FUSsa-talk Mailing List: Fwd: Newsline 13 November 2009

[Robert Tapp (tappx001]

I find this a valuable source of news about Britain and Europe (and often US).

Bob

Begin forwarded message:

> From: "National Secular Society" <admin [at] secularism.org.uk>
> Date: November 13, 2009 8:17:09 AM CST
> 
> Subject: Newsline 13 November 2009
> 
>  
> Newsline
> 
> 
> www.secularism.org.uk
> We are engaged in one of the most important struggles of this century – it 
> will decide whether we are able to live our lives free from religious 
> influence if we so choose. If we lose the battle for a secular society, the 
> result will be an education system completely under the control of religious 
> bodies, social services provided by "faith groups" and the spread of 
> religious influence throughout workplaces. We must resist these developments 
> now – once they are in place, there will be no shifting them. If you aren't a 
> member of the NSS but support our aims, then please consider joining.  You 
> can join securely online at www.secularism.org.uk or by cheque to NSS, 25 Red 
> Lion Square, London WC1R 4RL.
> 
> 13 November 2009
> 
>  
> In this week's Newsline 
> Quotes of the week
> Essays of the week
> Thought for the Day: announcement imminent 
> Archbishop says "faith schools" don't divide children. Hindu leader says they 
> do. 
> First "faith-based" prison proposed 
> NSS gets Christian cancer cure claim banned 
> Italian crucifix ruling: no such law exists 
> Vatican robs American women of even more abortion rights 
> Catholic Church in Washington uses "faith-based welfare" as a tool of 
> political blackmail – and denies gay people dignity in Rhode Island 
> Intelligence Squared debate now on our website 
> NSS signs statement against "defamation of religion" 
> Secularist of the Year 
> NSS speaks out 
> Letters to Newsline
> Events
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Quotes of the week  
> "Who will rise to challenge this cancer of segregation seeping into the 
> conscience of Muslim youth? The same clerics who sit at inter-faith and 
> multiculturalism conferences and breakfasts with politicians are the very 
> people who endorse the anti-Jew and anti-Christian message coming from their 
> Saudi masters."
> (Tarek Fatah, National Post)
> 
> "The Vatican is doubtless right to say that Christianity has shaped Europe's 
> identity. But so, too, have social and intellectual forces opposed to 
> organised religion, starting with the 18th-century Enlightenment and the 
> French Revolution and going all the way to Marxism-Leninism and the 
> liberalism of the European Court of Human Rights."
> (Tony Barber, FT)
> 
> Essays of the Week  
> Why fundamentalism will fail
> (Harvey Cox, Boston Globe)
> 
> Religion – particularly Islam – must learn to respect the secular majority
> (Libby Purves, The Times)
> 
> Thought for the Day: announcement imminent 
> The National Secular Society has been told by the BBC Trust that its 
> complaint about the exclusive nature of Thought for the Day will be published 
> within days.
> 
> Keith Porteous Wood, Executive Director of the NSS, who has seen this 
> complaint through the long appeals process, says: "The NSS has been pressing 
> for the opening up for Thought for the Day (and its predecessor programmes) 
> for almost half a century. We are hoping for a positive outcome this time." 
> 
> Archbishop says "faith schools" don't divide children. Hindu leader says they 
> do. 
> Speaking in Lancashire this week, the Archbishop of Canterbury pleaded with 
> local politicians in Burnley, Blackburn and Preston not to "play the race 
> card" when searching for votes, but at the same time he denied that "faith 
> schools" played any part in keeping communities separated from each other.
> 
> He was speaking as two Muslim boarding schools for girls are being built in 
> the Burnley area and even more "faith schools" are being created from the 
> Building Schools for the Future shake-up. He remains convinced that, somehow, 
> separating children on religious grounds helps them to integrate. 
> 
> Williams insisted: "It's not faith schools that are the root of the problem. 
