Newsline 8 January 2016

Happy New Year to all of our members and supporters! 2016 has only just begun but we have had a busy week speaking out for secularism and for secular values. We need your support to help our campaign work, so have a look at how you can get involved with the National Secular Society this year.

This week has marked the first anniversary of the attack on Charlie Hebdo, a grim reminder of the struggles ahead, but there has also been some welcome news when a Northern Ireland court issued a much needed restatement of our collective right to freedom of expression, when it found Pastor James McConnell not guilty for a "grossly offensive" sermon he had delivered.

News, Blogs & Opinion

	Victory for free speech as Pastor James McConnell found not guilty over “grossly offensive” sermon News \| Tue, 5th Jan 2016 The National Secular Society has welcomed a court's ruling that Northern Ireland Pastor James McConnell is "not guilty" for a sermon he uploaded online that was critical of Islam. NSS campaigns manager Stephen Evans described the ruling as a "welcome reassertion of the fundamental right to freedom of expression." He added, "While we and many others disagree strongly with the tone and content of the Pastor's remarks, a heartening and broad coalition of groups have stood up for his right to express his views. "At a time when freedom of speech is being curtailed and put at risk in any number of ways, this is a much needed statement from the judge that free speech will be defended and that Islam is not off-limits. "While we welcome the ruling, serious questions remain about the PPS' decision to pursue this case, particularly given that it was brought about after a complaint from a man who had to retract his praise for the Islamic State's rule." Dr Raied Al-Wazzan, who said Mosul "has become the most peaceful city in the world" under IS, was described as the "chief witness" for the prosecution. The NSS had written to the Northern Ireland Public Prosecution Service in an attempt to have the prosecution called off and criticising their "chilling" decision to go ahead with the case. The PPS said their decision was "in the public interest" without explaining why. Mr Evans added: "Now that McConnell has rightly been found not guilty, the PPS needs to be held to account for its reckless pursuit of this prosecution. The terrible effect on the exercise of free speech if McConnell had been found guilty are obvious. "The right verdict has now been reached, but this case should never have been pursued." The judge said that while McConnell had made offensive remarks, they were not "grossly offensive" under the law. Delivering his verdict he added: "The courts need to be very careful not to criminalise speech which, however contemptible, is no more than offensive. "It is not the task of the criminal law to censor offensive utterances." Pastor McConnell had been charged under the Communications Act 2003 after he described Islam as "satanic" and "heathen".
	Catholic Church intervenes in NI abortion court case to restrict access to abortion for rape victims News \| Fri, 8th Jan 2016 The Catholic Church in Northern Ireland is pressing the attorney general to appeal the 2015 High Court ruling that allowed abortion in cases of incest, rape or fatal foetal abnormalities. The Guardian has reported that the Northern Ireland attorney general is "considering whether to appeal against the judgment" made in November 2015 by the High Court that Northern Ireland's abortion law is "incompatible with human rights", and that the Church has now been acknowledged as an "interested party" – allowing its complaints to be heart in court. Tim Bartlett, secretary of the Catholic Council for Social Affairs, said that while rape was "the most heinous of crimes", that abortion in such cases was not right because "the answer is not to take the life of an innocent third party. The challenge is to give that person every possible support and care." He also stated that "the right to life of an innocent person is always inviolable, and that is a fundamental moral principle on which society and human rights should stand. That right begins from the moment of conception, and science affirms that." Bartlett said that abortion could not be justified even in cases of fatal foetal abnormality. "In the church, we work with women whose babies have life-limiting conditions, and these children can live for minutes, hours, days, weeks and in some cases years. The child is still technically, clinically and in every sense alive as a human person, and is entitled to have their life protected." Amnesty International has said that Northern Ireland's abortion laws need to be brought "out of the 19th Century and into the 21st." Patrick Corrigan of Amnesty said that the High Court's "landmark ruling" last year was a "damning indictment of the Northern Ireland Executive's failure to prioritise women's healthcare. That must end. It is now up to the new First Minister to lead that change." Meanwhile in Scotland the devolution of abortion-related matters to Holyrood has prompted the formation of a new anti-abortion campaign called "Don't Stop a Beating Heart". The head of the Catholic Church in Scotland, Archbishop Philip Tartaglia, said he "wholeheartedly" supported the campaign's aims to resist any extension of abortion time limits. Nicola Sturgeon however has said there will not be any changes to the current time limit for abortions.
