Newsline 4 August 2017

Newsline 4 August 2017

Christian advocates have been pushing a familiar narrative this week. After an NHS worker who abused her position to proselytise to patients and colleagues lost in court for a third time, Christian Concern said "the legal battle goes on". A pastor and baggage handler who tried to 'cure' a gay colleague lost a claim for unfair dismissal from his job. And a Christian magistrate who spoke out against gay adoption was in court after suing the NHS Trust which sacked him for religious discrimination.

In many parts of the world Christians face genuine persecution for their beliefs. But we also see claims that they are victimised in the UK. These claims are often bogus. The NSS will remain vigilant to this tactic; the law must be applied based on a fair assessment of the facts. And as Paul Russell argues in one of our essays of the week, religious worldviews do not deserve the same immunity from criticism as racial, sexual or gender identities.

Parliament has gone into recess for the summer, so the status of the government's plans on faith schools remains unclear. But we have continued to make the case against them. We have also attacked the church's poor record on LGBT+ rights. And as the BBC has announced an expansion of its religious content, we are holding it to account over its indulgence of faith groups.

Please support the NSS today and join thousands of other people like you in standing up for a secular Britain.

News, Blogs & Opinion

NSS criticises Archbishops over clerical hostility to LGBT+ rights

News | Thu, 3rd Aug 2017

The National Secular Society's Executive Director, Keith Porteous Wood, has criticised Church of England leaders for their record on gay rights after they spoke out on the subject.

Writing in the online Pink News, he said the Archbishops of Canterbury and York should be "judged by their actions rather than their words".

He was responding to a piece by Justin Welby and John Sentamu, written last week in the same magazine to mark the 50th anniversary of the partial decriminalisation of homosexuality. Under the unedifying title 'Gay people are not more sinful than anyone else', the Archbishops wrote that "Sin is not a characteristic of a particular group of people".

Mr Porteous Wood argued that neither this, nor the numerous religious references in the original piece, were likely to cut any ice with the vast majority of the intended audience. Pink News is largely read by young LGBT+ people.

He said the piece "has been greeted with well-deserved cynicism" by many of the magazine's readers. The height of the Church's ambition appeared to be denouncing "diminishing and criminalising homosexual people" as "wrong", and not all of the Church agree even on that. Crucially they failed to even mention equal civil rights or statutory protection from discrimination for LGBT+ people.

He said the Archbishops were "hardly setting the bar very high" in stating that "diminishing and criminalising homosexual people is wrong". He criticised the Archbishops for not mentioning the "gratuitous hurt and indeed persecution" that Christianity had caused to LGBT+ people over the centuries, and for not referring to equal civil rights or statutory protections from discrimination.

Nor had they come clean about Church doctrine which "still holds that same-sex intimacy, even within a committed relationship, is sinful and 'to be met by a call to repentance'". He added that at least one member of the Church's General Synod is working internationally to retain laws criminalising homosexuality.

He also argued that the Church had become more hostile to gay rights in the last 50 years. Clergy opposing these rights had become "much more entrenched and outspoken", while its parishoners have become more liberal. Gay clergy in lawful same sex civil marriages have even been barred from jobs.

The archbishops claimed "This anniversary of the 1967 Act is one when the Church in this land should be conscious of the need to turn away from condemnation of people as its first response." Mr Porteous Wood responded that none of the bishops in the House of Lords voted for the same-sex marriage bill in 2013. They "turned out in record numbers to support a 'wrecking amendment' to it". Their response to civil partnerships legislation was similar.

He drew attention to the "anachronism" of the Westminster parliament being the only one to give bishops a seat as of right. He also highlighted how much more conservative the bishops had become, relative to society as a whole and even Anglicans in the pews. He argued that this is incompatible with being a national church. The NSS believes the Church should be disestablished.

He concluded by predicting the Church would face a humiliating climb down on same-sex marriage.

The National Secular Society has long campaigned for LGBT+ rights not to be undermined by religious demands.

Evangelising NHS worker may not launch second appeal, court rules

News | Wed, 2nd Aug 2017

An NHS worker who was disciplined for using her position to evangelise will not be allowed to appeal against a decision that she did not face discrimination.

Christian Concern, an advocacy group for Christianity in the UK, has confirmed that Victoria Wasteney's request for permission to launch a second appeal has been rejected. It added that "the legal battle goes on" and called on followers to pray for her.