> Divisions come about because of economics or a perceived sense of injustice. 
> You do not address it by doing away with faith schools. Sometimes communities 
> need that to build their own confidence. But if it's just about putting up 
> the shutters it's not going to work."
> 
> Terry Sanderson, President of the National Secular Society, said: "He says 
> they help communities 'build their own confidence'. That sounds to me like 
> saying that they can develop separately, and no-one will disturb these little 
> outposts of Pakistan in Britain. We accept that there is deprivation and lack 
> of opportunity in these communities – but when they insist on keeping 
> themselves apart from the mainstream, and are encouraged to do so by constant 
> pandering to religious extremism, what else can you expect? If Rowan Williams 
> really believes these divisive schools are somehow unifying, he is quite the 
> opposite of the thinker some say he is. Or maybe Archbishop is just making 
> self-serving justifications for religious schools. Either way what he is 
> doing is irrational and extremely dangerous. The reality is that these 
> schools keep our children from getting to know each other across cultural 
> boundaries."
> 
> Meanwhile, Vijaya Gupta, president of the Hindu Cultural Society in Slough, 
> Berkshire raised serious questions over the claimed benefits of single 
> religion schooling and has warned that initiatives such as the town's 
> upcoming "interfaith week" serve only a limited purpose.
> 
> Mr Gupta — an acknowledged champion of community cohesion — has called for a 
> dramatic shake-up in the bid to strengthen bonds between members of different 
> communities in the town and he believes that the key lies in education. He 
> said: "Community cohesion should be strengthened at two levels, firstly on a 
> social level, which involves schools, festivals and community events, and 
> secondly on a political level, which unfortunately is rather more difficult. 
> I believe that faith schools promote exclusiveness and this is not a good 
> thing for our children. The best educational institutions are  the ones which 
> cater to the educational needs of students irrespective of religion, faith or 
> nationality. That is multi-culturalism in the right sense."
> 
> Slough, with its large ethnic minority populations, has seen the rise of a 
> number of "faith schools" including the Iqra Islamic Primary School and the 
> Khalsa Primary School. However, Mr Gupta also points out the growing 
> resentment among "faith communities" as some see others receiving what they 
> believe is privileged attention while they feel neglected. 
> 
> He said: "I feel that there is a policy of appeasement which caters to the 
> populist demands on the basis of numbers. Some faiths are pampered and get 
> undue attention while others feel marginalised. Relations of faith leaders 
> are good at a social level, but when it comes to policy, grants and budgets 
> some faiths are left out."
> 
> Terry Sanderson commented: "This growing feeling of unease among competing 
> religions – with some feeling resentful at the privileges being granted to 
> others – is inevitable when you try to satisfy all the unending demands of 
> 'faith groups'. Secularism is the only answer to this: let religions get on 
> with its own business at its own expense. There is no law that says we have 
> to pour public money into the promotion of religion, but there is a very good 
> argument that doing so will eventually backfire."
> 
> See also: £25million of taxpayers' money to build biggest Jewish school in 
> Europe
> Welsh Labour leadership candidate says "let faith schools wither on the vine"
> Christian ethos doesn't raise school standards – report
> 
> First "faith-based" prison proposed 
> The first prison in Britain run by a religious group is being mooted for 
> Cornwall. The Carpenter's House Project, which is being proposed by the 
> Kainos Christian Community could be up and running by 2012 if the group's 
> ambitions are realised.
> 
> Those behind the plans claim they can cut re-offending rates and help the 
> Government provide much-needed space for prisoners – the Ministry of Justice 
> says it needs another 12,000 prison spaces by 2014.
> 
> Mike Critchley, the project's chairman, said: "It is an ambitious project but 
> the need is massive. We've talked to a lot of people and our consultant has 
> been the Governor of five prisons." Mr Critchley told the Plymouth Herald: 
> "What we're talking about is not a Bible college. It's all about giving guys 
> the ability to respect themselves. Once they've got that it gets you to 
> respect other people."
