Newsline 5 June 2015

New research has again confirmed that around half of the UK's population don't identify with any religious belief: this strengthens the case for a secular state, but we still need your support to press our message home. If you are not already a member, please consider joining today.

This week, the NSS has responded to Tony Blair's ill-judged plans to 'entrench' religion in public life (more on that follows), and we have also covered developments with the Organisation of Islamic Cooperation- who have been warned by a human rights group against pushing once more for a global blasphemy law.

We also reported on the comments of a Christian MP who said that if you despise "Christian values" you should leave the UK. In the same speech Sir Gerald Howarth warned about people imposing "their medieval ways" on the UK.

Overseas, the French education minister has argued that sometimes French secularism is enforced too strongly, while back in the UK a number of secularist bills are set for attention in the House of Lords during the new parliament.

See our top news stories below, but you can also see all of our coverage from the past week on our website.

Top Stories

	NSS criticises Tony Blair’s plans to 'entrench' religion in public life across Europe News \| Thu, 4th Jun 2015 The NSS has criticised Tony Blair's proposals ahead of his appointment as chair of the European Council on Tolerance and Reconciliation (ECTR) as "ill thought out and counter-productive". The former Prime Minister has defended proposals "lowering the barriers to what constitutes incitement to violence" and pan-European plans to make Holocaust denial illegal and to 'entrench' "state funding for religious institutions into law." The NSS is adamant that measures such as 'group libel' would be "counter-productive, have a massive chilling effect on free speech and would be likely to restrict the open debate necessary to resolve problems." Keith Porteous Wood, NSS executive director, said: "Britain already has draconian legislation on religious insults – a possible seven year jail term with a low prosecution threshold. Politicians have already called for the outlawing of Islamophobia, playing into the hands of those intent on closing down honest debate about and within Islam." "There is no need for more laws, and the ones we already have fail to adequately protect freedom of expression. A robust civil society with a deep commitment to free expression is our best hope for challenging and countering bigoted narratives and misguided views. Driving extremist views underground will only allow them to fester and allow their proponents to present themselves as martyrs." Mr Wood continued, "Outlawing Holocaust denial completely undermines the West's defence of freedom of speech at home and abroad and removes our moral authority to propound freedom of expression abroad. No one has the right in a plural society not to be offended and ideas should not be proscribed but people should be defended from incitement to violence. "A European-wide Holocaust denial law would be exhibit A in every response from dictators abroad - and Islamists at home - when we criticise their appalling human rights records or challenge their rhetoric and beliefs." On proposals to require governments to provide security to synagogues and Jewish schools, Mr Wood said: "There is nothing preventing the state from providing security to places of worship where deemed necessary, appropriate and cost effective." "However, imposing pan-European, mandatory security at all places of worship and all Jewish schools is disproportionate. While a European response to extremism is called for, EU member states face a different scale of challenges. It would not be effective to require every EU country to respond in exactly the same way to anti-Semitism when the scope and detail of the issues faced in each nation varies so much." The NSS has also accused Mr Blair of being "confused over the role of religion". "For Mr Blair to dismiss those intent on justifying violence in the name of religion as abusing religion and using it as a mask reveals that his enthusiasm for religion has once more led him to misunderstand one of the roots of this problem. While few would suggest that extremists' interpretations of their faith are mainstream in today's society, it is naïve and counterproductive to deny the role that such interpretations play in their religio-political motivations. "In their eyes, which is all that matters, they are acting with greater fidelity to their religion than anyone, and all the Abrahamic religions have passages in their texts which can be used to justify such violence. "Recognising this harsh and politically unpalatable reality is a condition precedent to even starting to solve the problem", said Mr Wood. The NSS also criticised Mr Blair's proposal to entrench state funding for religious institutions into law. Mr Wood said: "The state should stand separation from religious institutions – not be involved in the funding of them. It's hard to see what justification Mr Blair could have for making such a vague and deeply anti-secular proposal."
