeks to ensure and protect freedom of religious belief and practice for all citizens. It does not seek to challenge the tenets of any particular religion or belief, neither does it seek to impose atheism on anyone. "We regard Ms Shah's questioning as being emblematic of a view that treats anyone with concerns about sharia with suspicion. It is wrong to insist that only Muslims can talk about sharia, and that only Muslims can fix it. Wider society, non-Muslims and ex-Muslims all have legitimate concerns and the right to articulate them." While Muslim women can be "powerful advocates on the need to challenge sharia codes," Mr Wood wrote, "There are serious problems in limiting the conversation around sharia to Muslim women alone." Several other campaign groups complained about the nature of the Select Committee's hearing. Southall Black Sisters, the Iranian and Kurdish Women's Rights Organisation, the Centre for Secular Space, One Law for All, British Muslims for Secular Democracy and the Culture Project wrote that the evidence session was "highly unbalanced and weighted in favour of those who support Sharia Councils".
	Bangladeshi society being destroyed by Islamic fundamentalism, says exiled writer News \| Thu, 24th Nov 2016 Exiled Bangladeshi writer Taslima Nasreen, who lives under constant protection, has told AFP that Islamic fundamentalism has destroyed Bangladeshi society. Nasreen said that in the 1980s she "wrote about Islamic fundamentalists. I said that they should not go unopposed or they will destroy our society, that's exactly what's happened now. "Islamisation started in Bangladesh in the 1980s and in the 80s I was very worried." Several fatwas were issued calling for her death for secular writing, and Nasreen has not returned to Bangladesh in over twenty years. There has been a spate of killings in Bangladesh, with secular writers targeted by Islamists and attacked with machetes. Nasreen said that the current government had failed to respond strongly enough to the attacks. The father of one murdered writer said the government was showing "silent support" for the killings. "I am very worried. Bangladesh was born as a secular state but now it's a kind of fundamentalist state," Nasreen said to AFP. But now "Islamic fundamentalists are very powerful, they can kill anyone if they want. "And because those atheist bloggers criticise Islam ― they criticise other religions too ― but because they criticised Islam they were hacked to death and the government didn't take any action against those killers." The writer said that she was used to living under guard with persistent death threats. "I think I've got used to it, you have to. "You cannot think of death all the time, then it's not a living. If I think of death all the time then I would not have been able to write so many books. "Of course every time a fatwa is issued I get shocked, I get sad, I get scared and then you know you have to live your everyday life." Discussing Islamist attacks on secular writers and the attack on Charlie Hebdo, Nasreen said that "Freedom of expression cannot exist without the right to offend." "Many of my books, people say they hurt their religious feelings. "But I think that if we believe in freedom of expression then we should believe also that everybody should have the right to express their opinions and everybody has the right to offend others and nobody has the right to live their entire life without being offended." Nasreen recently published In Exile: A Memoir See also: 2015: A year of terror for Bangladesh's secularist writers
	Record numbers attending Jewish faith schools as Orthodox numbers grow News \| Mon, 21st Nov 2016 Almost two-thirds of Jewish children in Britain attend Jewish faith schools, the majority of which are "strictly Orthodox", according to new research. A report published by the Board of Deputies and the Institute for Jewish Policy Research found that Jewish pupils are disproportionately more likely to attend a faith school than non-Jewish children. 63% of Jewish schoolchildren attend a faith school, compared to one in four of all children in the UK. The Chief Executive of the Board of Deputies Gillian Merron said the growth in Jewish schools was "huge". The report, 'The rise and rise of Jewish schools in the United Kingdom', found that "Both the number of Jewish schools and the number of Jewish pupils in these schools have almost doubled since the mid-1990s." Despite a "declining Jewish population" in the UK between the 1950s and the present day, the percentage of Jewish parents sending their children to a Jewish faith school has dramatically increased, the research found. "Whereas one in five children attended Jewish schools in the 1970s, today the proportion is about two-thirds," the report notes. Among the most striking of the research's findings was the dominance of ultra-Orthodox schools. Many more Jewish children are enrolled in "strictly Orthodox" than what the authors call "mainstream" Jewish faith schools. "Of the 30,900 Jewish children enrolled in Jewish schools across the United Kingdom in the academic year 2014/15, 13,400 were in mainstream Jewish schools and 17,500 were in strictly Orthodox Jewish schools," the report found. Ultra-Orthodox Jewish schools overwhelmingly outnumber "mainstream" schools, with 97 "strictly Orthodox" schools compared with 42 "mainstream" ones. The report also noted that "as children age in the strictly Orthodox sector, they become increasingly unlikely to be found within the registered school system." "About half of strictly Orthodox boys aged 11-15 years do not appear in the strictly Orthodox school system," the research found. The authors of the report also warned that "there is little discussion about the effects of the concurrent decline in the number of Jews in non-Jewish schools". The Board of Deputies had been lobbying the Government to remove the 50% faith-based admissions cap on new faith academies for some time. When Government plans to remove the cap were announced Vice President of the Board of Deputies, Sheila Gewolb, said: "We have been advocating for this for some time ... We look forward to working with the Government to enable more Jewish free schools to open and developing more effective means of their contributing to community cohesion." NSS campaigns director Stephen Evans said, "It is worrying to see segregation on such a large scale of Jewish children away from children of other backgrounds. It is very hard to see how this helps to build an integrated and cohesive society. If as a society we are to break down the barriers that too often divide us, children need more contact with their peers from other backgrounds, not more division."