In June 2013 Wasteney, who worked as the Head of Forensic Occupational Therapy at the East London NHS Trust, was suspended from her position for nine months for gross misconduct. Enya Nawaz, a Muslim woman who worked for her, had accused her of harassment and bullying.

In 2015 she lost a tribunal case where she argued that the suspension was the result of religious discrimination. She lost her first appeal against the decision in 2016.

Her case was backed by the Christian Legal Centre, which provides legal support to Christians in the UK.

The tribunal found that Wasteney had misused her position to try to impose her religious views on a subordinate. Nawaz submitted an eight-page letter which outlined the pressure she was under.

She alleged that Wasteney had asked her to pray and given her a copy of I Dared to Call Him Father, a book about a Muslim woman who converted to Christianity. At one point Wasteney put her hand on Nawaz's knee in prayer and asked God to come to her. The incident allegedly lasted for 10 minutes, and Nawaz said she felt as if she was being groomed.

Other staff also raised concerns about Wasteney's behaviour, particularly after her church, the Christian Revival Church (CRC), began providing a worship service at the Trust.

She asked the users of the church to encourage other people to join the group "to find the love of God" as "homework". The tribunal noted that this was particularly troubling as "service users are vulnerable persons with mental health conditions".

A colleague said her interaction with a patient for whom she had no direct clinical responsibility had troubled nurses on the ward. Wasteney agreed to withdraw from accompanying the patient to church services, but was later seen on the ward asking about his escorting arrangements.

Others said church users were pressurised to dance, sing and clap at the services, and to donate to the CRC rather than to charity. They added that negative views were expressed about other religions at the services and they included the laying on of hands and speaking in tongues.

Wasteney's line manager had agreed to set up the services for a probationary period, on the condition that the services should have a broad appeal.

The tribunal found that "the way in which that worship was conducted gave rise to allegations of improper pressure on staff and service users". It said it was "unsurprised" both that Wasteney had faced disciplinary action and that the church services had been suspended.

Wasteney said she went to court because she believed there had been "some injustice". "This doesn't seem to be as it ought to be in a country where we are supposed to be able to be free with each other," she added.

The National Secular Society, which outlined many of the details of the case two years ago, said Wasteney's case was now "closed".

Stephen Evans, NSS campaigns director, said: "There is clearly a need for healthcare professionals to maintain proper professional boundaries at work. It will be clear to anyone who has read the facts of this case that Victoria Wasteney's behaviour was both unprofessional and unreasonable and that the disciplinary action taken against her by the NHS was justified.

"Again we see Christian lobby groups selectively presenting the evidence to portray Victoria Wasteney as a victim in order to further their false Christian persecution narrative. Unsurprisingly, it didn't stand up in court."

Jehovah's Witnesses censured by Charity Commission over treatment of child abuse allegations

News | Mon, 31st Jul 2017

A congregation of Jehovah's Witnesses has been severely criticised by the Charity Commission over its handling of allegations of child abuse.

The regulator said the New Moston Congregation of Jehovah's Witnesses in Manchester had mismanaged claims made against a trustee who was subsequently convicted of counts of indecent assault. The trustee has since left the congregation.

In a report published this week, investigators said the trustees had failed to: "fully enforce the restrictions they decided to place on the individual's activities at the charity"; "adequately consider and deal with potential conflicts of loyalty within the trustee body"; or "keep an adequate written record of the decision-making process used to manage the potential risks posed by the individual to the beneficiaries of the charity".

They had also failed to "treat one allegation of potential child abuse as such."

Harvey Grenville, the commission's head of investigations and enforcement, concluded that "the victims of abuse were badly let down by the charity".

"The trustees should have made the victims' welfare their first priority," he wrote. "Instead, their actions and omissions, both in response to allegations of abuse, and in their attitude towards our investigation, fell short of what the public would expect of those running a charity in a modern society."

The report said the trustees "'effectively required' victims to attend a hearing where they had to repeat their allegations in the presence of the abuser. The abuser was also permitted to question the alleged victims.

And the charity did not "cooperate openly and transparently with the commission, adding that the trustees 'did not provide accurate and complete answers' about issues under investigation".

