Newsline 19 September 2014

Newsline is a weekly round-up of news and opinion from the NSS website. If you're not already a member, becoming one is the most tangible way of supporting our work. Our campaigning is wholly supported by our members, people like you who share our belief that secularism is an essential element in promoting equality between all citizens. Please join today.

News, Blogs & Opinion

	Anger as non-Catholics forced off the school bus News \| Thu, 18th Sep 2014 Parents in Flintshire have complained of religious discrimination after it emerged that non-Catholics wouldn't be permitted to use a bus provided by the local authority to a Catholic faith school. This term sees the implementation of Flintshire Council's new policy of only providing free bus passes to faith schools where parents can prove that pupils are attending the school for religious reasons with evidence such as baptism certificates or a note from a priest. One parent whose twin girls don't qualify for a free pass told the Flintshire Chronicle that parents have been "furious" to learn their children will not now be allowed to use the school bus, even as paid passengers. Mum-of-three Emily Hill claims the ban is "religious discrimination" and is fearful about the prospect of her children having to use public transport to travel to school. She told the Chronicle: "When the council did their consultations last year we were always led to believe that our children would still be able to use the bus and pay and we were told it would be about £55 a term, which I had no problem with as it is cheaper than public transport. "Now my girls will have to use public transport and I'm really worried about their safety as it's going to be dangerous. They will have to walk through an alleyway and along the main road which is very busy. She added: "it's discriminatory and causing segregation as it's making people stand out based on what religion they are. I'm so angry, it feels like we are all being penalised for not being the 'right' religion. There is enough anger in the world about religion as it is, so why add more." She claims that dozens of children were made to get off if they did not have a pass, however Flintshire County Council denies that any pupils were made to leave the bus. Ian Budd, chief officer education and youth for said: "Following thorough consultation, the council's transport policy for faith schools changed for new pupils starting the school with effect from this September. "The effect of the revised policy is that free transport will be provided only to pupils who can provide evidence that they adhere to the faith of the school they attend. "Bus passes have been distributed with the help of the school for the last two weeks, and bus drivers have been asked to check passes. "The council will ensure that transport is provided as efficiently and economically as possible, and if after finalising transport arrangements there are any spare seats on school contract vehicles they may be sold at a concessionary rate". When introduced in May 2013, Flintshire's policy was criticised as "morally repugnant" by the National Secular Society, which has condemned the way in which religious beliefs of parents are being used to single out specific children for unequal treatment in local authority school transport policies. An Equality Act exemption means an authority's duty not to discriminate against a person on the grounds of their religion or belief does not apply to its functions in relation to school transport. During its scrutiny of Act, the Joint Committee on Human Rights expressed concern that the existence of the exemptions would encourage authorities to treat the religious and the non-religious differently.
	Teachers shouldn’t be the victims of religious discrimination Opinion \| Tue, 16th Sep 2014 The degree to which we tolerate discrimination against teachers in state-funded faith schools would be totally unacceptable in almost all other areas of public life, argues Stephen Evans. Parents with children at a primary school in East Sussex expressed outrage this week, when it became clear that the school's popular headteacher, who was drafted in to save the failing primary, could not stay on permanently because he isn't Roman Catholic. The school of course, is a faith school. Being a voluntary aided Catholic school, all the staff are employed by the governing body which can apply a religious test in appointing, remunerating and promoting all teachers. Jon Reynard was called in to improve standards at the school after it was placed in special measures by Ofsted. Parents, who described the head as "fantastic", now want him to stay in post permanently. But the Diocese, which has control over the school's governing body, is keen to replace him with a Catholic. Defending its position, the Diocese said: "To maintain the clear Catholic character of Catholic schools the Bishops of England and Wales have stated that the posts of headteacher, deputy headteacher and head of religious education are to be filled by baptised and practising Catholics. The Diocese expects all Catholics schools in the diocese to follow this policy." As the Catholic Diocese of Arundel and Brighton correctly point out, such a policy is recognised in law. By any 21st Century standard of equality, the degree of discrimination legally permitted on the grounds of religion and belief against teachers is unreasonable and unacceptable. These are publicly funded schools we're talking about. Only in the field of education, where religion has somehow managed to maintain its stranglehold over society, would such discrimination still be tolerated. Surely children's best interests are served by schools recruiting the most suitably qualified teachers and headteachers. It's easy to see how putting religious ethos before the academic success of the school might serve the Church, but it's harder to see how it benefits the pupils – who I would argue, should always be the number one priority. Of course, some will argue that a distinctive religious ethos is key to academic success. This argument ignores the growing body of evidence that suggests that what success some faith schools achieve has less to do with "ethos" and more to do with the way in which they can select pupils on the basis of faith – which inadvertently acts as a form of socio-economic selection. Before the arrival of Mr Reynard, the undersubscribed Catholic Primary School in question was judged to be "inadequate" in virtually all areas. So much for the magical Catholic ethos, then. I'm not arguing that a school's ethos isn't important. I think it is. But in our publicly funded schools, shouldn't that ethos be built around shared values, equality, inclusiveness and a commitment to excellence? The school at the centre of this story says its "ultimate concern is to assist all those involved with it in their Journey to God." Such a self-serving ethos based around the promotion of a religious faith or a religious institution should have no place in a modern public education system. The extent to which such discrimination is permitted in faith schools in order to maintain this "ethos" is the subject of an ongoing European Commission investigation, with the National Secular Society arguing it breaches European employment laws in relation to discrimination on the grounds of religion or belief. But it shouldn't take the European Commission to tell us that such discrimination is unjust and ethically wrong and that it shouldn't be allowed to continue. It's time the law was changed to protect teachers from a form of discrimination that has thankfully been eradicated from almost all other areas of public life.