	Human rights group warns against global blasphemy law News \| Wed, 3rd Jun 2015 The International Federation for Human Rights (FIDH) has warned the Organisation of Islamic Cooperation (OIC) against pushing once more for a global blasphemy law. Ahead of a conference on combatting religious intolerance, the FIDH has sent out a strong warning against any attempt to ban "defamation of religion". The OIC is to host the conference from 3-4 June 2015, on the 2011 UN resolution about combatting "intolerance, negative stereotyping and stigmatization" of people based on religion and belief. The resolution was aimed at challenging discrimination and "incitement to violence and violence against … persons based on religion or belief". However, there are concerns among human rights and secularist groups that the OIC will use the conference to make another attempt for a global blasphemy law, or for other similar restrictions on criticising and discussing religion. The FIDH say the concept of "defamation of religion" is "incompatible" with human rights. "Religions, like all beliefs, cannot be said to have a reputation of their own", they note. The International Federation for Human Rights said the concept had been "clearly invalidated" and was the "worst option". Additionally, the FIDH warned the OIC that "debates on the border between free speech and hate speech, and on what type of hate speech should be criminalized, already reached conclusions." The FIDH said that any attempt to go beyond current UN agreements "would be tantamount to attempting to criminalize freedom of expression with regard to religious issues." "Open, public debate of ideas (including on religions or beliefs) can include criticism of religion; it cannot be equated with advocacy of religious hatred that constitutes incitement to discrimination, hostility or violence. All religions and beliefs can be subject to criticism, and none is 'shielded' by international law." On the subject of combatting religiously motivated hatred, the FIDH argued that blasphemy laws are "counter-productive" and instead argued that "dialogue, debate, and also criticism, are constructive, healthy and needed". NSS spokesperson Benjamin Jones commented: "Whether it is called a blasphemy law or 'defamation of religion' is largely immaterial: the effect would be the same. It must be opposed if the OIC go down this route again. "We hope that the UN remains committed to the current resolution, which challenges religiously-motivated bigotry and violence, while defending freedom of expression." The FIDH also drew attention to "growing intolerance and numerous incidents of violence against members of minority religious groups or beliefs, including atheists and agnostics". "States that recognize a specific religion or belief as official need to address issues that arise from this situation, in particular the fact that members of religious minorities or free thinkers, atheists and agnostics may be prevented from manifesting their religion or belief for fear of being targeted by state and non-state actors. In this regard, state authorities have not only an obligation to respect the fundamental rights and freedoms of every individual but a duty to protect all individuals from discrimination, hostility and violence, including from non-state actors." At a meeting of the European Parliament Platform for Secularism in Politics in February, NSS executive director Keith Porteous Wood warned against the "15 year project by the Organisation of Islamic Cooperation to have defamation [of religion] made an international law".
	Forced academisation could impose religion on pupils News \| Wed, 3rd Jun 2015 The National Secular Society has warned that proposals to force struggling local authority schools in England to become academies could increase the proportion of faith based schools. The NSS has written to the Education Secretary Nicky Morgan seeking assurances that upon conversion, no non-religiously designated school would be permitted to acquire a religious designation or faith ethos. The Government's new Education and Adoption Bill will force councils and governing bodies to actively progress the conversion of failing schools into academies. Education Secretary Nicky Morgan says the tough new measures intended to turn around failing schools will "sweep away bureaucratic and legal loopholes" that previously prevented schools from being improved. However, the NSS has warned that without adequate safeguards, schools joining faith academy chains could acquire a religious designation or faith ethos upon conversion with no opportunity for parents to object or even be consulted. Stephen Evans, National Secular Society campaigns manager, said: "Plans to scrap the requirement for academy sponsors to consult with school communities, including parents, could result in a faith based education being imposed on parents and young people against their wishes. "Given England's religiously diverse population – around half of which self-identify as non-religious, any increase in the proportion of religiously designated or faith ethos schools is likely to impede parents' ability to secure an education that doesn't run counter to their beliefs. "Forcing a religious ethos on young people through their education would in many cases disrespect their parents' wishes and be at odds with principles of fairness and equality. The Government need to be aware that respecting young people's right to religious freedom and an objective education is part of, and not separate from, looking after their best interests." The NSS has warned that the academisation of local authority controlled schools would increase the risk of faith-based organisations gaining greater control over school curriculums, admissions arrangements and employment practices – leading to even greater discrimination in our education system than already exists. A shortage of school places in many parts country of has already seen parents allocated faith schools against their wishes.