	Exam schedules re-arranged to accommodate Ramadan News \| Thu, 7th Jan 2016 The National Secular Society has warned that the rescheduling GCSE and A-Level exams to accommodate Ramadan must not disadvantage non-Muslim pupils. The authority which represents the UK exam boards, the Joint Council for Qualifications (JCQ), has held consultations with "Muslim leaders" about rescheduling exams to reduce the clash between the Islamic holy month and the exam period. Considerations included moving examinations in core GCSE subjects like English and Maths to the beginning of the exam period – reducing available revision time in order to move the sessions to before Ramadan begins. The JCQ have said that while exam boards will "always aim to be as fair as possible to all", it will only consider making "small" changes "for any one group that [do] not impact negatively on most students". The body said that "Where possible, large entry GCSE and GCE subjects are timetabled prior to the commencement of Ramadan and consideration given to whether they are timetabled in the morning or afternoon." NSS executive director Keith Porteous Wood commented on the reports: "If there are a significant number of Muslim students that are affected and calling for a change, a reconsideration of the schedule doesn't seem unreasonable, but accommodations should only be made if this can be achieved with little or no disruption or by disadvantaging other students. "A proper review of this – not driven by religious interests – but with educators reviewing the evidence, should consider possible arrangements. We cannot enter onto a slippery slope of making unreasonable accommodations on religious grounds. There must be a very stringent test for whether accommodations like this will disadvantage non-Muslim students. "Moving exams earlier in the day to lessen the effects of fasting will bring exams into a period of the day when teenagers may not be at their most focused or alert: Some researchers suggest that academic performance is improved in lessons held later in the day. Rescheduling exams to take place earlier may well disadvantage the majority of students on account of Muslim students fasting. The decisions around exam scheduling should be driven by evidence and research, not religious considerations. "Bringing exams in core subjects, such as English and Maths, earlier in the exam period will lessen the time available for revision for the most important exams. If this does disadvantage students then no special accommodation for religious festivals or fasting periods should be made."
	Damning details emerge about establishment cover-up of Anglican sex abuse Opinion \| Mon, 4th Jan 2016 New revelations about the extent of the letter-writing campaign to help disgraced bishop Peter Ball escape charges raise urgent questions about the extent of the establishment cover-up, writes Keith Porteous Wood. Former Bishop of Gloucester Peter Ball was recently jailed for 32 months aged 83 for offences relating to sexual activity with almost twenty young males. The Crown Prosecution Service had investigated allegations twenty years earlier but they had told Ball in 1993 that despite "sufficient admissible, substantial and reliable evidence" it was prepared to deal with the matter out of court. Ball was let off with a caution and resigned as bishop. It is widely thought that Ball escaped more serious charges and a trial in 1993 because of a massive establishment cover-up; numerous letters were sent to justice authorities on Ball's behalf. Freedom of Information requests, including by the Telegraph, Times and the BBC, have led to the release of a few of these letters and confirm that some were from key establishment figures. A former Home Office Secretary of State (now Rt Hon Lord Renton) wrote, seemingly accepting the accusations, that "the further shame of criminal action seems far too great a punishment". The Rt Hon Lord Justice Lloyd wrote to both the Detective Inspector and Chief Constable describing Ball as "the most … saintly man I have ever met", thanking the former for "being so understanding when we spoke on the telephone". Several senior masters from public schools also wrote. That the letters were orchestrated is suggested by a phrase used in a letter from Radley College Abingdon: "I gather it may be helpful for you to hear from those who have known Bishop Peter Ball for a long period of time." Who suggested that "it may be helpful"? A number of the letters released are, predictably, from senior figures in the Church including two (now former) Archbishops of Canterbury. Archbishop of Canterbury at the time Lord Carey wrote at least two of these letters, one to the Director of the Crown Prosecution Service and another to the relevant Chief Constable. The letters contained passages like: "while being keenly conscious of the need to avoid any suggestion that I might be trying to influence the police enquiries", and, "… in no way whatsoever would I wish to influence you about the decision over Bishop Ball", and "'special pleading' would be entirely inappropriate; at the same time …". Similar phrases occurred in several of the letters from others. But what other motive, other than the desire to influence any decision by the police and the CPS, could Lord Carey have had for writing the letters? One victim of Bishop Ball, Phil Johnson, told the BBC in an interview screened on 1 January that if there was no intention to influence, why did Lord Carey write the letters at all? The letters could not have been more manipulative. Lord Carey wrote of his "urgent concern" about Ball's health or to the police that he was "anxious", making representations of the "excruciating pain and spiritual torment which these allegations have brought upon [Ball]", and extolling at length on his achievements and ministry? Nor could they have been more effective. Why else would the CPS have withdrawn charges just days after receiving Lord Carey's pleas, as The Times reported on 5 January? The CPS have recently conceded that this was the wrong decision. According to the Press Association in September, Lord Carey said: "I was worried that if any other allegations of past indecency were made it would reignite. I wanted some reassurance that this would not be the case. … I was so troubled, that evening after dinner I went to my study. … I was supplied with a number of a man at the CPS I believed to be a director. I do not recall his name. … I rang him and asked what might happen if allegations from the past were made. … I was told quite categorically that the other allegations would not be taken further as far as we are concerned." The letters and above conversation do not seem entirely consistent with a report in the Church Times on 7 October 2015: "A spokesman for Lord Carey has denied that he attempted to intervene in the case. 