	Law Society under growing pressure over sharia wills guidance News \| Fri, 19th Sep 2014 Secularists and human rights campaigners have stepped up their calls for the Law Society to withdraw its controversial practice note on sharia succession rules. The practice note, intended to assist solicitors in drafting 'sharia compliant' wills, advises solicitors: "… illegitimate and adopted children are not Sharia heirs … The male heirs in most cases receive double the amount inherited by a female heir … Non-Muslims may not inherit at all …a divorced spouse is no longer a Sharia heir…" In a frank meeting with senior officials at the Law Society, representatives of both the National Secular Society and the Lawyers' Secular Society (LSS) called for withdrawal of the guidance. The Law Society agreed to further consider the possible withdrawal of the practice note and, failing that, consider amendments to it. The Law Society's refusal to withdraw the guidance thus far was branded a "gross derogation of duty on both legal and moral grounds" by campaigners, this week. The latest criticism came in an open letter signed by Pragna Patel (Southall Black Sisters), Maryam Namazie (One Law for All and Fitnah – Movement for Women's Liberation), Gita Sahgal (Centre for Secular Space), Yasmin Rehman, Diana Nammi (Iranian & Kurdish Women's Rights Organisation), Rumana Hashem (Nari Diganta – Women in Movement for Social Justice, Secularism and Equal Rights) and Chris Moos (LSESU Atheist, Secularist and Humanist Society). The letter, sent to all Law Society council members, states: "The Practice Note... serves in effect to endorse discrimination against minority women and children on the grounds of their gender, marital and family status and religious backgrounds, in so far as it encourages legal and state welfare services to accommodate highly gender discriminatory religious laws that are being increasingly defined by religious fundamentalists in our society. This is a source of immense concern to those of us who have for so long contested gender discrimination in our communities and fought for the freedom of women and children." It urges the Law Society to: "adhere to the spirit of the equalities and human rights legislation and to its own equality policy by recognising that its main business lies in the promotion of a culture of human rights and norms based on principles of equality for all rather than on the promotion of 'Sharia compliant' laws that discriminates against minority women and children in particular." Campaigners have also made public legal advice – obtained from Karon Monaghan QC of Matrix Chambers – a leading expert in discrimination law – expressing her opinion that there are considerable legal risks attached to the practice note since it takes no account of equality legislation and instead strays into the realms of doctrinal advice. In summary, Ms Monaghan's advice states: The Law Society is subject to the Public Sector Equality Duty since the promulgation of the practice note is an exercise of a public function; The practice note gives rise to equality issues since it provides guidance to solicitors which endorse gender discriminatory laws; The practice note gives rise to equality issues since it promotes an interpretation of Sharia that is discriminatory on the grounds of religion and ethnicity; There is a continuing duty on the Law Society to address equality and diversity issues; The practice note may give rise to direct discrimination by solicitors acting upon it; The Law Society fails to meet the specific requirements of the Public Sector Equality Duty, namely, the need to remove or minimise disadvantages suffered by minority women and to eliminate discrimination; The practice note gives rise to an obvious risk of illegality in its application and is therefore unlawful. The latest developments have been welcomed by the LSS, which first raised the alarm about the guidance. Charlie Klendjian, LSS secretary, said: "The Law Society can draw a line under this whole episode very easily. It simply needs to withdraw this controversial practice note. We hope they will do this as soon as possible." Earlier this year the Solicitors' Regulatory Authority (SRA) removed a reference it had made to the Law Society's controversial practice note, under threat of legal action alleging a breach of the Equality Act 2010 as the body is a public authority with a public sector equality duty.
	BBC's Rip Off Britain takes on chancel repair liability News \| Thu, 18th Sep 2014 Rip Off Britain, the BBC consumer rights program which investigates viewers' stories of being ripped-off, this week covered chancel repair liability (CRL) – an ancient law which can make homeowners liable for the upkeep of the chancel (the part including the altar) of their local Anglican church The 8 minute segment focused on the village of Edingale, in Staffordshire, and the story of NSS member Helen Bailey, who lives in a barn she converted with her husband Chris in 1999 to help care for his elderly mother. In October 2013 Helen received a notice from the Land Registry informing her that her local church, which she had never set foot in, had registered its right to make them contribute to the cost of repairs. Ms Bailey told Rip Off Britain: "It is quite bizarre that the law can ask us to pay for a church that we don't even attend, and have no connection with." Homeowners have raised concerns that registration reduces the value of properties and impairs their saleability. In the BBC show, Paul Hajek, a solicitor from Clatton Cox, estimates that for 99% of property owners affected, the liability doesn't show up on their deeds, but can now be registered, so the first they hear of it is often a letter from the Land Registry, as happened in Helen Bailey's case. Rectors were responsible