	Don’t ban women drivers – ban faith schools Opinion \| Sat, 30th May 2015 In a pluralist and diverse society, it's an invitation to ignorance for children to be segregated by their parent's religious affiliation – so why, asks Oliver Kamm, is the state entrusting the education of huge numbers of children to religious bodies? Whenever someone is described in the media as a person of faith, there's a dispiriting inevitability that it will be meant as a compliment. So consider the declaration by the Hasidic Belz community in north London that the children of mothers who drive them to school will be turned away at the gates. Women driving is, say the rabbis, "contrary to the rules of religious modesty in our camp". In a cosmopolitan capital city in the 21st century, it takes deep religious conviction to publicly hold women in such contempt. Yet so accustomed are we to the place of religion in public life that we risk overlooking another scandalous aspect of this episode: hundreds of children are being educated at the sect's two north London schools. Ofsted ranks both of them as "good". Did the inspectors ask what the children were being taught about the place of women in society? Or was this deemed a matter of religious choice? Religious liberty is integral to a free society. That means the state has no business conferring privilege on particular viewpoints. Dissenters in the 18th and early 19th centuries fought hard for the repeal of the Test and Corporation Acts, which barred non-Anglicans from public office. Their reasoning influenced Thomas Jefferson, who in 1819 founded the University of Virginia as a secular institution, having no professor of divinity. Yet the education of huge numbers of children is entrusted to religious bodies that can drill them in sectarian doctrines. Publicly funded faith schools make up a third of the primary and secondary education system. We have an established church to which few people listen, let alone belong, yet a quarter of primary schools and one in 16 secondary schools in England are Church of England schools. Periodically, the agendas of some faith schools are exposed as being at odds with the values of tolerance and education. A publicly funded Orthodox Jewish girls' school in London was found in 2013 to have censored exam questions for its pupils on evolution and human reproduction. The exam board had agreed to this on the grounds of sensitivity towards religious belief. Fortunately the exam regulator, Ofqual, has now banned this practice but the case illustrates a ruinous public deference to religion. Faith is a private choice in which the state has no legitimate interest. Parents are entitled to bring their own children up in a way consistent with their beliefs. They are not entitled, however, to shield children from knowledge. That principle is widely accepted. Where science classes are concerned, the Department for Education in England says that it will accept no proposal for an academy or free school that intends to teach creationism. That's right but inadequate. No existing school, of any type, should be permitted to spread beliefs that are intellectually fraudulent, such as hostility to science or a conviction that women don't belong, literally and metaphorically, in the driving seat. And because religious affiliation divides people into groups, faith schools undermine common citizenship under the rule of law. There should be no more publicly funded faith schools. In a pluralist and diverse society, it's an invitation to ignorance for children to be segregated by a characteristic that is, for all civic purposes, totally irrelevant. While faith schools exist and get public funding, they should have no ability to select children according to the religion of the parents. Above all, policymakers should recognise that the ethos of faith is, by definition, hostile to learning. It is long past time to get it out of the classroom. Oliver Kamm is a leader writer and columnist for The Times. This article was originally published inThe Timesand is reproduced here with kind permission. The views expressed in our blogs are those of the author and do not necessarily represent the views of the NSS.
	New research: 49% have no religion, Anglican Church collapse continues, Islam increases ten-fold since 1983 News \| Tue, 2nd Jun 2015 New findings by the National Centre for Social Research have confirmed the long-term collapse in affiliation with the Church of England and the huge increase in non-belief. Strikingly, the research also found that there had been a ten-fold increase in those identifying with Islam in the past 32 years. In 1983, Islam represented around half a percentage point of Britain's population but in 2014 it had reached 5%, the research found. "The proportion of people saying that they are Anglican has fallen quite dramatically in the last ten years, coinciding with a rise in people saying they are not religious," NatCen noted. The percentage of non-religious people has increased from 31% in 1983, to 49% in 2014. Conversely, the share belonging to the Church of England has fallen from 40% to 17% over the same time period. This means that by-far the single largest group of people is the non-religious. Based on estimates from the Office of National Statistics, there are 24.7 million non-believers