'He discussed the matter with the CPS after the caution had been given to Peter Ball. If there was a cover-up, he was unaware. The allegations were investigated by police, and he believed this was a proper investigation.'" Perhaps most concerning of all is that the evidence emerging is not inconsistent with Lord Carey acting despite acknowledging the validity of the accusations and that they may be multiple. And surely it could not because of them: He said, for example, "This seemed to me at first to be most improbable" [emphasis added] and he was at least aware of the possibility of further accusations: He said he was "worried" about "any other allegations of past indecency" that might be made. These concerns are strengthened by evidence that has now emerged in The Times that his Chief of Staff at the time, Bishop Ronald Gordon declined the prospect of further information that had become available about Ball's nefarious activities because he had "discussed the correspondence the archbishop had received referring to past events in PB's life" and there was "already enough evidence to suggest a picture of what has been happening". Richard Scorer, a senior lawyer specialising in such cases and author of a book on child abuse in the Roman Catholic Church, stated in The Times: "Unless Archbishop Carey has a very good explanation, this has all the hallmarks of a cover-up. … It appears to the victims that he was more concerned with ensuring Ball was treated leniently than about them." One of the alleged victims, Neil Todd, attempted suicide several times, depressed about not being believed. He even went to Australia to start a new life, but committed suicide in 2013 following the revival of police enquiries. Mr Scorer is demanding that Lord Carey publicly explain his actions, adding "We cannot have a system where certain people receive more lenient treatment than others, because of who they happen to know." It seems improbable in the extreme that these letters were sent to the Police and CPS without being orchestrated. The perpetrators of this perversion of the course of justice must be exposed. Hopefully it will emerge, perhaps from the Independent Inquiry into Child Sexual Abuse, who was responsible for organising this high level campaign, of such magnitude that it apparently succeeded in perverting the course of justice. Questions will be asked about a report in 1993 that according to the Sun: "church officials had pleaded with [alleged victim Neil Todd's] family not to go to the police." Getting to the bottom of the shocking perversion of justice in the 1990s is important, but we should be even more concerned about the extent to which it pervaded the treatment of Ball in recent years. While the CPS belatedly admitted its wrong decision in 1993 there has been no explanation of why the CPS decided in 2015 against pressing charges against Ball on the most serious allegations concerning two teenage boys, albeit Ball pleaded not guilty to them. Ball has shamelessly maintained his innocence for decades, and on the other charges until the last moment, presumably only changing it to avoid a trial. Ball stopped at nothing – including deceiving the establishment and Royal Family – to perpetuate the lie of his innocence. His doing so has caused untold misery and may have cost Neil Todd his life. Was sparing him a trial a reward for changing his plea? If so was that an appropriate reward for him, having lied for decades with such devastating consequences? Why was there no trial, one that would also have given his victims the opportunity to have their say in court? I am convinced that a trial would have revealed more of relevance about Ball's actions, but also of the Church's institutional bullying and intimidation of victims. The Rev Graham Sawyer claims he was denied ordination (he was eventually ordained in Australia) unless he was silent about being abused by Ball and that even in 2015 the Church's bishop in charge of safeguarding, the Bishop of Durham, refused to engage with victims, citing 'banking reform' as a greater priority. Sawyer is adamant that there is a "fundamental bankruptcy" in the Church's handling of survivor responses and that people at the highest levels of the Church are more concerned with "saving face". See also: "Carey knew of sex abuse when he defended Ball" in The Times (5/1/16)
	NSS welcomes minister’s commitment to ensure same-sex weddings can take place in military chapels News \| Tue, 22nd Dec 2015 The National Secular Society has welcomed an intervention from Defence Minister Penny Mordaunt to ensure that the rights of gay military personnel wishing to marry are respected. Regulations allowing same-sex marriages in the 190 military chapels in England and Wales came into force 18 months ago – but none of the Sending Churches using the chapels currently allow same-sex marriages to be conducted there. Defence Minister Penny Mordaunt has now written to military chaplains to ask how "Parliament's sanction" will be "fully implemented". News of the minister's intervention came in response to a written question from Madeleine Moon MP (Bridgend - Labour), a member of the Commons Defence Committee. The National Secular Society has called for it to be made clear to all service personnel that if they want a same-sex marriage in a military chapel they can have one. Keith Porteous Wood, NSS executive director, commented: "Military chapels are for the benefit of all military personnel, so it is discriminatory, as well as disingenuous to veto their use for same-sex marriages. "The churches repay the privilege of being provided with chapels for their services paid for by the state by denying their use to those wishing to be lawfully married. Shamelessly blocking the use of military chapels to gay serving personal who want to marry also illustrates that the centuries-old persecution of homosexuals by the institutional churches is being actively perpetuated today by their leaders, despite support for same-sex marriage by the majority of those that identify as Christians. "The only possible justification for such a veto, were if clergy who do not wish to solemnise same sex marriages were forced to do so, but the Marriage (Same Sex Couples) Act specifically exempts them from doing so against their will." The NSS says that if chaplains don't want to conduct to same sex marriages they should be under a duty to find someone who will. The position on armed forces' chapels differs from that of civilian religious buildings in that they are largely owned by the State and not by the religious organisations that use them. A small number of military chapels are owned by the Church of England and not covered by the regulations. The Defence Secretary is required to consult with Sending Churches before registering military chapels to be used for same-sex marriages. However they can legally block such registrations is unclear. The Sending Churches - which provide chaplains to the armed forces – include the Church of England, Roman Catholic, Methodist, Church of Scotland, Presbyterian, Baptist Union, United Reformed, Congregational, Free Church of Scotland, Elim Pentecostal and Assemblies of God. Photo: RAF Taking part in the London Gay Pride parade \| Credit: Defence Images ©Crown copyright 2012