for CRL under ancient common law by virtue of ownership of particular land. While this land passed into lay hands with the dissolution of the monasteries, the liability has remained. As long ago as 1985, the Law Commission recommended abolition, and the Law Society later recommended phasing out, as the Church of England had in 1982. More recently, though, the Church has been encouraging parishes to pursue the liability to help repair their churches and several hundred have done so. This has caused considerable resentment among the thousands of property owners affected. Helen Bailey led a local campaign which has resulted in her and her neighbours being able to buy out their liability from the Church at an advantageous price. Few have been so fortunate. Relatively cheap CRL insurance is available, but not for those whose properties have been registered. In July 2014 Liberal Democrat peer and NSS honorary associate Lord Avebury introduced the Chancel Repair Bill, to abolish the liability, with assistance from the National Secular Society. Its second reading debate is expected in the autumn. Viewers in the UK can watch the programme on BBC iPlayer until 30 September. The CRL segment starts at 33:44.
	Rowan Williams and his ilk are not the people to decide where religion sits in public life Opinion \| Sat, 13th Sep 2014 The Woolf Institute has convened a commission to consider the place and role of religion and belief in contemporary Britain, and to "make recommendations for public life and policy." David Voas questions whether this review can reach a conclusion that reflects the priorities of the general public, rather than just people of faith. A high-level commission has been convened to consider the place of religion in British public life. But the way this commission has been put together makes it part of the problem rather than promising real solutions. Its four patrons are drawn from the great and the good, though it is hard not to smile at the earnestness with which all religious bases have been covered. We have philosopher Bhikhu Parekh; Iqbal Sacranie, the former secretary-general of the Muslim Council of Britain; Rowan Williams, until recently Archbishop of Canterbury; and Harry Woolf, formerly Lord Chief Justice of England and Wales. When they gather, do they tell jokes that start "A priest, a rabbi and an imam walk into a bar …"? The issue is whether this review can reach a conclusion that reflects the priorities of the general public, rather than just people of faith. Religion is never out of the news and most of the stories out there do nothing to enhance its reputation in Britain, where an overwhelming majority of respondents to the British Social Attitudes Survey agree that religion is more likely to produce conflict than peace. Most British people see religion as a private matter and oppose religious influence on public policy. Many have beliefs that could be described as religious, but those beliefs have little influence on their lives. Although a large number of people – particularly from ethnic minority groups – do see religion as important, the majority of the population is profoundly indifferent to the claims of traditional faith. There is a common view that religion has made the world a more troubled place. And the highly religious are frequently depicted as ridiculous, creepy, moralising, intolerant, potentially dangerous and generally weird. For their part, religious groups increasingly come together to make common cause against outside disdain. The Commission on Religion and Belief in British Public Life gives every appearance of being one such effort by an inter-faith organisation. It has 20 members: only great-ish and good-ish, but distinguished and serious people. Once again, though, the inter-faith theologians have created the world in their own image. Nearly half of the members are religious professionals and nearly all of them have strong religious identities, if not beliefs. The chief executive of the British Humanist Association plays his customary part as the token free thinker, but it's hard to shake the dispiriting sense that we are dealing with an assembly of, by and for the religiously committed. It is completely appropriate for people whose business is faith to prepare a report on the role of religion and belief in British public life, just as it is appropriate for people who work in the pub trade to write about the role of alcohol in British life. What they cannot expect, though, is for their findings to be treated as anything other than the product of a special interest group. The commission is condemned from its conception to producing a minority report. One of the questions posed for the commission's public consultation is "Does Britain show equal respect for religious and non-religious beliefs and identities?" The answer is that Britain might, but the conveners of the commission clearly do not. The composition of the panel makes it plain that they have minimal respect for indifference to religion – which is precisely what characterises a majority of the population. There is as much chance of the commission proposing to reduce the role of religion in public life as there is of the National Secular Society proposing to increase it. Where's the science? Apart from its built-in partisanship, the commission also suffers from the hubris of the humanities. Practically everyone on it comes from theology, philosophy, religious studies, history or law. Expertise in the empirical social scientific study of British society is conspicuous by its near-absence. The causes and consequences of prejudice, discrimination, inequality and injustice are critical issues that are constantly being investigated by secular scholars in sociology, politics and economics. So why is the panel so weak in these fields? The recommendations made are likely to suffer from this absence. The commission was born in a bubble: the encapsulated community of people involved in religion. Its instigators will grumble if their report is ignored, but when that happens, they are going to have to accept a large share of the blame. David Voas is a professor of Population Studies at the University of Essex. He is the national programme director in Great Britain for the European Values Study and co-director of British Religion in Numbers. This article originally appeared on The Conversation and is reproduced here with the author's kind permission under a Creative Commons licence. The views in this article are those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of the NSS.