in the UK. The next single-highest group is Anglicans on 8.6 million. However, according to the NatCen figures, the "nones" have outnumbered Anglicans since at least 1994- when there were over 2 million more non-believers. The picture is different for non-Anglican Christians however. Roman Catholics have dropped by only 2 percentage points, from 10% of the population in 1983 to 8% last year. Immigration is thought to be propping up numbers of non-Anglican Christians. Naomi Jones, Head of Social Attitudes at NatCen Social research explained, "Members of other Christian and non-Christian religions have remained relatively constant and even increased. "The numbers of Catholic and non-Christian people in Britain may have been supplemented by migrants with strong religious beliefs. "We know from recent NatCen research that people are less likely than in previous years to see being Christian as an important component of being British. Therefore, fewer British people may feel that the Church of England is an important part of their identity nowadays." NSS spokesperson Stephen Evans commented on the research, "new findings emerge almost every month confirming just how irreligious UK society is. This obviously strengthens the case for a secular UK. At the very least it goes to show how nonsensical it is to speak of the UK as a 'Christian country'- as NatCen point out. "The collapse in affiliation with the Church of England continues to make its role as an Established church untenable and wrong. It would be better for both church and state if they parted company." Other research, surveys and polling have found similarly high levels of non-belief. In April 2015, the National Secular Society criticised the Prime Minister for his claim that the UK was "still a Christian country" after polling from YouGov found that 62% of Britons said they were not religious. The NatCen data can be seen here
	Secularists call for commitment to free speech and civil society to challenge bigotry News \| Tue, 2nd Jun 2015 The National Secular Society has called on the EU Agency for Fundamental Rights to promote a robust civil society response against religious and ethnic hatred. In a response to a consultation on anti-Semitic and anti-Muslim hatred in Europe, launched by the EU Agency for Fundamental Rights (FRA), the National Secular Society has called a renewed commitment to free speech and a strong civil society as the best defence against bigotry and discrimination. The NSS commented on the similarities and differences in recent trends of anti-Semitic and anti-Muslim hatred, and noted the changing focus of Europe's far-right and its shift in emphasis from historic anti-Semitism to attacks on Muslims. Additionally, the response drew attention to concerns about rising numbers of Islamist perpetrated anti-Semitic attacks in Europe. Of 453 recorded ideologically motivated anti-Semitic attacks in 2014, 38 showed Islamist motivations, and 76% showed anti-Israel motivation. The Society argued that Europe's changing demographics and the loss of traditional Christian privileges and identity are increasingly being projected by the far-right onto Muslims, who are targeted as a visible minority group. While patterns of bigotry and far-right activity fluctuate across Europe and Islamist-motivated violence has increased, in Russia there has been a resurgence in Christian, far-right nationalism- which was singled out in the NSS response. The National Secular Society has called for a shared civil society across Europe, bridging minority groups, and argued that "the most important tool for challenging hatred towards any community is to facilitate that community's integration into wider society; for Muslims and Jews to meet and interact with non-Muslims and non-Jews in the classroom, in the workplace, in secular public services and at the school gates." The NSS wrote that while diversity and equality ought to be celebrated, respect for democracy, the rule of law and human rights was paramount. In the submission to the FRA we called this the basis of the secular state. The response also argued that protecting free speech was vital to fostering civil society, and that defending free expression should be a core part of the EU's work. We also raised concerns about the way in which minority groups have been engaged with by wider society through dubious "community leaders" in the past, and urged direct community engagement in the future. The NSS has recently raised concerns over calls for specific laws against 'Islamophobia', and we argued again to the FRA that the term remains extremely problematic, and it is furthermore unhelpful when dealing with real anti-Muslim bigotry to conflate terminology which refers to both hate crime and criticism of a religion. The FRA is responsible for providing expert advice across the range of EU institutions, and also offers guidance to EU member states to "ensure that the fundamental rights of people living in the EU are protected." As such, it is a vital forum in which to advance secular principles. The NSS response made the case that secularism is a pre-requisite for the creation of a society in which people of all religions or none can live together fairly and cohesively. In addition to the consultation response, NSS executive director Keith Porteous Wood raised these issues and others at a high-level meeting between the Vice President of the European Commision, Frans Timmermans, and other secular organisations in Brussels.