> 
> Kainos Community is a religious charity that has operated its Challenge to 
> Change programme in prisons for 12 years. It is now receiving public funding 
> to push its religious agenda in three prisons. It claims to have slashed 
> re-offending rates among prisoners it has worked with to 13 per cent — way 
> below the national average of 60 per cent — within two years of release. 
> However, those who carried out the research say that their figures should be 
> treated with caution as no comparison with the general prison population was 
> used. Previous independent research, however, that did use comparisons with 
> the general prison population showed that the programme made no significant 
> difference to re-offending rates.
> 
> Keith Porteous Wood, Executive Director of the National Secular Society, 
> said: "Kainos obviously seeks to open a private prison which it apparently 
> hopes will eventually be funded by the tax payer. We hope that the Prison 
> Service will not entertain such an idea. With the increasing number of 
> prisoners from other religions, it would be divisive and dangerous to 
> introduce a prison with a particular religious ethos. Although Kainos says it 
> takes people of all faiths and none on its courses, it is explicitly and 
> heavily Christian in nature. Those concerned about this should read a 2001 
> Home Office report about Kainos (pdf). Major problems are dressed up as 
> opportunities for improvement, but there is plenty here to be concerned 
> about. Effectively these religious wings or prisons become self-policing 
> units saving the Home Office money, hence the appeal, and the danger."
> 
> Kainos leaders are now trying to raise cash to provide the Government with a 
> feasibility study in order to formally lodge its proposals by next year.
> 
> A HM Prison Service spokesman confirmed the National Offender Management 
> Service, which runs prisons in England and Wales for the Ministry of Justice, 
> was aware of the Carpenter's House project, but said it had "no current 
> plans" to build faith-specific prisons.
> See also: America's first all-Christian prison is coming down the pike
> 
> NSS gets Christian cancer cure claim banned 
> The NSS recently complained formally to the Advertising Standards Authority 
> and Trading Standards about a flyer being distributed across Manchester by 
> the Body of Christ International Ministries (BCIM) claiming that they could 
> cure cancer, arthritis and other diseases through the power of prayer at 
> their meetings. Claiming to cure cancer is in contravention of the Cancer Act 
> Section 4.1(a) 8. The BCIM have now agreed with the ASA and Trading Standards 
> to withdraw the flyer and to avoid such claims on any future ones.
> 
> This was a dangerous and misleading advert, suggesting that prayer can 
> accomplish what science cannot. Such adverts give people false hope or stop 
> them seeking medical advice – or potentially not until it's too late. People 
> who are seriously ill or have a chronic condition can understandably be very 
> vulnerable so it's important to report any such claims in any media. You can 
> read more about the flier and the claims of the BCIM here .
> 
> Italian crucifix ruling: no such law exists 
> After the European Court of Human Rights ruled that displaying crucifixes in 
> Italian schools was offensive to other religions and an abuse of the human 
> rights of children who might not share the religious views that the crucifix 
> represents, it was assumed that Italy would have to take those crosses down.
> 
> But it turns out that it won't. All it will have to do is pay the fine. The 
> reason is that the European Court doesn't have the power to order a sovereign 
> state to do anything. All it can do is determine whether a given action 
> constitutes an abuse of human rights and recommend an appropriate remedy. 
> Nobody has to take any notice and, of course, Italy won't.
> 
> At the same time, there is no law in Italy that mandates the hanging of 
> crucifixes on classroom walls. We have been informed that it was simply a 
> throw back to fascist times.
> Read more here .