	Luxembourg considers new church tax in debate over future of state support News \| Tue, 16th Sep 2014 Luxembourg is considering a church tax as part of a range of possible measures to replace direct state funding for religious organisations. The Vice-Prime Minister of the majority Catholic country, Etienne Schneider, said the Government is pushing ahead with the separation of church and state. But that the Government wants the church to be able to be financially independent while still being able to pay the wages of priests and other staff. Non-profit organisations run by the church will continue to benefit from state support to deliver welfare services. Following his deputy's comments, Prime Minister Xavier Bettel told the Luxemburger Wort that talks with the Catholic diocese and other faith groups were ongoing and that nothing had been decided. Mr Bettel expressed his belief that, "Religion is something personal and should not be financed by the state" and confirmed that he would seek approval for constitutional changes on the relationship between church and state. According to the Luxemburger Wort, the main opposition party the Catholic-oriented CSV (Christian Social People's Party) criticised the Vice-PM saying that his comments could leave church workers worried about their livelihoods. Luxembourg is in theory a secular state, based on the French principle of laïcité. However, over the last 200 years the country's separation of church and state has been gradually transformed. The Grand Duchy's royal family are Catholic and Luxembourg retained the principles of the Concordat of 1801, granting privileged status to the Roman Catholic Church, when it separated from France in 1815. Since then Luxembourg has officially recognised a number of other religions, starting with the Protestant Church of Luxembourg in 1894. In return for influence over religious administration and the appointment of clergy, the State pays certain running costs and wages. Alongside a tax imposed on registered members of the church (which some commentators predict may lead to an exodus), other proposed ideas include a membership fee charged to active members, or that members celebrating special events at the church – such as their first holy communion or wedding – will have to financially contribute. A 1979 law forbids the Government from collecting statistics on religious beliefs or practices. But, in 2011 the Centre for the Study of Population, Poverty and Socio-Economic Policy reported that the country's population was: 68.7% Catholic, 1.8% Protestant, 1.9% other Christian religion, 2.6% other non-Christian religion and 24.9% non-religious.
	Secularism, today, now Opinion \| Thu, 4th Sep 2014 Ahead of an historic conference on the Religious-Right, Secularism and Civil Rights in London this October, Algerian secularist, Marieme Helie Lucas calls on secularists everywhere to mobilise to counter the rise of the Religious-Right – and to urge the elements of the left that support them to reconsider their stance. Secularism is probably the one big issue for our century. This century is not, as many still think, marked by a religious or spiritual revival. What we are actually witnessing is the rise of extreme-Right political movements, working under the cover of religion. Everywhere. No one is spared, neither Buddhism or Hinduism which still enjoy outside their boundaries an undue reputation of being peaceful, nor the notorious Christian-Right, or Muslim, Sikh or Jewish fundamentalisms. All of them, when given a chance, behave like any extreme-Right movement: they suppress dissent through brute force and they physically eliminate those deemed infra-humans. In the name of their gods. Secularists are being attacked in many places in the world today: they are jailed, killed, tortured, their very existence is considered an offense to believers in many non-secular states. The terrible crimes committed right now by ISIS in Iraq, against dissenters, religious minorities and women in general, are far from exceptional: all areas of countries that were momentarily under the boot of armed Muslim fundamentalists experienced similar ferocious repression, be it Algeria in the nineties, Mali, Afghanistan, etc… Fundamentalist extreme-Right forces manage to get more and more countries to 'accommodate' parallel religiously-inspired legal systems that are a denial of democracy; supposedly divine rules, as interpreted by old reactionary male clerics are given equal status - and sometimes prominence over - hard-won democratically-voted laws. They are supported at UN and international levels by powerful coalitions (from the Vatican to the Organization of the Islamic Conference and even by the Non-Aligned – alas! - in the name of anti-imperialism) that assert so-called religious rights over and above any other fundamental human rights. Europe, which has seen parallel legal systems sanctioned by state authorities in the name of multiculturalism, i.e. the promotion of unequal rights for different categories of citizens, has not been spared. There is a need for secularists around the world to come together and examine their situations, to exchange information, to strategize and to join hands. This is the purpose of the upcoming International Conference on the Religious Right, Secularism and Civil Rights, which is to take place in London during October 11-12, 2014. Speakers from countries or the Diaspora as diverse as Algeria, Bangladesh, Canada, Egypt, France, India, Iran, Iraq, Israel, Libya, Morocco, Pakistan, Palestine, Poland, Senegal, Sudan, Switzerland, Syria, Tunisia, UK, USA and Yemen will reflect on the struggle for secularism in both regional and thematic ways and will discuss how to counter the specific forms that attacks on secularism take in various parts of the world, and how to more efficiently mobilize in the defence of threatened secularists. A number of victims of state repression for having declared their atheism will be present and will testify. Participants will also discuss how to counter the rise of the religious-Right in countries of emigration such as Europe and North America, and how to help both the Left and human rights organisations, which have been blindly supporting fundamentalist demands – assuming they were the true and legitimate voice of minorities, re-evaluate the politics behind those demands, reconsider their support for extreme-Right political forces and shift their concern to endangered secularists. To find out more about this historic conference, go to www.secularconference.com Marieme Helie Lucas is an Algerian sociologist, founder and former International Coordinator of the 'Women Living Under Muslim Laws' international solidarity network and founder of 'Secularism Is A Women's Issue' (siawi.org). She is a member of the Conference Organising Committee. The views expressed in this article are those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of the NSS.