NSS Speaks Out

NSS executive director Keith Porteous Wood was quoted by the BBC on Tony Blair's draconian proposals - warning that they would have a chilling effect on free speech.

NSS campaigns manager Stephen Evans was quoted in Christian Today on the scandal of the Belz sect's 'ban' on women driving their children to school. He also had a letter published in London's Evening Standard calling for a philosophy and ethics based subject to replace RE after the Standard's columnist Melanie McDonagh argued that England needs to be 're-evangelised' and children instructed in Christian doctrine in order to understand concepts of the common good, altruism, virtue.

Additionally, our story on Sir Gerald Howarth MP's comments telling people to "leave and go somewhere else" if they despised "Christian values" was picked up by Premier Christian Radio, who quoted us in their report.

Quote of the Week

"If one is to argue for freedom of speech there can be no caveats, no asterisks, no fine print qualifying that 'freedom' only applies to expression we don't consider too upsetting".
Jennifer Cody Epstein, novelist who asked for her name to be removed from the petition protesting PEN American Centre's decision to award its Freedom of Expression Courage Award to Charlie Hebdo.

Essays of the Week

"Britain's moderate Jews must stand up to the Orthodox women driving ban"
Naomi Alderman, Guardian.

"We must tackle extremism without compromising freedom of speech"
Deeyah Khan, Huffington Post.

