Newsline 26 April 2013

Newsline 26 April 2013

Becoming a member of the National Secular Society is a declaration of your support for the separation of the state from religious institutions. Make a stand for freedom, fairness and human rights by adding your voice to the call for a secular society. Join today.

Read this week's Newsline in full (PDF)

News, Blogs & Opinion

Victory for campaigners as Government outlaws caste discrimination

News | Tue, 23rd Apr 2013

The National Secular Society has welcomed news that the Government has climbed down following its defeat last night in the House of Lords and agreed to make discrimination on grounds of caste unlawful.

On Monday evening (22 April) peers voted to retain their original amendment making caste a protected characteristic (as an aspect of race) under equality law via a new clause in the Enterprise and Regulatory Reform Bill. The vote was won by 181 votes to 168.

The Government has now conceded on the principle and has tabled an amendment which requires the Secretary of State to bring forward regulations to include caste as an aspect of race (under Section 9(5) of the Equality Act).

Last week the Commons voted to reject the amendment by 64 votes. Earlier the peers had voted in favour of the amendment by 103 votes.

Keith Porteous Wood, executive director of the National Secular Society, commented: "We are delighted that the Government has committed to ensure that discrimination against caste will enjoy the same statutory protection as other protected characteristics. Too many British citizens have suffered caste based discrimination. Our equality legislation now sends out a clear signal that it will no longer be tolerated, and offers hope to the tens of thousands of British Asians whose lives are blighted by such prejudice.

"The 'Informal conciliation' solution previously proposed by the Government instead of legislation, possibly in deference to high caste (and high influence) Hindus, was woefully inadequate for such deep-seated discrimination that can ruin people's lives.

"We particularly regret the Government's refusal until today to follow the UN's recommendation (pdf) to bring in this legislation, especially as to do so was an international obligation.

"This is a victory for the Lords and their emphasis on protecting Human Rights. Special thanks go to Lord Avebury, Lord Harries of Pentregarth and Baroness Thornton for promoting this cause, which the National Secular Society has been campaigning on for several years since the first world Conference on Untouchability (pdf) in London in 2009.

It is thought the amended law will come into force within one to two years.

For further details on this issue, please see our briefing on caste discrimination (pdf).

Catholic midwives succeed in attempt to extend “conscience” exemption

News | Wed, 24th Apr 2013

Two Catholic midwives have won a legal battle for the right to conscientious exemption from all involvement with abortions.

Mary Doogan and Concepta Wood argued that being required to supervise staff taking part in abortions violated their human rights.

The ruling, which could yet be appealed by Greater Glasgow and Clyde health board, may have wide ramifications for the NHS and for other health staff who oppose abortions on religious grounds.

Giving judgment in a judicial review last year, Lady Smith said: "Nothing they have to do as part of their duties terminates a woman's pregnancy. They are sufficiently removed from direct involvement as, it seems to me, to afford appropriate respect for and accommodation of their beliefs."

However, in a judgement handed down today by Lady Dorrian, sitting with Lord Mackay of Drumadoon and Lord McEwan, the Court of Session ruled : "In our view the right of conscientious objection extends not only to the actual medical or surgical termination but to the whole process of treatment given for that purpose."

Dr Antony Lempert, chair of the Secular Medical forum, said: "Despite their own conscientious objections, these midwives chose to apply for this particular role within their profession. The earlier judgment rightly restrained the limits of conscientious objection to those defined by law and further clarified by Parliament in 1991 and the House of Lords in January 1988.

"Today's judgment could open the door to all manner of objections by professional staff who might now feel empowered to refuse to participate in a wide variety of tasks far removed from the treatment of a patient. It should be the responsibility of the healthcare professional to apply only for roles which are not in direct conflict with their personal beliefs. Where the two do come into conflict, service provision should never be constrained by the personal views of professionals.

"By so broadly extending the practical limits of conscientious objection, the practical effect is likely to be service disruption and compromised patient care. It may become increasingly difficult for NHS provider organisations to ensure that service provision can be maintained. Patients, who do not have the luxury of choosing when they might need to seek medical help, may be disadvantaged."

In a statement, the NHS Greater Glasgow and Clyde health board said: "We note the outcome of the appeal and will be considering our options with our legal advisers over the next few days."

Why are children being forced into faith schools?

Opinion | Thu, 25th Apr 2013

By Stephen Evans, Campaigns Manager, National Secular Society

When primary school places were allocated in England last week, around sixty thousand families missed out on their first choice of school. For some parents, this meant their children being placed in a 'faith' school – often against their wishes.