Quotes of the Week

"I would like to see, over time, an understanding by all people and cultures, and religions, that there should be separation of church and state, that there is a sense of rendering unto Caesar what is Caesar's and to God what is God's."
(Tony Abbott, Prime Minister of Australia, ABC News)

"That in the 21st century, someone might be arguing against the "competition of ideas" seems to me remarkable."
(Shoaib Daniyal, on proposals to ban religious conversion in India, Scroll)

Essays of the Week

If ISIS Is Not Islamic, then the Inquisition Was Not Catholic
(Jerry A. Coyne, New Republic)

Compromise with political Islam is impossible
(Salah Chouaki, Algerian educator and rights activist, El Watan)

Social Justice through Citizenship? The Politics of Muslim Integration in Germany and Great Britain, by Aleksandra Lewicki
(Review by Sarah Hackett, Times Higher Education)

Upcoming Events

International conference on the Religious-Right, Secularism and Civil Rights

Sat, 11th Oct 2014

Do you have an event relevant to secularism, which you'd like to appear in Newsline? Send the details to enquires@secularism.org.uk

	Anger as non-Catholics forced off the school bus News \| Thu, 18th Sep 2014 Parents in Flintshire have complained of religious discrimination after it emerged that non-Catholics wouldn't be permitted to use a bus provided by the local authority to a Catholic faith school. This term sees the implementation of Flintshire Council's new policy of only providing free bus passes to faith schools where parents can prove that pupils are attending the school for religious reasons with evidence such as baptism certificates or a note from a priest. One parent whose twin girls don't qualify for a free pass told the Flintshire Chronicle that parents have been "furious" to learn their children will not now be allowed to use the school bus, even as paid passengers. Mum-of-three Emily Hill claims the ban is "religious discrimination" and is fearful about the prospect of her children having to use public transport to travel to school. She told the Chronicle: "When the council did their consultations last year we were always led to believe that our children would still be able to use the bus and pay and we were told it would be about £55 a term, which I had no problem with as it is cheaper than public transport. "Now my girls will have to use public transport and I'm really worried about their safety as it's going to be dangerous. They will have to walk through an alleyway and along the main road which is very busy. She added: "it's discriminatory and causing segregation as it's making people stand out based on what religion they are. I'm so angry, it feels like we are all being penalised for not being the 'right' religion. There is enough anger in the world about religion as it is, so why add more." She claims that dozens of children were made to get off if they did not have a pass, however Flintshire County Council denies that any pupils were made to leave the bus. Ian Budd, chief officer education and youth for said: "Following thorough consultation, the council's transport policy for faith schools changed for new pupils starting the school with effect from this September. "The effect of the revised policy is that free transport will be provided only to pupils who can provide evidence that they adhere to the faith of the school they attend. "Bus passes have been distributed with the help of the school for the last two weeks, and bus drivers have been asked to check passes. "The council will ensure that transport is provided as efficiently and economically as possible, and if after finalising transport arrangements there are any spare seats on school contract vehicles they may be sold at a concessionary rate". When introduced in May 2013, Flintshire's policy was criticised as "morally repugnant" by the National Secular Society, which has condemned the way in which religious beliefs of parents are being used to single out specific children for unequal treatment in local authority school transport policies. An Equality Act exemption means an authority's duty not to discriminate against a person on the grounds of their religion or belief does not apply to its functions in relation to school transport. During its scrutiny of Act, the Joint Committee on Human Rights expressed concern that the existence of the exemptions would encourage authorities to treat the religious and the non-religious differently.
	Teachers shouldn’t be the victims of religious discrimination Opinion \| Tue, 16th Sep 2014 The degree to which we tolerate discrimination against teachers in state-funded faith schools would be totally unacceptable in almost all other areas of public life, argues Stephen Evans. Parents with children at a primary school in East Sussex expressed outrage this week, when it became clear that the school's popular headteacher, who was drafted in to save the failing primary, could not stay on permanently because he isn't Roman Catholic. The school of course, is a faith school. Being a voluntary aided Catholic school, all the staff are employed by the governing body which can apply a religious test in appointing, remunerating and promoting all teachers. Jon Reynard was called in to improve standards at the school after it was placed in special measures by Ofsted. Parents, who described the head as "fantastic", now want him to stay in post permanently. But the Diocese, which has control over the school's governing body, is keen to replace him with a Catholic. Defending its position, the Diocese said: "To maintain the clear Catholic character of Catholic schools the Bishops of England and Wales have stated that the posts of headteacher, deputy headteacher and head of religious education are to be filled by baptised and practising Catholics. The Diocese expects all Catholics schools in the diocese to follow this policy." As the Catholic Diocese of Arundel and Brighton correctly point out, such a policy is recognised in law. By any 21st Century standard of equality, the degree of discrimination legally permitted on the grounds of religion and belief against teachers is unreasonable and unacceptable. These are publicly funded schools we're talking about. Only in the field of education, where religion has somehow managed to maintain its stranglehold over society, would such discrimination still be tolerated. Surely children's best interests are served by schools recruiting the most suitably qualified teachers and headteachers. It's easy to see how putting religious ethos before the academic success of the school might serve the Church, but it's harder to see how it benefits the pupils – who I would argue, should always be the number one priority. Of course, some will argue that a distinctive religious ethos is key to academic success. This argument ignores the growing body of evidence that suggests that what success some faith schools achieve has less to do with "ethos" and more