	2015: A year of terror for Bangladesh’s secularist writers Opinion \| Tue, 5th Jan 2016 Arif Rahman, a Bangladeshi blogger, reflects on the targeted attacks on secularist bloggers that took place in Bangladesh throughout 2015, claiming many lives, and considers the road ahead for secularism in the face of terror and state-sanctioned persecution. 2015 was the darkest of times in Bangladesh's history. Like the 1975 murder of the founding president Sheikh Mujib, which wiped out all the secular achievements of the 1971 war for independence from Pakistan, 2015 will be remembered by the world as the year atheist bloggers, authors and publishers were killed. Bloggers and publishers were assassinated one after another, attacked in the streets, at home or in their offices, and countless bloggers were persecuted by the infamous 'Section 57', a blasphemy law. This resulted in mass hysteria among the huge number of bloggers, activists, a lot of whom eventually fled the country, tarnishing the 'secular image' of Bangladesh. In this one year, 2015, Bangladesh became a killing ground of not only bloggers, but for freedom of speech itself. Government officials, ministers and police repeatedly warned bloggers not to 'cross the line' immediately after every brutal murder by Islamists. Large sections of the country's traditional media chimed in with this sort of victim blaming. The result was devastating for the psychological state of bloggers, writers, publishers and vocal activists in general. The fear of sudden attack coupled with the threat of jail or persecution at the hands of the law, supported by a vicious media, created such a toxic psychological atmosphere for the already afraid critical and creative minds that people were fleeing the country in flocks. This suffocating atmosphere created perfect conditions for ISIS to expand. Their magazine 'Dabiq' declared Bangladesh its next target. Bloggers running for their lives could not go to the police, and were told that the authorities couldn't give them protection, and that their best bet was to flee the country. The son of Sheikh Hasina, Sajib Wazed Joy, an adviser of the Prime Minister, told Reuters that the Awami League, the party running the country right now cannot aggravate Islamists in fear of losing votes. His mother expressed her condolence to the father of the slain science writer Avijit Roy in secret, over the phone. She was afraid if news of this phone call leaked to the press, her 'approval rating' would diminish. It seems to that Islamists are already in power. We know very well that the Islamists are funded and supported from abroad, not least in donations and assistance from Saudi Arabia, the 'ally' Britain desperately appeases. Bangladesh does not want to be seen as aggravating either Saudi Arabia, or Britain. But Bangladeshi secularists will not forget that Britain and Bangladesh both flew their national flag at half-mast after the death of the Saudi King. Secular bloggers, authors and activists may only be a thorn in side for Islamists, but we are a very painful one. Aside from the horrendous levels of violence, the law, in the form of Section 57 of the Information Communication Act, was also weaponized against secularists back in 2013. This gave yet more fuel for the Bangladeshi intellectual diaspora. In this vague and blunt law, God, prophets, and political personalities are protected from criticism or satire. The law puts fear into the minds of bloggers: writers can be arrested without warrant, detained indefinitely, fined an unbelievable sum or worse, and face a jail sentence of 14 years. That fear is enough for the rest of the critical blogger community to fold inwards, hide and eventually give up writing altogether. The effect is a victory for Islamism and the would-be dictator, Sheikh Hasina. A translation of Ali Dashti's "23 Years, a Study of the Prophetic Career of Muhammad" was seized by Islamist thugs. No one even dared to protest. Recently the same Islamist mob vandalized the traditional Baul festival, just because the Bauls, the mystical singers of rural Bangladesh, do not conform to imported Wahhabism. No one dared to stop the Islamist mob. That is the price Bangladesh is paying for criminalising atheist blogging. Attacks on other religious sects continue year-long. No newspaper dares to publish a humanist or atheist article in fear of retaliation. The publishing of cartoons has already become a taboo after Islamists threatened to burn down a major daily newspaper. The Bangladesh DGFI 'ordered' businesses not to advertise in the same newspaper, exerting another level of government control. 2015 also saw the proliferation of 'hit lists' and further threats to newspapers, dictating conditions such as women journalists to be sacked, no reporting on the killing of atheist bloggers, no negative coverage of Islamist thugs. We know Islamists are operating widely, but in Bangladesh, they get a seal of approval from the government. Bangladesh is known as a 'secular' state to the rest of world, however, the meaning of secularism inside the country is skewed to the degree that UN Special Rapporteur on Freedom of Religion or Belief, Heiner Bielefeldt, recently had to comment on the 'misperceptions' around secularism within Bangladesh. This struggle between real secularism and overt Islamism took a turn for the worse in 2015 with the blood of so many bloggers being spilled on the streets. The Islamist bubble seems to have engulfed the secular narrative practised by a dwindling number of civil society organisations. The 1991 transition from military rule to democracy gave us hope but even after 24 years in 'democracy' we seem to have failed to fulfil the basic requirements of a proper democracy. This is sad and no signs of recovery can be seen in the horizon. This is an amended version of a blog post originally posted here. Arif Rahman is a secularist Bangladeshi blogger, based in the UK. The views expressed in our blogs are those of the author, and may not represent the views of the NSS.