In one of the more farcical cases, non-religious parents were unsuccessful at securing a place in any of the five community schools they listed as preferences – and have instead been allocated a place for their son at an Orthodox Jewish School that aims to 'promote religious beliefs and practices fostering a pride in their Jewish identity'.

Naturally, this isn't the kind of education they had in mind for their son.

Then consider that the local authority also allocated a child from a Muslim family at this same Jewish school (again against the family's wishes) and you have the makings of a sitcom. But for the parents involved, it really isn't that funny.

The Government argue that the existence of 'faith' schools creates a diversity of provision that offers greater opportunity for parental choice. But for the non-religious, and those not of the dominant Christian faith, the exact opposite is often true.

In many areas, particularly rural locations, schooling with a 'religious' ethos is the only game in town, and parents are left with little choice but to hand their children over to the Church to be educated.

How on earth did we get into the position where a state education system in one of the most secularised nations in the world isn't able to provide parents with a secular education for their children?

Of course, one reason is that in terms of a national system of education, the Church got there first. Its dominance in our schools is a product of historical circumstances – but circumstances have changed radically in the past 50 years. The Church's past role no longer justifies its enormous influence over our education system today.

Around a third of our state funded schools now have a religious ethos – the vast majority Christian. This is juxtaposed against a background of rapidly diminishing religious belief in the UK, which highlights not only how unsustainable and inefficient this is, but importantly, just how inappropriate it all is.

Religiosity in the UK is not only in decline, it is also becoming increasingly diverse. Northern Ireland is a living example of why the least appropriate response to this situation is to create a state education system where religious groups are encouraged and funded to open schools for parents that wish to segregate their children by their religious beliefs. But this is precisely the road successive Governments have gone down.

Conscious of the inherent unfairness of the dominance of Christian church schools within our school system (but unwilling to challenge it), part of the appeal to the Government of the free schools initiative is that it enables religious minorities to open schools that cater specifically to their religious and cultural beliefs.

Minority faith groups are now starting to see the appeal. We've recently seen a flurry of new free schools with a Sikh ethos being proposed. This is unfortunate, because in many ways, Sikhs have been the most successful at fully integrating themselves into British society. The fear is that with a proliferation of single faith schools, this could now be put at risk.

However 'inclusive' these schools claim to be, you can't escape the fact that the intention is to segregate children into religious groups and inculcate them. Even when minority-faith free schools only select 50% of their pupils on faith grounds, the majority of the remaining places are filled with children from that same faith background because only families from that particular faith background find them appealing.

That leaves a mono-religious, and often mono-ethnic school environment that denies children the opportunity to meet and make friends with a mix of people in a secular setting – which is, I would argue, the best preparation for life in modern Britain.

But as Professor Ted Cantle, Chair of the Interculturalism Community Cohesion (iCoCo) Foundation, has pointed out (pdf), this is an issue nobody seems willing to tackle. Partly because it's in the 'too difficult' box, but mostly because of a lack of will and imagination of political leaders to work towards a shared society.

It's already unacceptable that young people's rights are being violated by the law requiring a daily act of (broadly Christian) worship in all state schools. But it is intolerable that as the shortage of primary school places becomes more acute, an increasing number of families are finding the only state education available to them comes with a 'religious ethos' attached.

A report from the National Audit Office last month said an estimated 250,000 new places (mainly primary) will be needed by autumn 2014 to meet rising demand caused by the rising birth rate. Meanwhile, the body that represents London's 33 local authorities says at least 118,000 more state-funded school places will be needed in London alone within the next three years.

These places need to be created in non-selective and inclusive community schools that provide education without feeling the need to push religion on pupils at every possible opportunity – because the fact that we're forcing children into 'faith' schools against the wishes of their parents is nothing short of a national disgrace.

See also: Shared schools report is an opportunity lost

Report recommends directing homeless to church

News | Mon, 22nd Apr 2013

A new report, funded by a number of religious groups and researched and published by Lemos and Crane, recommends that agencies working with homeless people should encourage their clients to go to church and to talk about "faith."

The report, Lost and Found: faith and spirituality in the lives of homeless people is written by Carwyn Gravell and says that homeless people, whether they are being helped by secular or religious organisations, should be told that "religious belief and spiritual practice can help them come to terms with a past characterised by profound loss, enhance the present where time can hang heavy, and create a meaningful future built on hope, fellowship and purpose."