> 
> However, the Christian barrister Neil Addison, has another take on it. He 
> says: 
> 
> We will have to see whether the ECHR may overrule itself on an appeal but it 
> would have been interesting if this case had occurred before the Irish voted 
> on the Lisbon Treaty. Before anyone emails me pointing out that the ECHR is 
> not part of the EU, yes I know, however the Lisbon Treaty contains a Charter 
> of Fundamental Rights Articles 10 and 14 of which conform to the provisions 
> considered by the ECHR in this case. Article 52.3 of the Lisbon Treaty 
> Charter of Rights says that where the Charter is equivalent to the ECHR it 
> shall be interpreted in accordance with the ECHR decisions so this decision 
> on the Crucifix is, in effect, now part of EU law which is binding on the 27 
> members of the EU. I will be interested to see how Cyprus, Malta, Greece and 
> Poland react when they realise the implications of this case. Incidentally, 
> the Lisbon Treaty Charter of Rights has 50 separate rights, the USA has 
> managed reasonably well for 200 years with a Bill of Rights of 10 articles."
> 
> See also: Greek Church panics over crucifix ban
> 
> 
> Vatican robs American women of even more abortion rights 
> In a grotesque violation of the American constitutional separation of church 
> and state, it has become clear that the Vatican has almost completely 
> dictated the direction of the Obama administration's attempts to create a 
> wide-reaching health care system for America. The Bill only passed after the 
> Vatican had approved an amendment that denies women federal funding for 
> abortion.
> 
> Cliff Kincaid, the Editor of the right-leaning Accuracy in Media group 
> commented:
> 
> The group Catholic Democrats has hailed passage of H.R. 3962, the Affordable 
> Health Care for America Act of 2009, and notes that the only House Republican 
> voting for it, Representative Joseph Cao of Louisiana, is a Catholic and 
> former Jesuit seminarian. 'The Catholic Church has been at the forefront of 
> advocating for health care as a right for decades, including pastoral letters 
> issued by the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops (USCCB) in 1981 and 1993,' 
> the group notes.
> 
> The evidence indicates that the Bishops—and the Vatican itself—are calling 
> the shots behind the scene. In fact, as many media organizations are now 
> reporting, they engineered the 'compromise' that deleted abortion funding so 
> the bill could pass the House. The Los Angeles Times reported that House 
> Speaker Nancy Pelosi, a Catholic, not only 'conferred with the U.S. 
> Conference of Catholic Bishops to be sure the new restrictions were 
> acceptable' but 'consulted by telephone with a cardinal in Rome.'
> 
> CNN reported that, as a deal was being made between Pelosi and Catholic 
> lobbyists, 'Several Democrats, including Rep. Jason Altmire, D-Pennsylvania, 
> said they are in touch with their Catholic Bishops back home. Altmire said he 
> must have the approval of his bishop in Pittsburgh before he can vote yes.'
> 
> "Where is the media outrage over 'the separation of church and state'? In 
> this case, there is direct evidence of a foreign entity, the Vatican, 
> actually passing judgment on legislation and, in effect, delivering votes for 
> it. Few in the media, on the left or right, want to raise the issue, 
> apparently fearful of being labelled 'anti-Catholic.'
> 
> But the outcome of the legislation in the House demonstrates that while the 
> Republicans don't have the votes to stop it, the Vatican has the votes to 
> pass it. Could the same thing happen in the U.S. Senate? It is time for the 
> major media to investigate how the officials of a major religious 
> denomination, with its headquarters in Rome, are affecting the outcome of 
> major pieces of legislation in the Congress of the United States."
> 
> Barry Lynn, executive director of Americans United for Separation of Church 
> and State said: "What we saw over the weekend was an act of unparalleled 
> arrogance on the part of church officials. Basically, they were claiming they 
> would kill health care for the sick and the poor if the Democrats didn't give 
> them the votes to impose religious doctrine into law."
> 
> The amendment to the Health Bill will prevent millions of Americans from 
> buying insurance that covers abortions — even if they use their own money. As 
> the New York Times said:
> 
> The restrictions would fall on women eligible to buy coverage on new health 
> insurance exchanges. They are a sharp departure from current practice, an 
> infringement of a woman's right to get a legal medical procedure and an 
> unjustified intrusion by Congress into decisions best made by patients and 
> doctors.