Upcoming Events

Social cohesion - lessons from the Pennines

Wed, 10th Jun 2015

The Equality Act 2010: five-years on

Mon, 22nd Jun 2015

	NSS criticises Tony Blair’s plans to 'entrench' religion in public life across Europe News \| Thu, 4th Jun 2015 The NSS has criticised Tony Blair's proposals ahead of his appointment as chair of the European Council on Tolerance and Reconciliation (ECTR) as "ill thought out and counter-productive". The former Prime Minister has defended proposals "lowering the barriers to what constitutes incitement to violence" and pan-European plans to make Holocaust denial illegal and to 'entrench' "state funding for religious institutions into law." The NSS is adamant that measures such as 'group libel' would be "counter-productive, have a massive chilling effect on free speech and would be likely to restrict the open debate necessary to resolve problems." Keith Porteous Wood, NSS executive director, said: "Britain already has draconian legislation on religious insults – a possible seven year jail term with a low prosecution threshold. Politicians have already called for the outlawing of Islamophobia, playing into the hands of those intent on closing down honest debate about and within Islam." "There is no need for more laws, and the ones we already have fail to adequately protect freedom of expression. A robust civil society with a deep commitment to free expression is our best hope for challenging and countering bigoted narratives and misguided views. Driving extremist views underground will only allow them to fester and allow their proponents to present themselves as martyrs." Mr Wood continued, "Outlawing Holocaust denial completely undermines the West's defence of freedom of speech at home and abroad and removes our moral authority to propound freedom of expression abroad. No one has the right in a plural society not to be offended and ideas should not be proscribed but people should be defended from incitement to violence. "A European-wide Holocaust denial law would be exhibit A in every response from dictators abroad - and Islamists at home - when we criticise their appalling human rights records or challenge their rhetoric and beliefs." On proposals to require governments to provide security to synagogues and Jewish schools, Mr Wood said: "There is nothing preventing the state from providing security to places of worship where deemed necessary, appropriate and cost effective." "However, imposing pan-European, mandatory security at all places of worship and all Jewish schools is disproportionate. While a European response to extremism is called for, EU member states face a different scale of challenges. It would not be effective to require every EU country to respond in exactly the same way to anti-Semitism when the scope and detail of the issues faced in each nation varies so much." The NSS has also accused Mr Blair of being "confused over the role of religion". "For Mr Blair to dismiss those intent on justifying violence in the name of religion as abusing religion and using it as a mask reveals that his enthusiasm for religion has once more led him to misunderstand one of the roots of this problem. While few would suggest that extremists' interpretations of their faith are mainstream in today's society, it is naïve and counterproductive to deny the role that such interpretations play in their religio-political motivations. "In their eyes, which is all that matters, they are acting with greater fidelity to their religion than anyone, and all the Abrahamic religions have passages in their texts which can be used to justify such violence. "Recognising this harsh and politically unpalatable reality is a condition precedent to even starting to solve the problem", said Mr Wood. The NSS also criticised Mr Blair's proposal to entrench state funding for religious institutions into law. Mr Wood said: "The state should stand separation from religious institutions – not be involved in the funding of them. It's hard to see what justification Mr Blair could have for making such a vague and deeply anti-secular proposal."
	Human rights group warns against global blasphemy law News \| Wed, 3rd Jun 2015 The International Federation for Human Rights (FIDH) has warned the Organisation of Islamic Cooperation (OIC) against pushing once more for a global blasphemy law. Ahead of a conference on combatting religious intolerance, the FIDH has sent out a strong warning against any attempt to ban "defamation of religion". The OIC is to host the conference from 3-4 June 2015, on the 2011 UN resolution about combatting "intolerance, negative stereotyping and stigmatization" of people based on religion and belief. The resolution was aimed at challenging discrimination and "incitement to violence and violence against … persons based on religion or belief". However, there are concerns among human rights and secularist groups that the OIC will use the conference to make another attempt for a global blasphemy law, or for other similar restrictions on criticising and discussing religion. The FIDH say the concept of "defamation of religion" is "incompatible" with human rights. "Religions, like all beliefs, cannot be said to have a reputation of their own", they note. The International Federation for Human Rights said the concept had been "clearly invalidated" and was the "worst option". Additionally, the FIDH warned the OIC that "debates on the border between free speech and hate speech, and on what type of hate speech should be criminalized, already reached conclusions." The FIDH said that any attempt to go beyond current UN agreements "would be tantamount to attempting to criminalize freedom of expression with regard to religious issues." "Open, public debate of ideas (including on religions or beliefs) can include criticism of religion; it cannot be equated with advocacy of religious hatred that constitutes incitement to discrimination, hostility or violence. All religions and beliefs can be subject to criticism, and none is 'shielded' by international law." On the subject of combatting religiously motivated hatred, the FIDH argued that blasphemy laws are "counter-productive" and instead argued that "dialogue, debate, and also criticism, are constructive, healthy and needed". NSS spokesperson Benjamin Jones commented: "Whether it is called a blasphemy law or 'defamation of religion' is largely immaterial: the effect would be the same. It must be opposed if the OIC go down this route again. "We hope that the UN remains committed to the current resolution, which challenges religiously-motivated bigotry and violence, while defending freedom of expression." The FIDH also drew attention to "growing intolerance and numerous incidents of violence against members of minority religious groups or beliefs, including atheists and agnostics". "States that recognize a specific religion or belief as official need to address issues that arise from this situation, in particular the fact that members of religious minorities or free thinkers, atheists and agnostics may be prevented from manifesting their religion or belief for fear of being targeted by state and non-state actors. In this regard, state authorities have not only an obligation to respect the fundamental rights and freedoms of every individual but a duty to protect all individuals from discrimination, hostility and violence, including from non-state actors." At a meeting of the European Parliament Platform for Secularism in Politics in February, NSS executive director Keith Porteous Wood warned against the "15 year project by the Organisation of Islamic Cooperation to have defamation [of religion] made an international law".