A legal attempt to block the investigation on the grounds of religious discrimination failed. Last year WalesOnline reported that "Jehovah's Witnesses have been accused of ordering the destruction of documents in direct contradiction of an order not to do so from [the Independent Inquiry into Child Sexual Abuse]."

The commission said the charity had subsequently "improved its child safeguarding policy and its procedures for handling misconduct allegations".

The commission is currently conducting another inquiry into another Jehovah's Witnesses charity, the Watch Tower Bible and Tract Society of Britain. This is examining its child safeguarding policy and procedures further, as they are common to all Jehovah's Witnesses congregations in England and Wales.

Keith Porteous Wood, executive director of the National Secular Society, commented: "The commission's report represents a thorough analysis of the problems at New Moston, despite the attempts to frustrate their endeavours to uphold charity standards and protect victims.

"Sadly, however, for shortfalls of such seriousness to result only in a slap on the wrist and a pious hope about improved policy speaks volumes about the insufficiency of sanctions. The catalogue of child abuse in institutions is huge and most have been skilled in preventing knowledge of it being reported to the appropriate authorities.

"We therefore need mandatory reporting by those in institutions (including religious bodies) of suspected abuse. This has already been enacted in several countries. It has been proposed and debated in the Westminster Parliament in recent years but attempts to introduce it appear to have stalled.

"We call on the Government to amend the law to incorporate this essential measure to protect children with utmost urgency."

The BBC is overdoing religion

Opinion | Mon, 31st Jul 2017

New figures show that the BBC is devoting hundreds of hours of programming to religion each year. NSS president Terry Sanderson argues that more of its scarce resources should be spent elsewhere.

In its recently published annual report, the BBC reveals the amount of time it devotes to religion on its TV and radio channels. This year's figures are:

BBC1 - 88 hours (last year 92 hours)

BBC2 - 73 hours (last year 50 hours)

BBC 4 - 20 hours (last year 24 hours)

Radio – 574 hours (last year 573 hours)

The corporation, as we know, is under severe financial strain and needs to make savings in all areas. Surely it is sensible to put most of its resources into programmes that people actually want to watch.

That, quite clearly, doesn't include religion. The audiences for these programmes are often so small that they can't be measured by the usual methods.

Despite this, the BBC is regularly attacked by religious interests for not taking its religious programming seriously and, in fact, reducing its religious output. This claim was given a new impetus earlier this year when it was discovered that the BBC was closing its religion and ethics department in Salford. This followed the announcement that BBC1's only vaguely popular religious show, Songs of Praise, was being outsourced to an independent producer.

The usual voices were raised in protest. Roger Bolton, who presents programmes for the BBC and has long campaigned for more religion on TV, said that the corporation is "not fit for purpose". In the Radio Times last year, he wrote: "How can young people and immigrants to this country understand the UK without learning of the crucial role Christianity has played in the formation of its political structures and culture?

"How can people feel they're being welcomed as equal citizens if we don't bother to find out about what is often the most important part of their life, their faith? How can we understand what's going on in the Middle East, for example, without knowing about the Shia/Sunni split?

"This is not about promoting faith; it's about promoting knowledge and understanding – surely a central role of a public service broadcaster? But the BBC is coming up short."

This is, of course, the familiar argument often put forward by the churches that there is an urgent need for more "religious literacy" in Britain. Religion is so important, they say, that we must all know much more about it.

But, of course, "religious literacy" is never defined and as we have seen in schools, it can very quickly morph into evangelising and proselytising.

The Bishop of Leeds, Nick Baines, is another familiar voice in the push to get more religion on the BBC. He says "the loss of a specialist department in television poses serious questions for the BBC" and his colleague the Bishop of Norwich, Rt Revd Graham James, said: "It is a failure of the BBC as a public-service broadcaster."

Meanwhile, Ofcom – which has been charged with regulating the corporation's output – is to publish a report in the autumn outlining what it expects from the BBC. In a statement, Ofcom says: "Our plans would mean that BBC One and BBC Two would have tougher requirements for showing arts, music and religious programmes, including new requirements to show some during peak viewing times."

Interesting programmes about religion's role in the world - and its frequently dire consequences - are to be welcomed. They will fulfil the BBC's remit to educate the nation. But they must approach the topic objectively, and not be used as a propaganda platform. If you listen to The Sunday Programme, which is supposed to be a magazine exploring religious topics in the news, you will hear direct evangelising slipping in (8m 22s in).