to do with the way in which they can select pupils on the basis of faith – which inadvertently acts as a form of socio-economic selection. Before the arrival of Mr Reynard, the undersubscribed Catholic Primary School in question was judged to be "inadequate" in virtually all areas. So much for the magical Catholic ethos, then. I'm not arguing that a school's ethos isn't important. I think it is. But in our publicly funded schools, shouldn't that ethos be built around shared values, equality, inclusiveness and a commitment to excellence? The school at the centre of this story says its "ultimate concern is to assist all those involved with it in their Journey to God." Such a self-serving ethos based around the promotion of a religious faith or a religious institution should have no place in a modern public education system. The extent to which such discrimination is permitted in faith schools in order to maintain this "ethos" is the subject of an ongoing European Commission investigation, with the National Secular Society arguing it breaches European employment laws in relation to discrimination on the grounds of religion or belief. But it shouldn't take the European Commission to tell us that such discrimination is unjust and ethically wrong and that it shouldn't be allowed to continue. It's time the law was changed to protect teachers from a form of discrimination that has thankfully been eradicated from almost all other areas of public life.
	Law Society under growing pressure over sharia wills guidance News \| Fri, 19th Sep 2014 Secularists and human rights campaigners have stepped up their calls for the Law Society to withdraw its controversial practice note on sharia succession rules. The practice note, intended to assist solicitors in drafting 'sharia compliant' wills, advises solicitors: "… illegitimate and adopted children are not Sharia heirs … The male heirs in most cases receive double the amount inherited by a female heir … Non-Muslims may not inherit at all …a divorced spouse is no longer a Sharia heir…" In a frank meeting with senior officials at the Law Society, representatives of both the National Secular Society and the Lawyers' Secular Society (LSS) called for withdrawal of the guidance. The Law Society agreed to further consider the possible withdrawal of the practice note and, failing that, consider amendments to it. The Law Society's refusal to withdraw the guidance thus far was branded a "gross derogation of duty on both legal and moral grounds" by campaigners, this week. The latest criticism came in an open letter signed by Pragna Patel (Southall Black Sisters), Maryam Namazie (One Law for All and Fitnah – Movement for Women's Liberation), Gita Sahgal (Centre for Secular Space), Yasmin Rehman, Diana Nammi (Iranian & Kurdish Women's Rights Organisation), Rumana Hashem (Nari Diganta – Women in Movement for Social Justice, Secularism and Equal Rights) and Chris Moos (LSESU Atheist, Secularist and Humanist Society). The letter, sent to all Law Society council members, states: "The Practice Note... serves in effect to endorse discrimination against minority women and children on the grounds of their gender, marital and family status and religious backgrounds, in so far as it encourages legal and state welfare services to accommodate highly gender discriminatory religious laws that are being increasingly defined by religious fundamentalists in our society. This is a source of immense concern to those of us who have for so long contested gender discrimination in our communities and fought for the freedom of women and children." It urges the Law Society to: "adhere to the spirit of the equalities and human rights legislation and to its own equality policy by recognising that its main business lies in the promotion of a culture of human rights and norms based on principles of equality for all rather than on the promotion of 'Sharia compliant' laws that discriminates against minority women and children in particular." Campaigners have also made public legal advice – obtained from Karon Monaghan QC of Matrix Chambers – a leading expert in discrimination law – expressing her opinion that there are considerable legal risks attached to the practice note since it takes no account of equality legislation and instead strays into the realms of doctrinal advice. In summary, Ms Monaghan's advice states: The Law Society is subject to the Public Sector Equality Duty since the promulgation of the practice note is an exercise of a public function; The practice note gives rise to equality issues since it provides guidance to solicitors which endorse gender discriminatory laws; The practice note gives rise to equality issues since it promotes an interpretation of Sharia that is discriminatory on the grounds of religion and ethnicity; There is a continuing duty on the Law Society to address equality and diversity issues; The practice note may give rise to direct discrimination by solicitors acting upon it; The Law Society fails to meet the specific requirements of the Public Sector Equality Duty, namely, the need to remove or minimise disadvantages suffered by minority women and to eliminate discrimination; The practice note gives rise to an obvious risk of illegality in its application and is therefore unlawful. The latest developments have been welcomed by the LSS, which first raised the alarm about the guidance. Charlie Klendjian, LSS secretary, said: "The Law Society can draw a line under this whole episode very easily. It simply needs to withdraw this controversial practice note. We hope they will do this as soon as possible." Earlier this year the Solicitors' Regulatory Authority (SRA) removed a reference it had made to the Law Society's controversial practice note, under threat of legal action alleging a breach of the Equality Act 2010 as the body is a public authority with a public sector equality duty.
	BBC's Rip Off Britain takes on chancel repair liability News \| Thu, 18th Sep 2014 Rip Off Britain, the BBC consumer rights program which investigates viewers' stories of being ripped-off, this week covered chancel repair liability (CRL) – an ancient law which can make homeowners liable for the upkeep of the chancel (the part including the altar) of their local Anglican church The 8 minute segment focused on the village of Edingale, in Staffordshire, and the story of NSS member Helen Bailey, who lives in a barn she converted with her husband Chris in 1999 to help care for his elderly mother. In October 2013 Helen received a notice from the Land Registry informing her that her local church, which she had never set foot in, had registered its right to make them contribute to the cost of repairs. Ms Bailey told Rip Off Britain: "It is quite bizarre that the law can ask us to pay for a church that we don't even attend, and have no connection with." Homeowners have raised concerns that registration reduces the value of properties and impairs their saleability. In the BBC