Read Elsewhere

Safe space hand wringers are attacking academic freedom – we must fight back

In order for academic freedom to be better protected in the future, intellectual diversity must become as important to universities as equality and inclusivity are today, writes Joanna Williams of the University of Kent.

NSS Speaks Out

Our executive director Keith Porteous Wood was quoted in the Daily Mail, The Sun, The Week and Il Messagero on reports this week about the exam period being adjusted to accommodate Ramadan. Communications officer Benjamin Jones was also featured on Channel 5 News discussing this story.

Our commentary on the case of Pastor James McConnell – a vital test case for free speech – was picked up in the Irish Times, the Guardian, the Northern Ireland News Letter, Belfast Telegraph, the Christian Institute and the Catholic Herald.

Shortly before Christmas, the NSS was featured in many newspapers responding to David Cameron's claim (once again) that the UK is a Christian country. Campaigns manager Stephen Evans was quoted in the Mirror, Huffington Post, Daily Mail, Independent, Christian Today and by ITV.

Quote of the Week

"Against the flaming backdrop of torched Christian churches, bloody executions and massacres of faith minorities in the Middle East and elsewhere, it is ... a matter of utmost concern that, in this country, we discharge our common duty steadfastly to defend the freedom of citizens to discuss, debate and critique religious ideas and beliefs – restricting only speech which incites to physical violence against others. Moreover, in a free and democratic society we enter into severe peril when we start to confuse what we perhaps ought or ought not to say, with what in law we are allowed to, or not allowed to say."
Muhammed al-Hussaini, an imam, speaking after Pastor James McConnell was found not guilty for an anti-Islamic sermon.

Essays of the Week

Sometimes there is a moral duty to mock religion.
Ed West, Catholic Herald.

James McConnell victory for free speech brings happy ending to pantomime.
Suzanne Breen, Belfast Telegraph.

On the anniversary of the attack on Charlie Hebdo we must defend the right to blaspheme.
Sarah McLaughlin, Independent.

Upcoming Events

An Atheist and a Muslim in Conversation: Overcoming Differences, Challenging Fundamentalism and Promoting Secular Values