	Clerics shouldn’t be the gatekeepers to publicly funded schools Opinion \| Fri, 25th Nov 2016 A progressive education policy would seek to break down barriers between people of different faiths and beliefs, not erect them, writes NSS campaigns director Stephen Evans. The schools adjudicator recently ruled against a new policy across all Catholic schools under which priests certify on a pupil-by-pupil basis whether a family is sufficiently pious for the pupil to merit a place at the local Catholic school. So incensed is the Catholic church that it is considering taking the Government's schools admissions watchdog to court to protect the rights of priests to decide who can, or cannot, attend the local Catholic controlled school. Under the policy parents wishing to apply for a school place are forced to obtain a Certificate of Catholic Practice (CCP), signed by a priest, to prove that their child is from a practising Catholic family. This arbitrary approach clearly falls foul of the Admissions Code which requires admissions arrangements to be "fair, clear and objective". As one of the objectors pointed out, the CCP could lead to different priests applying different measures of practice. That said, other mechanisms of proving your religious credentials are no less problematic. It's equally unfair to demand that parents regularly attend church in order for their children to attend the local school. This has resulted in many middle-class parents pretending to be religious in order to manipulate the system and get a place at their school. One oversubscribed Church of England school in Lancashire is now considering insisting that parents attend worship for a minimum of two years in order secure a place. I'm sure this helps prop up church attendance figures, but where does this leave Justin Welby's claim that church schools must be "places of welcome for all, not cosy clubs for Anglicans"? The relationship between religious adherence and school admissions in a liberal, secular democracy like Britain is an outrage that needs to end. Yet the Government's regressive plans to open a new wave of fully religiously selective schools means we can look forward to a lot more religious discrimination in years to come. Department for Education guidance on 'promoting fundamental British values' calls it "unacceptable" for schools to "promote discrimination against people or groups on the basis of their belief, opinion or background". I quite agree. But by dropping the 50% faith-based admissions cap, this is exactly the sort of discrimination that the Government is promoting. Perhaps Ofsted should consider putting the Government under special measures until it adequately promotes its own fundamental British values? At the same time, the dropping of the 50% faith-based admissions cap will pave the way for yet more mono-religious and often mono-ethnic minority faith schools, which we all know will be disaster for social cohesion. If our multi-racial, multi-cultural, increasingly secularised yet religiously diverse society is to succeed, pupils from an early age are going to need to learn to live respectfully and harmoniously alongside one another. You don't achieve that by fetishising faith and segregating children based on their religious background. The collaboration between religion and state goes back a long way in Britain. What seemed reasonable and sensible in the 19^th century today leads to division and discrimination. A progressive education policy would seek to break down barriers between people of different faiths and beliefs, not erect them. Theresa May's plan to open up a new wave of discriminatory religious schools embodies retrograde thinking and sustains religious privilege. The National Secular Society's message to Theresa May is clear. Don't extend religious discrimination and segregation in schools – end it.