> 
> The anti-abortion Democrats behind this coup insisted that they were simply 
> adhering to the so-called Hyde Amendment, which bans the use of federal 
> dollars to pay for almost all abortions in a number of government programs. 
> In fact, they reached far beyond Hyde and made it largely impossible to use a 
> policyholder's own dollars to pay for abortion coverage.
> 
> The fight will resume in the Senate, where the Finance Committee has approved 
> a bill that incorporates a less restrictive compromise. But the Catholic 
> Church has already said that it intends to have this modified to incorporate 
> the restrictions it managed to impose on the previous version.
> See also: The Democrats and abortion
> How religion is running American politics
> Faith healers to be paid as much as real doctors in Obama's health bill 
> Why don't churches have to disclose lobbying activities?
> What the House of Representatives did to the Health Reform Bill is clearly 
> unconstitutional
> Catholic bishops' double standard
> 
> Catholic Church in Washington uses "faith-based welfare" as a tool of 
> political blackmail – and denies gay people dignity in Rhode Island 
> In a blatant attempt to control the political agenda, the Catholic 
> Archdiocese of Washington DC has threatened to withdraw its "faith-based 
> welfare" programme unless the city changes a proposed same-sex marriage law.
> 
> The threat could affect services provided by the Church to tens of thousands 
> of vulnerable people in the areas of adoption, healthcare and homelessness.
> 
> Under the legislation, which the City Council is expected to pass next month, 
> religious organisations would not be required to perform or make space 
> available for same-sex weddings. But they would have to obey laws prohibiting 
> discrimination against gays and lesbians.
> 
> Fearful that they could be forced, among other things, to extend employee 
> benefits to same-sex married couples, church officials said they would have 
> "no choice" but to abandon their contracts with the city.
> 
> "If the city requires this, we can't do it," said Susan Gibbs, spokeswoman 
> for the archdiocese. "The city is saying in order to provide social services, 
> you need to be secular. For us, that's really a problem."
> 
> Catholic Charities, the church's social services arm, is one of dozens of 
> non-profit organizations that partner with Washington to provide social 
> services. City leaders said the church, which serves 68,000 people, is not 
> the dominant provider of any particular social service. But the church 
> pointed out that it supplemented funding for city programs with $10 million 
> from its coffers. "All of those services will be adversely impacted if the 
> exemption language remains so narrow," Jane G. Belford, chancellor of the 
> archdiocese, wrote to the council in what amounts to a blackmail letter.
> 
> Other "faith leaders" are turning on the Catholic Church over this. Baptist 
> pastor Reverend Dr. Dennis W. Wiley said: "The Catholic Church hierarchy is 
> at a crossroads: they must decide whether they are in the charity business 
> for charity's sake, or if imposing their will on the D.C. City Council and 
> the citizens of the District is their primary interest."
> 
> Terry Sanderson, president of the National Secular Society, said: "This is 
> nothing short of wicked. To use the services that are depended on by some of 
> the city's most vulnerable people as a political tool demonstrates just how 
> ruthless the Catholic Church can be. It also shows another danger of 
> 'faith-based welfare'. Once it is in the hands of a religio-political 
> organisation like this it will be used as a crowbar to force further 
> privileges and even — as in this case — to dictate the direction of 
> legislation."
> 
> Meanwhile, the Catholic Governor of Rhode Island has vetoed a bill that would 
> have given gay people the right to plan their deceased partner's funeral 
> arrangements. The legislation was brought forward after one man was unable to 
> retrieve the body of his late partner, with whom he had been living for 17 
> years, from the state medical examiner for weeks because they weren't married 
> or next-of-kin.
> 
> In his veto message, Carcieri made the following statement: "This bill 
> represents a disturbing trend over the past few years of the incremental 
> erosion of the principles surrounding traditional marriage, which is not the 
> preferred way to approach this issue."