show, Paul Hajek, a solicitor from Clatton Cox, estimates that for 99% of property owners affected, the liability doesn't show up on their deeds, but can now be registered, so the first they hear of it is often a letter from the Land Registry, as happened in Helen Bailey's case. Rectors were responsible for CRL under ancient common law by virtue of ownership of particular land. While this land passed into lay hands with the dissolution of the monasteries, the liability has remained. As long ago as 1985, the Law Commission recommended abolition, and the Law Society later recommended phasing out, as the Church of England had in 1982. More recently, though, the Church has been encouraging parishes to pursue the liability to help repair their churches and several hundred have done so. This has caused considerable resentment among the thousands of property owners affected. Helen Bailey led a local campaign which has resulted in her and her neighbours being able to buy out their liability from the Church at an advantageous price. Few have been so fortunate. Relatively cheap CRL insurance is available, but not for those whose properties have been registered. In July 2014 Liberal Democrat peer and NSS honorary associate Lord Avebury introduced the Chancel Repair Bill, to abolish the liability, with assistance from the National Secular Society. Its second reading debate is expected in the autumn. Viewers in the UK can watch the programme on BBC iPlayer until 30 September. The CRL segment starts at 33:44.
	Rowan Williams and his ilk are not the people to decide where religion sits in public life Opinion \| Sat, 13th Sep 2014 The Woolf Institute has convened a commission to consider the place and role of religion and belief in contemporary Britain, and to "make recommendations for public life and policy." David Voas questions whether this review can reach a conclusion that reflects the priorities of the general public, rather than just people of faith. A high-level commission has been convened to consider the place of religion in British public life. But the way this commission has been put together makes it part of the problem rather than promising real solutions. Its four patrons are drawn from the great and the good, though it is hard not to smile at the earnestness with which all religious bases have been covered. We have philosopher Bhikhu Parekh; Iqbal Sacranie, the former secretary-general of the Muslim Council of Britain; Rowan Williams, until recently Archbishop of Canterbury; and Harry Woolf, formerly Lord Chief Justice of England and Wales. When they gather, do they tell jokes that start "A priest, a rabbi and an imam walk into a bar …"? The issue is whether this review can reach a conclusion that reflects the priorities of the general public, rather than just people of faith. Religion is never out of the news and most of the stories out there do nothing to enhance its reputation in Britain, where an overwhelming majority of respondents to the British Social Attitudes Survey agree that religion is more likely to produce conflict than peace. Most British people see religion as a private matter and oppose religious influence on public policy. Many have beliefs that could be described as religious, but those beliefs have little influence on their lives. Although a large number of people – particularly from ethnic minority groups – do see religion as important, the majority of the population is profoundly indifferent to the claims of traditional faith. There is a common view that religion has made the world a more troubled place. And the highly religious are frequently depicted as ridiculous, creepy, moralising, intolerant, potentially dangerous and generally weird. For their part, religious groups increasingly come together to make common cause against outside disdain. The Commission on Religion and Belief in British Public Life gives every appearance of being one such effort by an inter-faith organisation. It has 20 members: only great-ish and good-ish, but distinguished and serious people. Once again, though, the inter-faith theologians have created the world in their own image. Nearly half of the members are religious professionals and nearly all of them have strong religious identities, if not beliefs. The chief executive of the British Humanist Association plays his customary part as the token free thinker, but it's hard to shake the dispiriting sense that we are dealing with an assembly of, by and for the religiously committed. It is completely appropriate for people whose business is faith to prepare a report on the role of religion and belief in British public life, just as it is appropriate for people who work in the pub trade to write about the role of alcohol in British life. What they cannot expect, though, is for their findings to be treated as anything other than the product of a special interest group. The commission is condemned from its conception to producing a minority report. One of the questions posed for the commission's public consultation is "Does Britain show equal respect for religious and non-religious beliefs and identities?" The answer is that Britain might, but the conveners of the commission clearly do not. The composition of the panel makes it plain that they have minimal respect for indifference to religion – which is precisely what characterises a majority of the population. There is as much chance of the commission proposing to reduce the role of religion in public life as there is of the National Secular Society proposing to increase it. Where's the science? Apart from its built-in partisanship, the commission also suffers from the hubris of the humanities. Practically everyone on it comes from theology, philosophy, religious studies, history or law. Expertise in the empirical social scientific study of British society is conspicuous by its near-absence. The causes and consequences of prejudice, discrimination, inequality and injustice are critical issues that are constantly being investigated by secular scholars in sociology, politics and economics. So why is the panel so weak in these fields? The recommendations made are likely to suffer from this absence. The commission was born in a bubble: the encapsulated community of people involved in religion. Its instigators will grumble if their report is ignored, but when that happens, they are going to have to accept a large share of the blame. David Voas is a professor of Population Studies at the University of Essex. He is the national programme director in Great Britain for the European Values Study and co-director of British Religion in Numbers. This article originally appeared on The Conversation and is reproduced here with the author's kind permission under a Creative Commons licence. The views in this article are those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of the NSS.