	It’s blasphemy to oppose having prayers in meetings, blasts councillor News \| Fri, 25th Nov 2016 A Cheadle town councillor has rejected objections to the council holding prayers in its meetings, saying it was blasphemous to deny that the UK was a "Christian country". A local resident had written to Cheadle Town Council to object to the saying of prayers during meetings. Chris Addis wrote: "I attended a town council meeting in September as an observer, interested particularly in the future of the hospital. "I was very disturbed to discover that at the commencement of the meeting all those present were asked to stand and share a moment of prayer." Mr Addis said it was a "huge presumption" to assume that "every person in the room subscribes to the same religious viewpoint. "We know that cannot be the case. Ours is a multi-ethnic society which hosts a variety of outlooks and religious beliefs." He wrote that it was a "fact that some people in the room will be made uncomfortable by this request to stand and pray" and accused the council of failing to accept that the UK was no longer a majority Christian country. "Are council members happy that their decision to open the proceedings with prayer will make some uncomfortable?" Mr Addis asked. "Britain is not a 'Christian country'. The label is and always has been incorrect, because it implies that every subject is, by choice, a Christian. "In 2016 many UK residents are Christians, many are not. "I am aware of the legal ruling following the Secular Society's complaint against Bideford Town Council, and of the March 2015 debates in the House of Lords. "But I would ask you to ensure that Council members are aware that in opening the meeting with a prayer they are making some members of the public uncomfortable." According to the local paper, Councillor Ian Whitehouse reacted to the letter by saying, "I don't agree that Britain isn't a Christian country; that's blasphemy." "I propose we keep the prayer and the Mayor can say if anyone doesn't want to take part they can leave," he suggested. Several other councillors agreed that the council should not change its policy on holding a prayer in meetings. "Once we let the tail wag the dog it's a downward slope," said Councillor Gary Bentley. NSS campaigns director Stephen Evans said "This is by far the strangest set of arguments we've heard in favour of local authorities having official prayers in their meetings. Meetings should be welcoming to all; they are not opportunities to force religious beliefs on others."
	Evangelical ‘shoebox’ scheme faces legal challenge in American schools News \| Thu, 24th Nov 2016 The American Humanist Association has filed a lawsuit in Colorado to challenge 'Operation Christmas Child', an evangelical charity scheme, being promoted by public schools. Samaritan's Purse, which organises Operation Christmas Child, is run by Franklin Graham, son of evangelist Billy Graham. In 2015 Graham backed Donald Trump's proposal to bar Muslims from entering the United States. The scheme supports "the advancement of the Christian faith through educational projects and the relief of poverty" and uses the shoeboxes to proselytise and promote a literalist, hard-line interpretation of Christianity. David Niose, the legal director of the American Humanist Association (AHA) said: "As taxpaying citizens with children in the school district, these families object to their schools supporting the efforts of Christian missions to convert children in developing countries. "Pressuring students to participate in religious programs in their public schools flies in the face of the separation of church and state that the Establishment Clause demands." The AHA initially filed the lawsuit against a school district in 2014, on behalf of local parents. The scheme has faced international criticism and the National Secular Society has raised objections to the scheme in the UK, and regularly advises parents and schools on alternative charitable projects to support instead of the Shoebox Appeal. NSS campaigns director Stephen Evans said the scheme was a "Trojan horse to use people's goodwill and generosity to fund the spreading of literalist Christianity." "It really is a deeply unethical and wholly inefficient way of providing aid. We would always urge schools, clubs and workplaces to find alternative ways of assisting children in need." The London School of Economics (LSE) recently distanced itself from Operation Christmas Child after the NSS raised a number of concerns about its promotion of the scheme in previous years. The LSE said it had previously been run by the REJOICE staff network, but that there were no plans to run the same campaign this year. Last year Girlguiding UK confirmed to the NSS that it "does not support the Samaritan's Purse Operation Christmas Child initiative" and that it would not be encouraging groups to support the scheme. A school in Buckingham has also decided to end its association with the scheme, after an NSS member raised concerns about the organisation's anti-LGBT agenda. Once information was bought to the school's attention senior management agreed that Samaritan's Purse was "not an appropriate organisation for the school to be involved with". Although it was too late for the school to change scheme this year, they have said there will be no further collaboration with the organisation, and are looking into more appropriate charitable projects to support next Christmas. See also: Advice for parents on the ethical, educational and efficiency case against the Samaritan's Purse Operation Christmas Child