Sun, 10th Jan 2016

Secularist of the Year 2016

Sat, 19th Mar 2016

	Victory for free speech as Pastor James McConnell found not guilty over “grossly offensive” sermon News \| Tue, 5th Jan 2016 The National Secular Society has welcomed a court's ruling that Northern Ireland Pastor James McConnell is "not guilty" for a sermon he uploaded online that was critical of Islam. NSS campaigns manager Stephen Evans described the ruling as a "welcome reassertion of the fundamental right to freedom of expression." He added, "While we and many others disagree strongly with the tone and content of the Pastor's remarks, a heartening and broad coalition of groups have stood up for his right to express his views. "At a time when freedom of speech is being curtailed and put at risk in any number of ways, this is a much needed statement from the judge that free speech will be defended and that Islam is not off-limits. "While we welcome the ruling, serious questions remain about the PPS' decision to pursue this case, particularly given that it was brought about after a complaint from a man who had to retract his praise for the Islamic State's rule." Dr Raied Al-Wazzan, who said Mosul "has become the most peaceful city in the world" under IS, was described as the "chief witness" for the prosecution. The NSS had written to the Northern Ireland Public Prosecution Service in an attempt to have the prosecution called off and criticising their "chilling" decision to go ahead with the case. The PPS said their decision was "in the public interest" without explaining why. Mr Evans added: "Now that McConnell has rightly been found not guilty, the PPS needs to be held to account for its reckless pursuit of this prosecution. The terrible effect on the exercise of free speech if McConnell had been found guilty are obvious. "The right verdict has now been reached, but this case should never have been pursued." The judge said that while McConnell had made offensive remarks, they were not "grossly offensive" under the law. Delivering his verdict he added: "The courts need to be very careful not to criminalise speech which, however contemptible, is no more than offensive. "It is not the task of the criminal law to censor offensive utterances." Pastor McConnell had been charged under the Communications Act 2003 after he described Islam as "satanic" and "heathen".
	Catholic Church intervenes in NI abortion court case to restrict access to abortion for rape victims News \| Fri, 8th Jan 2016 The Catholic Church in Northern Ireland is pressing the attorney general to appeal the 2015 High Court ruling that allowed abortion in cases of incest, rape or fatal foetal abnormalities. The Guardian has reported that the Northern Ireland attorney general is "considering whether to appeal against the judgment" made in November 2015 by the High Court that Northern Ireland's abortion law is "incompatible with human rights", and that the Church has now been acknowledged as an "interested party" – allowing its complaints to be heart in court. Tim Bartlett, secretary of the Catholic Council for Social Affairs, said that while rape was "the most heinous of crimes", that abortion in such cases was not right because "the answer is not to take the life of an innocent third party. The challenge is to give that person every possible support and care." He also stated that "the right to life of an innocent person is always inviolable, and that is a fundamental moral principle on which society and human rights should stand. That right begins from the moment of conception, and science affirms that." Bartlett said that abortion could not be justified even in cases of fatal foetal abnormality. "In the church, we work with women whose babies have life-limiting conditions, and these children can live for minutes, hours, days, weeks and in some cases years. The child is still technically, clinically and in every sense alive as a human person, and is entitled to have their life protected." Amnesty International has said that Northern Ireland's abortion laws need to be brought "out of the 19th Century and into the 21st." Patrick Corrigan of Amnesty said that the High Court's "landmark ruling" last year was a "damning indictment of the Northern Ireland Executive's failure to prioritise women's healthcare. That must end. It is now up to the new First Minister to lead that change." Meanwhile in Scotland the devolution of abortion-related matters to Holyrood has prompted the formation of a new anti-abortion campaign called "Don't Stop a Beating Heart". The head of the Catholic Church in Scotland, Archbishop Philip Tartaglia, said he "wholeheartedly" supported the campaign's aims to resist any extension of abortion time limits. Nicola Sturgeon however has said there will not be any changes to the current time limit for abortions.
	Exam schedules re-arranged to accommodate Ramadan News \| Thu, 7th Jan 2016 The National Secular Society has warned that the rescheduling GCSE and A-Level exams to accommodate Ramadan must not disadvantage non-Muslim pupils. The authority which represents the UK exam boards, the Joint Council for Qualifications (JCQ), has held consultations with "Muslim leaders" about rescheduling exams to reduce the clash between the Islamic holy month and the exam period. Considerations included moving examinations in core GCSE subjects like English and Maths to the beginning of the exam period – reducing available revision time in order to move the sessions to before Ramadan begins. The JCQ have said that while exam boards will "always aim to be as fair as possible to all", it will only consider making "small" changes "for any one group that [do] not impact negatively on most students". The body said that "Where possible, large entry GCSE and GCE subjects are timetabled prior to the commencement of Ramadan and consideration given to whether they are timetabled in the morning or afternoon." NSS executive director Keith Porteous Wood commented on the reports: "If there are a significant number of Muslim students that are affected and calling for a change, a reconsideration of the schedule doesn't seem unreasonable, but accommodations should only be made if this can be achieved with little or no disruption or by disadvantaging other students. "A proper review of this – not driven by religious interests – but with educators reviewing the evidence, should consider possible arrangements. We cannot enter onto a slippery slope of making unreasonable accommodations on religious grounds. There must be a very stringent test for whether accommodations like this will disadvantage non-Muslim students. "Moving exams earlier in the day to lessen the effects of fasting will bring exams into a period of the day when teenagers may not be at their most focused or alert: Some researchers suggest that academic performance is improved in lessons held later in the day. Rescheduling exams to take place earlier may well disadvantage the majority of students on account of Muslim students fasting. The decisions around exam scheduling should be driven by evidence and research, not religious considerations. "Bringing exams in core subjects, such as English and Maths, earlier in the exam period will lessen the time available for revision for the most important exams. If this does disadvantage students then no special accommodation for religious festivals or fasting periods should be made."