	Luxembourg considers new church tax in debate over future of state support News \| Tue, 16th Sep 2014 Luxembourg is considering a church tax as part of a range of possible measures to replace direct state funding for religious organisations. The Vice-Prime Minister of the majority Catholic country, Etienne Schneider, said the Government is pushing ahead with the separation of church and state. But that the Government wants the church to be able to be financially independent while still being able to pay the wages of priests and other staff. Non-profit organisations run by the church will continue to benefit from state support to deliver welfare services. Following his deputy's comments, Prime Minister Xavier Bettel told the Luxemburger Wort that talks with the Catholic diocese and other faith groups were ongoing and that nothing had been decided. Mr Bettel expressed his belief that, "Religion is something personal and should not be financed by the state" and confirmed that he would seek approval for constitutional changes on the relationship between church and state. According to the Luxemburger Wort, the main opposition party the Catholic-oriented CSV (Christian Social People's Party) criticised the Vice-PM saying that his comments could leave church workers worried about their livelihoods. Luxembourg is in theory a secular state, based on the French principle of laïcité. However, over the last 200 years the country's separation of church and state has been gradually transformed. The Grand Duchy's royal family are Catholic and Luxembourg retained the principles of the Concordat of 1801, granting privileged status to the Roman Catholic Church, when it separated from France in 1815. Since then Luxembourg has officially recognised a number of other religions, starting with the Protestant Church of Luxembourg in 1894. In return for influence over religious administration and the appointment of clergy, the State pays certain running costs and wages. Alongside a tax imposed on registered members of the church (which some commentators predict may lead to an exodus), other proposed ideas include a membership fee charged to active members, or that members celebrating special events at the church – such as their first holy communion or wedding – will have to financially contribute. A 1979 law forbids the Government from collecting statistics on religious beliefs or practices. But, in 2011 the Centre for the Study of Population, Poverty and Socio-Economic Policy reported that the country's population was: 68.7% Catholic, 1.8% Protestant, 1.9% other Christian religion, 2.6% other non-Christian religion and 24.9% non-religious.
	Secularism, today, now Opinion \| Thu, 4th Sep 2014 Ahead of an historic conference on the Religious-Right, Secularism and Civil Rights in London this October, Algerian secularist, Marieme Helie Lucas calls on secularists everywhere to mobilise to counter the rise of the Religious-Right – and to urge the elements of the left that support them to reconsider their stance. Secularism is probably the one big issue for our century. This century is not, as many still think, marked by a religious or spiritual revival. What we are actually witnessing is the rise of extreme-Right political movements, working under the cover of religion. Everywhere. No one is spared, neither Buddhism or Hinduism which still enjoy outside their boundaries an undue reputation of being peaceful, nor the notorious Christian-Right, or Muslim, Sikh or Jewish fundamentalisms. All of them, when given a chance, behave like any extreme-Right movement: they suppress dissent through brute force and they physically eliminate those deemed infra-humans. In the name of their gods. Secularists are being attacked in many places in the world today: they are jailed, killed, tortured, their very existence is considered an offense to believers in many non-secular states. The terrible crimes committed right now by ISIS in Iraq, against dissenters, religious minorities and women in general, are far from exceptional: all areas of countries that were momentarily under the boot of armed Muslim fundamentalists experienced similar ferocious repression, be it Algeria in the nineties, Mali, Afghanistan, etc… Fundamentalist extreme-Right forces manage to get more and more countries to 'accommodate' parallel religiously-inspired legal systems that are a denial of democracy; supposedly divine rules, as interpreted by old reactionary male clerics are given equal status - and sometimes prominence over - hard-won democratically-voted laws. They are supported at UN and international levels by powerful coalitions (from the Vatican to the Organization of the Islamic Conference and even by the Non-Aligned – alas! - in the name of anti-imperialism) that assert so-called religious rights over and above any other fundamental human rights. Europe, which has seen parallel legal systems sanctioned by state authorities in the name of multiculturalism, i.e. the promotion of unequal rights for different categories of citizens, has not been spared. There is a need for secularists around the world to come together and examine their situations, to exchange information, to strategize and to join hands. This is the purpose of the upcoming International Conference on the Religious Right, Secularism and Civil Rights, which is to take place in London during October 11-12, 2014. Speakers from countries or the Diaspora as diverse as Algeria, Bangladesh, Canada, Egypt, France, India, Iran, Iraq, Israel, Libya, Morocco, Pakistan, Palestine, Poland, Senegal, Sudan, Switzerland, Syria, Tunisia, UK, USA and Yemen will reflect on the struggle for secularism in both regional and thematic ways and will discuss how to counter the specific forms that attacks on secularism take in various parts of the world, and how to more efficiently mobilize in the defence of threatened secularists. A number of victims of state repression for having declared their atheism will be present and will testify. Participants will also discuss how to counter the rise of the religious-Right in countries of emigration such as Europe and North America, and how to help both the Left and human rights organisations, which have been blindly supporting fundamentalist demands – assuming they were the true and legitimate voice of minorities, re-evaluate the politics behind those demands, reconsider their support for extreme-Right political forces and shift their concern to endangered secularists. To find out more about this historic conference, go to www.secularconference.com Marieme Helie Lucas is an Algerian sociologist, founder and former International Coordinator of the 'Women Living Under Muslim Laws' international solidarity network and founder of 'Secularism Is A Women's Issue' (siawi.org). She is a member of the Conference Organising Committee. The views expressed in this article are those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of the NSS.

Newsline 19 September 2014

News, Blogs & Opinion

Quotes of the Week

Essays of the Week

Upcoming Events

Sign up for our newsletter