The latest reasoning for demanding more programmes that people don't want to watch is that "religious literacy" is at an all-time low and needs to be increased. The theory goes that because religion is tearing the world apart we all have to know much more about it, we have to know about the theology of various sects and denominations so we can understand why they are murdering each other.

And, of course, in schools, children have to know how to worship and have their heads filled with the idea that religion is essential, important, all-pervasive and inescapable. (Fortunately, their own lives tell them that they can get along very nicely without religion, thank you, and nothing would induce them to start going to church).

Personally speaking, I don't want to know anything more about religion – nothing at all. I don't think that my life would be diminished one iota if I knew nothing whatsoever about it. It has no meaning for me, and as an increasing amount of research is showing, has little meaning for many, if not most, other people in this country.

Why do we have to know about it? If we aren't going to follow it, aren't going to observe it and even consider it to be slightly off the wall, why do we have to educate ourselves about its theology? Isn't it enough to know that its adherents are tearing the world asunder?

If religions want to go to war over tiny differences in theology, there is nothing I can do about it. As recent research has shown, people with dogmatic beliefs hold them on emotional grounds and they will not be shaken by any logic or reason. That does not mean that the rest of us have to endure their obsessions.

The BBC is a public service broadcaster (unlike ITV, which was long ago relieved by Ofcom of the requirement to provide any religious programmes at all). As such the Corporation must seek to serve all sections of society. It is therefore not unreasonable that religious people should get a look in.

But it should be a proportionate look in; 574 hours of radio is surely more than enough for any special interest group. Religion no longer holds a special place in the hearts of large swathes of the British people and that should be taken into account when allotting scarce BBC resources.

I don't think it is the duty of the BBC to provide ill-defined "religious literacy" to a nation that doesn't want it. And the BBC should not be used as a platform for proselytising at public expense.

UN tells Pakistan to end blasphemy laws and protect minorities

News | Wed, 2nd Aug 2017

The UN's Human Rights Committee has told Pakistan to end its blasphemy laws and do more to protect religious minorities.

Last week the committee adopted a set of observations under the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. Signatories to the covenant agree to "promote universal respect for, and observance of, human rights and freedoms".

Observers say atheists, Ahmadi Muslims and Christians have been targeted for blasphemy in Pakistan. Some have been killed or forced to convert. In April Mashal Khan, a student, was killed by a lynch mob after being falsely accused of blasphemy. At least one man has been sentenced to death for blasphemy.

The committee said Pakistan has a high number of prosecutions for blasphemy based on false accusations. It said mobs and non-state actors had attacked those accused of blasphemy and their defenders. It added that judges dealing with blasphemy cases are often harassed, intimidated and threatened and there was a low rate of prosecution and conviction of perpetrators.

It criticised the Pakistani government's wider record on free expression, including its use of "religiously biased content in textbooks and curricula in public schools and madrassas". Defamation is a criminal offence in Pakistan, and there have been legal crackdowns on the media.

The committee expressed alarm at "continued reports of hate speech and hate crimes against persons belonging to religious minorities and their places of worship". It added that Ahmadis had been registered to vote on a separate voting list.

It said Pakistan should "review its laws relating to freedom of expression" and "repeal all blasphemy laws or amend them in compliance with the strict requirements of the covenant". Article 19 of Pakistan's constitution gives citizens the right to free expression, but allows for "reasonable restrictions imposed by law in the interest of the glory of Islam". Pakistan has also limited free speech for its broadcast media.

The committee also said Pakistan should: better protect those involved in blasphemy cases; review its school textbooks and curricula to remove "religiously biased content"; and "improve the election system and procedures" so "all citizens can exercise their right to vote without obstacles". It called for tougher punishments for those engaging in violence against blasphemers and hate crimes.

And it asked Pakistan to report within a year to explain how it is implementing its recommendations on freedom of religion, conscience and belief.

The National Secular Society has campaigned throughout its history for an end to blasphemy laws. The NSS played a leading role in the abolition of blasphemy law in Britain in 2008, and continues to lobby for international protections for free expression.

NSS Speaks Out

NSS communications officer Chris Sloggett made the case that faith schools are too divisive on the BBC's Sunday Morning Live. Keith Porteous Wood, our executive director, criticised the Church of England's record on LGBT+ rights in Pink News.