> 
> Democratic Representative Frank G. Ferri retorted: "This legislation was 
> about simple human dignity and once again the governor feels comfortable 
> denying certain Rhode Islanders equality based on his own personal religious 
> beliefs." Representative David Segal, who sponsored the original legislation, 
> said: "I think the man is heartless and this has become a bad joke that has 
> carried on for far too long." 
> 
> Intelligence Squared debate now on our website 
> The now-notorious Intelligence Squared debate that resulted in a rout for the 
> Catholic Church can be seen on the NSS website. The proposition was: "The 
> Catholic Church is a force for good in the world". The result: For the motion 
> – 12.4%; Against – 86%. Talk about feeding Christians to the lions!
> See also: The best rebuke they can come up with is – they wouldn't do this to 
> Islam
> 
> NSS signs statement against "defamation of religion" 
> The NSS has joined with more than 100 other groups from more than 20 
> countries to protest a so-called "global blasphemy law" proposed by the 
> United Nations (UN). Last month, for the first time ever, a UN body proposed 
> a legally-binding treaty to combat the "defamation of religions." Read the 
> statement and the list of signatories.
> See also: OIC writes to UN in defence of its defamation of religion proposals 
> (pdf)
> 
> Secularist of the Year 
> The NSS's social highlight of the year – the presentation of the £5,000 Irwin 
> Prize for Secularist of the year will take place at a glittering lunchtime 
> function in central London on Saturday 13 February 2010. Tickets are £45 (£15 
> for accredited students) and will include a welcome drink, a three course 
> meal with tea or coffee and all the entertainment and surprises. You can 
> order your tickets online at the NSS shop or by post from NSS, 25 Red Lion 
> Square, London WC1R 4RL. 
> 
> NSS speaks out 
> Terry Sanderson was on LBC Radio talking about the Chief Rabbi's comments 
> about secularism being the enemy of Europe and how atheists are selfish and 
> don't have enough children.
> 
> Terry was also quoted in a Sunday Times (Scotland) article on the proposed 
> bill to legalise assisted suicide.  
> 
> Letters to Newsline
> Please send your letters for publication to letters [at] secularism.org.uk We 
> want to publish as many letters as possible, so please keep them brief. We 
> reserve the right to edit. Opinions expressed in letters are those of the 
> writers and not necessarily those of the NSS.
> 
> From Paul Brown:
> I thought I would provide a small success story Westminster Unison had 
> regarding Street Pastors, which were nearly introduced at Westminster City 
> Council.  Following a complaint made by myself, and a letter to Newsline, 
> outlining the reasons why a local authority should not pay for the Ascension 
> Trust, an evangelical Christian group, to patrol the streets, I was informed 
> this week that Westminster has now withdrawn the proposal.
> 
> I had outlined to the Council the various arguments against: the Trust's 
> attitude to LGBT people; its opposition to abortion; its advocacy of 
> compulsory Christian teaching in schools; and their constant railing against 
> alcohol, drugs, 'provocative' clothing, and social liberalism. The work of 
> the Ascension Trust is incompatible with the Equalities Bill, and I therefore 
> believe it will be untenable for other authorities to continue with this 
> scheme once the Bill becomes law.  The BBC took an interest in the issue, and 
> so it was probably wise for the Council to withdraw the proposal before it 
> became a story.  I would encourage others that work in local government to 
> take the same approach if they have Pastors introduced to their area.
> 
> From Richard Green:
> Terry Sanderson (Newsline, 6 November) says: "I couldn't care less whether 
> there is a God or not."
> But, if there were a God, religious privilege would be perfectly justifiable.
> 
> From J. Dowdle:
> I have sent on the latest NSS newsletter to our WAH members, including your 
> very article on being an Indifferentist. I sometimes claim to be an apatheist 
> – I don't know and I don't care, either.