The publishers of the report say: "Britain is commonly described as a secular society. Open expression of faith in public and professional life is largely frowned upon. Yet religion continues to give many people in their private lives significant psychological, social and emotional benefits."

They say that agencies for the homeless hardly ever raise the topic of religion with their clients let alone encourage them to attend a place of worship. "Why this silence on such a powerful source of personal strength and support?" they ask.

The Lemos and Crane website says: "Lost and Found describes the ideological dominance of secular orthodoxy and scientific materialism in mainstream service provision for homeless people and how religion is regarded by many in the sector, including senior commissioners, with atheist views as a subject to be avoided – too personal and intrusive for the client, too time-consuming and difficult to handle for the support worker, and coming with the risk of being misunderstood as an attempt to proselytise."

The publishers, who received funding from the Catholic Archdiocese of Westminster among other religious bodies says the report will be read by hundreds of providers and commissioners on how faith and spirituality should be integrated into the care offered to the homeless. They recommend:

  • Life interviews with clients where faith and spirituality is discussed in the context of reflections on the past, activities and interests in the present, and hopes for the future
  • Establishing closer links with local faith groups and places of worship so that service users who have an active interest in faith can be matched up easily and proactively
  • Setting up spirituality discussion groups for people "of all faiths and no faith" to present a wide range of religious beliefs and practices to satisfy homeless people's incipient demand for fruitful discussion about purpose and meaning in life.

Terry Sanderson, President of the National Secular Society, said: "This reads very much like another step towards 'faith-based welfare'. It all sounds very benign at first sight, but once religion-based care becomes established it rapidly turns from being neutral into being a platform for evangelising. This report tries to convince us that it is not in the business of encouraging proselytising among the homeless and vulnerable, but you don't have to read too far between the lines to see that is exactly what it is about."

Mr Sanderson said that if people have spiritual and religious needs, there are tens of thousands of churches that they can go to of their own free will – they don't have to be directed into them by people they are looking to for welfare services. "When people are dependent on an organisation for a roof over their head, invitation can quickly begin to feel like coercion."

Please visit the Lemos & Crane website to read the full report.

Christian activists just won’t let it go

Opinion | Mon, 22nd Apr 2013

By Terry Sanderson

You've got to give them full marks for sheer bloody-mindedness.

I'm talking about the paranoid Christian activists obsessed with the idea that they are being persecuted in the workplace. They have brought numerous cases to British courts to try to prove this, and all of them have failed. They have been to tribunals, Crown Courts, High Courts, Appeal Courts, the Supreme Court and then the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR). They failed to convince any of them that there was any of the discrimination they claimed.

Instead of just accepting that they were wrong, they are now making a final attempt by applying for a hearing at the Grand Chamber of the European Court of Human Rights – which has the power to overturn ECtHR judgments. But the Grand Chamber hears only very few cases, so the odds are stacked against them getting a hearing.

The papers they have submitted to the court concern the cases of Shirley Chaplin, the nurse who was made to remove a dangling necklace (that happened to have a cross on it) because of health and safety concerns; Gary McFarlane, the Relate counsellor who refused to treat gay couples equally; and Lillian Ladele, the Islington registrar who refused to provide civil partnerships for same-sex couples.

All these cases were rejected by the ECtHR in Strasbourg earlier this year, although in the case of Lillian Ladele, two judges issued a dissenting judgment claiming that "conscience is being sacrificed on the altar of obsessive political correctness".

This time Ms Ladele's lawyers will argue that her case could have "huge implications" regarding whether other workers, such as teachers or social workers, will be forced to "promote" gay marriage after it becomes law.

According to newspaper reports, the trio's representatives will up the already inflated rhetoric, arguing that "British courts are applying double standards towards Christians for 'political' reasons," and that human rights laws have been used to "effectively outlaw beliefs which have been held for millennia while affording special recognition to minority opinions on anything from fox hunting to climate change."

The Daily Telegraph, which has seen the papers that have been submitted, reports that they claim:

"Self-evidently absurd" health and safety rules are being used as a "ruse" to prevent Christians wearing crosses while outward expressions of other faiths are welcomed, they say. An overzealous and one-sided interpretation of rules has brought human rights law itself into disrepute and exposed the British judiciary itself to "ridicule".

In January, the lower chamber of the Strasbourg court ruled in favour of Nadia Eweida, a BA check-in clerk who was told the cross she wore contravened the airline's uniform policy – which has since been changed.