	Forced academisation could impose religion on pupils News \| Wed, 3rd Jun 2015 The National Secular Society has warned that proposals to force struggling local authority schools in England to become academies could increase the proportion of faith based schools. The NSS has written to the Education Secretary Nicky Morgan seeking assurances that upon conversion, no non-religiously designated school would be permitted to acquire a religious designation or faith ethos. The Government's new Education and Adoption Bill will force councils and governing bodies to actively progress the conversion of failing schools into academies. Education Secretary Nicky Morgan says the tough new measures intended to turn around failing schools will "sweep away bureaucratic and legal loopholes" that previously prevented schools from being improved. However, the NSS has warned that without adequate safeguards, schools joining faith academy chains could acquire a religious designation or faith ethos upon conversion with no opportunity for parents to object or even be consulted. Stephen Evans, National Secular Society campaigns manager, said: "Plans to scrap the requirement for academy sponsors to consult with school communities, including parents, could result in a faith based education being imposed on parents and young people against their wishes. "Given England's religiously diverse population – around half of which self-identify as non-religious, any increase in the proportion of religiously designated or faith ethos schools is likely to impede parents' ability to secure an education that doesn't run counter to their beliefs. "Forcing a religious ethos on young people through their education would in many cases disrespect their parents' wishes and be at odds with principles of fairness and equality. The Government need to be aware that respecting young people's right to religious freedom and an objective education is part of, and not separate from, looking after their best interests." The NSS has warned that the academisation of local authority controlled schools would increase the risk of faith-based organisations gaining greater control over school curriculums, admissions arrangements and employment practices – leading to even greater discrimination in our education system than already exists. A shortage of school places in many parts country of has already seen parents allocated faith schools against their wishes.
	Don’t ban women drivers – ban faith schools Opinion \| Sat, 30th May 2015 In a pluralist and diverse society, it's an invitation to ignorance for children to be segregated by their parent's religious affiliation – so why, asks Oliver Kamm, is the state entrusting the education of huge numbers of children to religious bodies? Whenever someone is described in the media as a person of faith, there's a dispiriting inevitability that it will be meant as a compliment. So consider the declaration by the Hasidic Belz community in north London that the children of mothers who drive them to school will be turned away at the gates. Women driving is, say the rabbis, "contrary to the rules of religious modesty in our camp". In a cosmopolitan capital city in the 21st century, it takes deep religious conviction to publicly hold women in such contempt. Yet so accustomed are we to the place of religion in public life that we risk overlooking another scandalous aspect of this episode: hundreds of children are being educated at the sect's two north London schools. Ofsted ranks both of them as "good". Did the inspectors ask what the children were being taught about the place of women in society? Or was this deemed a matter of religious choice? Religious liberty is integral to a free society. That means the state has no business conferring privilege on particular viewpoints. Dissenters in the 18th and early 19th centuries fought hard for the repeal of the Test and Corporation Acts, which barred non-Anglicans from public office. Their reasoning influenced Thomas Jefferson, who in 1819 founded the University of Virginia as a secular institution, having no professor of divinity. Yet the education of huge numbers of children is entrusted to religious bodies that can drill them in sectarian doctrines. Publicly funded faith schools make up a third of the primary and secondary education system. We have an established church to which few people listen, let alone belong, yet a quarter of primary schools and one in 16 secondary schools in England are Church of England schools. Periodically, the agendas of some faith schools are exposed as being at odds with the values of tolerance and education. A publicly funded Orthodox Jewish girls' school in London was found in 2013 to have censored exam questions for its pupils on evolution and human reproduction. The exam board had agreed to this on the grounds of sensitivity towards religious belief. Fortunately the exam regulator, Ofqual, has now banned this practice but the case illustrates a ruinous public deference to religion. Faith is a private choice in which the state has no legitimate interest. Parents are entitled to bring their own children up in a way consistent with their beliefs. They are not entitled, however, to shield children from knowledge. That principle is widely accepted. Where science classes are concerned, the Department for Education in England says that it will accept no proposal for an academy or free school that intends to teach creationism. That's right but inadequate. No existing school, of any type, should be permitted to spread beliefs that are intellectually fraudulent, such as hostility to science or a conviction that women don't belong, literally and metaphorically, in the driving seat. And because religious affiliation divides people into groups, faith schools undermine common citizenship under the rule of law. There should be no more publicly funded faith schools. In a pluralist and diverse society, it's an invitation to ignorance for children to be segregated by a characteristic that is, for all civic purposes, totally irrelevant. While faith schools exist and get public funding, they should have no ability to select children according to the religion of the parents. Above all, policymakers should recognise that the ethos of faith is, by definition, hostile to learning. It is long past time to get it out of the classroom. Oliver Kamm is a leader writer and columnist for The Times. This article was originally published inThe Timesand is reproduced here with kind permission. The views expressed in our blogs are those of the author and do not necessarily represent the views of the NSS.