> 
> From Brian Nixon:
> Terry Sanderson's piece strikes me as somewhat confusing, and possibly 
> confused. There is nothing wrong or illogical about being totally indifferent 
> to religion and wishing to behave as if it had no effect on one's personal 
> situation. Unfortunately, to varying degrees, depending on where one lives, 
> religion can, and is likely to continue doing so, have a significant and 
> derogatory effect on people's lives. To be able to practise total 
> indifferentism, one would have to go and live on a desert island, either 
> alone or with like-minded "indifferents." (Indifferent appears in the OED 
> only as an adjective, not as a noun). One can, of course, make an effort to 
> practice indifferentism while living in the UK or similar locations, but not 
> if one aspires to act in accordance with the following principle quoted by 
> Terry. 
> 
> "The NSS wants to ensure that religion doesn't take over the world and force 
> itself on to the lives of us Indifferents." He will obviously, by virtue of 
> his being President of the NSS, actively pursue a course to bring this about. 
> Therefore, logically, it is impossible for him to be indifferent. By taking 
> any action to support such a course, he ceases to be indifferent.
> 
> From Sue Cauty:
> Terry Sanderson''s exploration of 'Indifferentism' is as good as Ophelia 
> Benson's article in the Guardian, which I think is excellent. I suppose I, 
> too, am one of her 'Movement Atheists'. But it seems to me that anybody who 
> is not satisfied with the status quo and seeks to change it is a 'movement 
> person', and many Newsline contributors fall into that category: church to 
> pay hospital chaplains, religious teaching out of schools etcetera. 
> 
> But Terry Sanderson's 'indifferent' stance will pose a problem for those who, 
> like me, were 'indifferent' until the advent of suicide bombers. Children 
> being taught to suicide bomb and so murder others? Women with mental problems 
> being manipulated to mass-murder? Isn't the backbone of Newsline the exposing 
> of religious privilege; and the many ridiculous absurdities which are 
> multiplying all around the once-great Britain I once loved? It seems to me 
> that the essence of the NSS is 'movement atheism' at least insofar as it is 
> pushing hard for the separation of Church and State – which can hardly be 
> construed as 'indifference' to religion. I would love to feel free to be 
> 'indifferent' to it, but think it my duty to investigate what goes on inside 
> the heads of rabid fundamentalists of any religion – certainly one which 
> promotes indiscriminate murder, proposes to Islamicise Britain, demands 
> sharia law, and aims to put the Queen in a burqa. Laughable they may be, but 
> not funny. Plenty of Germans considered Hitler and his gang laughable and 
> funny.
> 
> From Matt Sheard:
> Terry Sanderson says that "The NSS wants to ensure that religion doesn't take 
> over the world and force itself on to the lives of us Indifferents."  Why, 
> then, all the fuss about three minutes of pseudo-religion on the radio of a 
> morning?
> 
> From Dene Gilbert:
> I'm loathe to criticise someone who has worked so hard for the cause of 
> secularism, But...
> 
> Terry Sanderson may be indifferent to religion but I, and I suspect most 
> other NSS members am not. I care deeply about religion; about its influence 
> on the world and upon individual lives. I joined the NSS because I want to 
> live in a secular democracy, but also because I'm concerned about the 
> influence of religious thinking on all of us; in particular its tendency to 
> divide people into oppositional groups. In this misguided article Mr 
> Sanderson has himself divided the world into two opposing camps – the 
> indifferents and the believers. In doing so he foolishly equates Atheism with 
> Theology and so suggests there is an equivalence between supernaturalism and 
> evidence based thought; the religious lobby must be delighted as this is a 
> position which they crave. To hear it from the President of the NSS must be a 
> true joy to them.
> 
> It is not good enough to say that you are bored by religion, that you just 
> don't want to have to deal with it. You might as well say you are bored by 
> violent crime – so long as you don't have to witness it, you're not bothered. 