	Damning details emerge about establishment cover-up of Anglican sex abuse Opinion \| Mon, 4th Jan 2016 New revelations about the extent of the letter-writing campaign to help disgraced bishop Peter Ball escape charges raise urgent questions about the extent of the establishment cover-up, writes Keith Porteous Wood. Former Bishop of Gloucester Peter Ball was recently jailed for 32 months aged 83 for offences relating to sexual activity with almost twenty young males. The Crown Prosecution Service had investigated allegations twenty years earlier but they had told Ball in 1993 that despite "sufficient admissible, substantial and reliable evidence" it was prepared to deal with the matter out of court. Ball was let off with a caution and resigned as bishop. It is widely thought that Ball escaped more serious charges and a trial in 1993 because of a massive establishment cover-up; numerous letters were sent to justice authorities on Ball's behalf. Freedom of Information requests, including by the Telegraph, Times and the BBC, have led to the release of a few of these letters and confirm that some were from key establishment figures. A former Home Office Secretary of State (now Rt Hon Lord Renton) wrote, seemingly accepting the accusations, that "the further shame of criminal action seems far too great a punishment". The Rt Hon Lord Justice Lloyd wrote to both the Detective Inspector and Chief Constable describing Ball as "the most … saintly man I have ever met", thanking the former for "being so understanding when we spoke on the telephone". Several senior masters from public schools also wrote. That the letters were orchestrated is suggested by a phrase used in a letter from Radley College Abingdon: "I gather it may be helpful for you to hear from those who have known Bishop Peter Ball for a long period of time." Who suggested that "it may be helpful"? A number of the letters released are, predictably, from senior figures in the Church including two (now former) Archbishops of Canterbury. Archbishop of Canterbury at the time Lord Carey wrote at least two of these letters, one to the Director of the Crown Prosecution Service and another to the relevant Chief Constable. The letters contained passages like: "while being keenly conscious of the need to avoid any suggestion that I might be trying to influence the police enquiries", and, "… in no way whatsoever would I wish to influence you about the decision over Bishop Ball", and "'special pleading' would be entirely inappropriate; at the same time …". Similar phrases occurred in several of the letters from others. But what other motive, other than the desire to influence any decision by the police and the CPS, could Lord Carey have had for writing the letters? One victim of Bishop Ball, Phil Johnson, told the BBC in an interview screened on 1 January that if there was no intention to influence, why did Lord Carey write the letters at all? The letters could not have been more manipulative. Lord Carey wrote of his "urgent concern" about Ball's health or to the police that he was "anxious", making representations of the "excruciating pain and spiritual torment which these allegations have brought upon [Ball]", and extolling at length on his achievements and ministry? Nor could they have been more effective. Why else would the CPS have withdrawn charges just days after receiving Lord Carey's pleas, as The Times reported on 5 January? The CPS have recently conceded that this was the wrong decision. According to the Press Association in September, Lord Carey said: "I was worried that if any other allegations of past indecency were made it would reignite. I wanted some reassurance that this would not be the case. … I was so troubled, that evening after dinner I went to my study. … I was supplied with a number of a man at the CPS I believed to be a director. I do not recall his name. … I rang him and asked what might happen if allegations from the past were made. … I was told quite categorically that the other allegations would not be taken further as far as we are concerned." The letters and above conversation do not seem entirely consistent with a report in the Church Times on 7 October 2015: "A spokesman for Lord Carey has denied that he attempted to intervene in the case. 'He discussed the matter with the CPS after the caution had been given to Peter Ball. If there was a cover-up, he was unaware. The allegations were investigated by police, and he believed this was a proper investigation.'" Perhaps most concerning of all is that the evidence emerging is not inconsistent with Lord Carey acting despite acknowledging the validity of the accusations and that they may be multiple. And surely it could not because of them: He said, for example, "This seemed to me at first to be most improbable" [emphasis added] and he was at least aware of the possibility of further accusations: He said he was "worried" about "any other allegations of past indecency" that might be made. These concerns are strengthened by evidence that has now emerged in The Times that his Chief of Staff at the time, Bishop Ronald Gordon declined the prospect of further information that had become available about Ball's nefarious activities because he had "discussed the correspondence the archbishop had received referring to past events in PB's life" and there was "already enough evidence to suggest a picture of what has been happening". Richard Scorer, a senior lawyer specialising in such cases and author of a book on child abuse in the Roman Catholic Church, stated in The Times: "Unless Archbishop Carey has a very good explanation, this has all the hallmarks of a cover-up. … It appears to the victims that he was more concerned with ensuring Ball was treated leniently than about them." One of the alleged victims, Neil Todd, attempted suicide several times, depressed about not being believed. He even went to Australia to start a new life, but committed suicide in 2013 following the revival of police enquiries. Mr Scorer is demanding that Lord Carey publicly explain his actions, adding "We cannot have a system where certain people receive more lenient treatment than others, because of who they happen to know." It seems improbable in the extreme that these letters were sent to the Police and CPS without being orchestrated. The perpetrators of this perversion of the course of justice must be exposed. Hopefully it will emerge, perhaps from the Independent Inquiry into Child Sexual Abuse, who was responsible for organising this high level campaign, of such magnitude that it apparently succeeded in perverting the course of justice. Questions will be asked about a report in 1993 that according to the Sun: "church officials had pleaded with [alleged victim Neil Todd's] family not to go to the police." Getting to the bottom of the shocking perversion of justice in the 1990s is important, but we should be even more concerned about the extent to which it pervaded the treatment of Ball in recent years. While the CPS belatedly admitted its wrong decision in 1993 there has been no explanation of why the CPS decided in 2015 against pressing charges against Ball on the most serious allegations concerning two teenage boys, albeit Ball pleaded not guilty to them. Ball has shamelessly maintained his innocence for decades, and on the other charges until the last moment, presumably only changing it to avoid a trial. Ball stopped at nothing – including deceiving the establishment and Royal Family – to perpetuate the lie of his innocence. His doing so has caused untold misery and may have cost Neil Todd his life. Was sparing him a trial a reward for changing his plea? If so was that an appropriate reward for him, having lied for decades with such devastating consequences? Why was there no trial, one that would also have given his victims the opportunity to have their say in court? I am convinced that a trial would have revealed more of relevance about Ball's actions, but also of the Church's institutional bullying and intimidation of victims. The Rev Graham Sawyer claims he was denied ordination (he was eventually ordained in Australia) unless he was silent about being abused by Ball and that even in 2015 the Church's bishop in charge of safeguarding, the Bishop of Durham, refused to engage with victims, citing 'banking reform' as a greater priority. Sawyer is adamant that there is a "fundamental bankruptcy" in the Church's handling of survivor responses and that people at the highest levels of the Church are more concerned with "saving face". See also: "Carey knew of sex abuse when he defended Ball" in The Times (5/1/16)