Ms Eweida, and her supporters at the Christian Legal Centre, have since trumpeted this as a "major victory" – but, in fact, nothing has changed. The court ruled in her favour because, in the light of much adverse publicity, BA rapidly changed its policy to accommodate her. The court reasoned that if the airline could change its policy so quickly and easily, it could not have been essential in the first place.

However, crosses can still be banned in the workplace if there is a good reason to do it, one that could be justified in court. That is what happened in the case of Shirley Chaplin. The hospital she worked for ruled that her jewellery posed a health and safety risk, and the court accepted that it was a reasonable justification for asking her to remove it.

In the case of Gary McFarlane, barrister (and master of hyperbole) Paul Diamond argues: "He was dismissed for his 'thoughts' and 'religious beliefs' on a wholly theoretical basis. The case directly raises the question of conscience and 'thought crime'."

The lawyers say in their papers:

"The United Kingdom has an overall good record on human rights; in recent years this has come into sharp contrast due a number of decisions made against Christians.

"Christian views on the upbringing of children by two parents have not been recognised as a religious view at all; whilst views on global warming, fox hunting, and even the BBC as a public broadcaster have been recognised."

Andrea Minichiello Williams, director of the Christian Legal Centre, which is supporting Mr McFarlane and Mrs Chaplin, also increased the volume by saying:

"We are throwing down the gauntlet to David Cameron to decide once and for all whether he is in favour of religious freedom or not. These are cases where the only victims were the Christians trying to live out their faith in the workplace but who were driven out for doing so. As the pleadings in Gary McFarlane's case make clear, Christians are now being punished for 'thought crimes'."

Although it's unlikely that these cases will get a further hearing, we can't be complacent. We have only to look at what happened in the Lautsi case to see that when religion gets into gear it can throw justice off course. But the Lautsi decision was reversed mainly because the Vatican wanted it reversed. I don't think Andrea Minichiello Williams or Paul Diamond have quite the same clout.

Fitnah! Movement for women’s liberation founded

News | Thu, 25th Apr 2013

A new women's liberation group called Fitnah! has been created as a protest movement demanding freedom, equality, and secularism and calling for an end to misogynist cultural, religious and moral laws and customs, compulsory veiling, sex apartheid, sex trafficking, and violence against women.

In its founding statement it says: "We remind the Islamic regime of Iran and Islamists everywhere that the women's liberation movement is a source of fitnah for their rule alone. We are Islamism's worst fitnah!"

Please feel free to publicise and also urge others to join us by signing this petition.

Despite secular constitution, Fiji government won’t rule out prayer at official functions

News | Tue, 23rd Apr 2013

With Fiji set to become a secular state when the new constitution comes into effect, it has been confirmed that "general prayers acceptable to all" will be said in government organised functions.

In the draft constitution, it is clearly stated that religious belief is personal. It said that the State and all persons holding a public office must treat all religions equally and they must not dictate any religious belief.

The draft further said that the State and all persons holding a public office must not prefer or advance, by any means, any particular religion, religious denomination, religious belief or religious practice over another, or over any non-religious belief.

When asked on how the government departments will handle prayers at functions when the constitution is adopted, Acting Prime Minister and Attorney General Aiyaz Sayed-Khaiyum said a prayer can be said that is acceptable to all.

Ninety-nine people convicted of blasphemy in Malta last year

News | Tue, 23rd Apr 2013

A report on human rights around the world from the US Department of State showed that 99 individuals were convicted in Malta last year for "public blasphemy". This was down from 119 the year before.

Maltese law prohibits vilification of or giving offence to the Roman Catholic Church, which is also Malta's official religion. In Malta, it is a criminal offence to utter publicly any obscene or indecent words, make obscene acts or gestures or in any other way offend public morality, propriety or decency.

However, the report was generally positive about the freedom of the press in Malta, saying that the media can express a wide variety of views without restriction.

"The constitution and law provide for freedom of speech and of the press, and the government generally respected these rights. An independent press and a functioning democratic political system combined to ensure freedom of speech and of the press," the report said.

It also pointed out that international media could operate freely and there was no indication of reprisals against individuals for either public or private criticism of the government.

However, the existence of a blasphemy law that is so heavily enforced tells a different story about the rights of individuals to say what is on their mind – particularly if it is about the Catholic Church.

See also: A review of Malta's concordat with the Church is urgent, says MP.

Read this week's Newsline in full (PDF)

NSS Speaks Out

Keith Porteous Wood had this blog on the Politics.co.uk website ahead of the vote on caste discrimination in parliament on Monday. After the Government backed down he was quoted by the BBC, in the Independent, MSN India, Solicitors Journal and Economic Times (India).