	New research: 49% have no religion, Anglican Church collapse continues, Islam increases ten-fold since 1983 News \| Tue, 2nd Jun 2015 New findings by the National Centre for Social Research have confirmed the long-term collapse in affiliation with the Church of England and the huge increase in non-belief. Strikingly, the research also found that there had been a ten-fold increase in those identifying with Islam in the past 32 years. In 1983, Islam represented around half a percentage point of Britain's population but in 2014 it had reached 5%, the research found. "The proportion of people saying that they are Anglican has fallen quite dramatically in the last ten years, coinciding with a rise in people saying they are not religious," NatCen noted. The percentage of non-religious people has increased from 31% in 1983, to 49% in 2014. Conversely, the share belonging to the Church of England has fallen from 40% to 17% over the same time period. This means that by-far the single largest group of people is the non-religious. Based on estimates from the Office of National Statistics, there are 24.7 million non-believers in the UK. The next single-highest group is Anglicans on 8.6 million. However, according to the NatCen figures, the "nones" have outnumbered Anglicans since at least 1994- when there were over 2 million more non-believers. The picture is different for non-Anglican Christians however. Roman Catholics have dropped by only 2 percentage points, from 10% of the population in 1983 to 8% last year. Immigration is thought to be propping up numbers of non-Anglican Christians. Naomi Jones, Head of Social Attitudes at NatCen Social research explained, "Members of other Christian and non-Christian religions have remained relatively constant and even increased. "The numbers of Catholic and non-Christian people in Britain may have been supplemented by migrants with strong religious beliefs. "We know from recent NatCen research that people are less likely than in previous years to see being Christian as an important component of being British. Therefore, fewer British people may feel that the Church of England is an important part of their identity nowadays." NSS spokesperson Stephen Evans commented on the research, "new findings emerge almost every month confirming just how irreligious UK society is. This obviously strengthens the case for a secular UK. At the very least it goes to show how nonsensical it is to speak of the UK as a 'Christian country'- as NatCen point out. "The collapse in affiliation with the Church of England continues to make its role as an Established church untenable and wrong. It would be better for both church and state if they parted company." Other research, surveys and polling have found similarly high levels of non-belief. In April 2015, the National Secular Society criticised the Prime Minister for his claim that the UK was "still a Christian country" after polling from YouGov found that 62% of Britons said they were not religious. The NatCen data can be seen here
	Secularists call for commitment to free speech and civil society to challenge bigotry News \| Tue, 2nd Jun 2015 The National Secular Society has called on the EU Agency for Fundamental Rights to promote a robust civil society response against religious and ethnic hatred. In a response to a consultation on anti-Semitic and anti-Muslim hatred in Europe, launched by the EU Agency for Fundamental Rights (FRA), the National Secular Society has called a renewed commitment to free speech and a strong civil society as the best defence against bigotry and discrimination. The NSS commented on the similarities and differences in recent trends of anti-Semitic and anti-Muslim hatred, and noted the changing focus of Europe's far-right and its shift in emphasis from historic anti-Semitism to attacks on Muslims. Additionally, the response drew attention to concerns about rising numbers of Islamist perpetrated anti-Semitic attacks in Europe. Of 453 recorded ideologically motivated anti-Semitic attacks in 2014, 38 showed Islamist motivations, and 76% showed anti-Israel motivation. The Society argued that Europe's changing demographics and the loss of traditional Christian privileges and identity are increasingly being projected by the far-right onto Muslims, who are targeted as a visible minority group. While patterns of bigotry and far-right activity fluctuate across Europe and Islamist-motivated violence has increased, in Russia there has been a resurgence in Christian, far-right nationalism- which was singled out in the NSS response. The National Secular Society has called for a shared civil society across Europe, bridging minority groups, and argued that "the most important tool for challenging hatred towards any community is to facilitate that community's integration into wider society; for Muslims and Jews to meet and interact with non-Muslims and non-Jews in the classroom, in the workplace, in secular public services and at the school gates." The NSS wrote that while diversity and equality ought to be celebrated, respect for democracy, the rule of law and human rights was paramount. In the submission to the FRA we called this the basis of the secular state. The response also argued that protecting free speech was vital to fostering civil society, and that defending free expression should be a core part of the EU's work. We also raised concerns about the way in which minority groups have been engaged with by wider society through dubious "community leaders" in the past, and urged direct community engagement in the future. The NSS has recently raised concerns over calls for specific laws against 'Islamophobia', and we argued again to the FRA that the term remains extremely problematic, and it is furthermore unhelpful when dealing with real anti-Muslim bigotry to conflate terminology which refers to both hate crime and criticism of a religion. The FRA is responsible for providing expert advice across the range of EU institutions, and also offers guidance to EU member states to "ensure that the fundamental rights of people living in the EU are protected." As such, it is a vital forum in which to advance secular principles. The NSS response made the case that secularism is a pre-requisite for the creation of a society in which people of all religions or none can live together fairly and cohesively. In addition to the consultation response, NSS executive director Keith Porteous Wood raised these issues and others at a high-level meeting between the Vice President of the European Commision, Frans Timmermans, and other secular organisations in Brussels.