	NSS welcomes minister’s commitment to ensure same-sex weddings can take place in military chapels News \| Tue, 22nd Dec 2015 The National Secular Society has welcomed an intervention from Defence Minister Penny Mordaunt to ensure that the rights of gay military personnel wishing to marry are respected. Regulations allowing same-sex marriages in the 190 military chapels in England and Wales came into force 18 months ago – but none of the Sending Churches using the chapels currently allow same-sex marriages to be conducted there. Defence Minister Penny Mordaunt has now written to military chaplains to ask how "Parliament's sanction" will be "fully implemented". News of the minister's intervention came in response to a written question from Madeleine Moon MP (Bridgend - Labour), a member of the Commons Defence Committee. The National Secular Society has called for it to be made clear to all service personnel that if they want a same-sex marriage in a military chapel they can have one. Keith Porteous Wood, NSS executive director, commented: "Military chapels are for the benefit of all military personnel, so it is discriminatory, as well as disingenuous to veto their use for same-sex marriages. "The churches repay the privilege of being provided with chapels for their services paid for by the state by denying their use to those wishing to be lawfully married. Shamelessly blocking the use of military chapels to gay serving personal who want to marry also illustrates that the centuries-old persecution of homosexuals by the institutional churches is being actively perpetuated today by their leaders, despite support for same-sex marriage by the majority of those that identify as Christians. "The only possible justification for such a veto, were if clergy who do not wish to solemnise same sex marriages were forced to do so, but the Marriage (Same Sex Couples) Act specifically exempts them from doing so against their will." The NSS says that if chaplains don't want to conduct to same sex marriages they should be under a duty to find someone who will. The position on armed forces' chapels differs from that of civilian religious buildings in that they are largely owned by the State and not by the religious organisations that use them. A small number of military chapels are owned by the Church of England and not covered by the regulations. The Defence Secretary is required to consult with Sending Churches before registering military chapels to be used for same-sex marriages. However they can legally block such registrations is unclear. The Sending Churches - which provide chaplains to the armed forces – include the Church of England, Roman Catholic, Methodist, Church of Scotland, Presbyterian, Baptist Union, United Reformed, Congregational, Free Church of Scotland, Elim Pentecostal and Assemblies of God. Photo: RAF Taking part in the London Gay Pride parade \| Credit: Defence Images ©Crown copyright 2012
	2015: A year of terror for Bangladesh’s secularist writers Opinion \| Tue, 5th Jan 2016 Arif Rahman, a Bangladeshi blogger, reflects on the targeted attacks on secularist bloggers that took place in Bangladesh throughout 2015, claiming many lives, and considers the road ahead for secularism in the face of terror and state-sanctioned persecution. 2015 was the darkest of times in Bangladesh's history. Like the 1975 murder of the founding president Sheikh Mujib, which wiped out all the secular achievements of the 1971 war for independence from Pakistan, 2015 will be remembered by the world as the year atheist bloggers, authors and publishers were killed. Bloggers and publishers were assassinated one after another, attacked in the streets, at home or in their offices, and countless bloggers were persecuted by the infamous 'Section 57', a blasphemy law. This resulted in mass hysteria among the huge number of bloggers, activists, a lot of whom eventually fled the country, tarnishing the 'secular image' of Bangladesh. In this one year, 2015, Bangladesh became a killing ground of not only bloggers, but for freedom of speech itself. Government officials, ministers and police repeatedly warned bloggers not to 'cross the line' immediately after every brutal murder by Islamists. Large sections of the country's traditional media chimed in with this sort of victim blaming. The result was devastating for the psychological state of bloggers, writers, publishers and vocal activists in general. The fear of sudden attack coupled with the threat of jail or persecution at the hands of the law, supported by a vicious media, created such a toxic psychological atmosphere for the already afraid critical and creative minds that people were fleeing the country in flocks. This suffocating atmosphere created perfect conditions for ISIS to expand. Their magazine 'Dabiq' declared Bangladesh its next target. Bloggers running for their lives could not go to the police, and were told that the authorities couldn't give them protection, and that their best bet was to flee the country. The son of Sheikh Hasina, Sajib Wazed Joy, an adviser of the Prime Minister, told Reuters that the Awami League, the party running the country right now cannot aggravate Islamists in fear of losing votes. His mother expressed her condolence to the father of the slain science writer Avijit Roy in secret, over the phone. She was afraid if news of this phone call leaked to the press, her 'approval rating' would diminish. It seems to that Islamists are already in power. We know very well that the Islamists are funded and supported from abroad, not least in donations and assistance from Saudi Arabia, the 'ally' Britain desperately appeases. Bangladesh does not want to be seen as aggravating either Saudi Arabia, or Britain. But Bangladeshi secularists will not forget that Britain and Bangladesh both flew their national flag at half-mast after the death of the Saudi King. Secular bloggers, authors and activists may only be a thorn in side for Islamists, but we are a very painful one. Aside from the horrendous levels of violence, the law, in the form of Section 57 of the Information Communication Act, was also weaponized against secularists back in 2013. This gave yet more fuel for the Bangladeshi intellectual diaspora. In this vague and blunt law, God, prophets, and political personalities are protected from criticism or satire. The law puts fear into the minds of bloggers: writers can be arrested without warrant, detained indefinitely, fined an unbelievable sum or worse, and face a jail sentence of 14 years. That fear is enough for the rest of the critical blogger community to fold inwards, hide and eventually give up writing altogether. The effect is a victory for Islamism and the would-be dictator, Sheikh Hasina. A translation of Ali Dashti's "23 Years, a Study of the Prophetic Career of Muhammad" was seized by Islamist thugs. No one even dared to protest. Recently the same Islamist mob vandalized the traditional Baul festival, just because the Bauls, the mystical singers of rural Bangladesh, do not conform to imported Wahhabism. No one dared to stop the Islamist mob. That is the price Bangladesh is paying for criminalising atheist blogging. Attacks on other religious sects continue year-long. No newspaper dares to publish a humanist or atheist article in fear of retaliation. The publishing of cartoons has already become a taboo after Islamists threatened to burn down a major daily newspaper. The Bangladesh DGFI 'ordered' businesses not to advertise in the same newspaper, exerting another level of government control. 2015 also saw the proliferation of 'hit lists' and further threats to newspapers, dictating conditions such as women journalists to be sacked, no reporting on the killing of atheist bloggers, no negative coverage of Islamist thugs. We know Islamists are operating widely, but in Bangladesh, they get a seal of approval from the government. Bangladesh is known as a 'secular' state to the rest of world, however, the meaning of secularism inside the country is skewed to the degree that UN Special Rapporteur on Freedom of Religion or Belief, Heiner Bielefeldt, recently had to comment on the 'misperceptions' around secularism within Bangladesh. This struggle between real secularism and overt Islamism took a turn for the worse in 2015 with the blood of so many bloggers being spilled on the streets. The Islamist bubble seems to have engulfed the secular narrative practised by a dwindling number of civil society organisations. The 1991 transition from military rule to democracy gave us hope but even after 24 years in 'democracy' we seem to have failed to fulfil the basic requirements of a proper democracy. This is sad and no signs of recovery can be seen in the horizon. This is an amended version of a blog post originally posted here. Arif Rahman is a secularist Bangladeshi blogger, based in the UK. The views expressed in our blogs are those of the author, and may not represent the views of the NSS.