> Is Mr Sanderson indifferent to the indoctrination of children, misogyny, 
> homophobia, xenophobia and the promotion of supernaturalism over evidence? Is 
> he really happy for religions to do and say whatever they choose so long as 
> he doesn't have to encounter it? I hope that the NSS has higher aims than 
> simply to protect Mr Sanderson's right to stick his head in the sand. 
> 
> From Keith Charters:
> Great article, Mr Sanderson. My sentiments exactly.
> 
> From Barbara Smoker:
> My first reaction to Terry Sanderson's claim to be an Indifferentist rather 
> than an Atheist was one of approval. Certainly, indifference is the most 
> intelligent response to all the rival theological minutiae.
> 
> On second thoughts, however, can we really be indifferent to the immoral idea 
> that an alleged creator, though omnipotent, permits so much suffering, yet is 
> deserving of human worship? Can we be indifferent to the huge religious 
> confidence trick that is imposed on almost all children, whether attending 
> 'faith' schools or not? Can we be indifferent to the life-long effect on many 
> people of this confidence trick, often affecting their citizenship choices – 
> even occasionally, to the extreme of suicide bombing?
> 
> Atheism is not just an alternative belief system, demanding official equality 
> with every other: since it alone rejects any beliefs that are not derived 
> from adequate objective evidence, it is only sound basis for social action.
> 
> From Graham Davis:
> In your recent article you state that the majority of the population define 
> themselves as "subscribing to no religion". Whilst that is undoubtedly the 
> case, you go on to say that you share this view and that your 
> "Indifferentism" means that you couldn't care less whether there is a God or 
> not. Whilst I have great respect for your work on behalf of the NSS, this 
> view troubles me somewhat. Secularism only exists because some of those who 
> believe in god try to foist their particular beliefs on the rest of us. 
> Secularists are inevitably defined by what we are against; if there was no 
> god and religion, there wouldn't be a need for the NSS. 
> 
> Belief in god is both infantile and irrational and the religions that feed 
> off this belief need constantly to be challenged because they use their hold 
> over millions of people to promote their own, often inhumane, agendas. How 
> can we remain indifferent to a belief that enslaves millions? 
> 
> If belief in god did not result in religion I would share your indifference, 
> but it always does and we cannot expect a rational, secular society to occur 
> whilst significant numbers of people still believe in god. In my view the 
> NSS, in common with other freethinking, rationalist and atheist organisations 
> should not just confront religious privilege but constantly challenge the 
> belief that lies behind it.
> 
> From Samantha Beere: 
> Thank you, Terry. Can we get "indifferent" put down on the census and any 
> other official way of measuring "belief"? Because it's totally what I am. 
> Brilliant statement.
> 
> From Robert Kaye: 
> In addition to your counter to the pro-paid preachers argument mentioned in 
> John Bazley's letter (Newsline last week), I think that there is another 
> counterpoint to be made. Given the number of patients who have to deal with 
> cancer each year, it is no surprise that among these patients are followers  
> of 'minor' religions, so what would John have made of the situation had the 
> christian patient who was so comforted by the chaplain been a hindu, or a 
> jew, or a sikh, pagan or baha'ist? In these situations their clergyperson 
> would travel to see their follower entirely at their own cost, despite these 
> religions often not being as wealthy as those who have paid chaplains within 
> the hospital, and it wouldn't have cost the NHS a penny, thus allowing more 
> money to be spent on medicine and staff. Since these less wealthy religions 
> can afford to support their followers in times of need out of their own 
> pocket, why can't the wealthy religions?
> 
> From Steve Curr: 
> Lots of things in Friday 6th's Newsline that warrant comment, but I'll 
> restrict myself to one, plus a note about Remembrance Sunday.
>  
> Newsline first: shame on the author who put vegetarians in the same class as 
> religious nutters. The former generally choose their diet on rational ethical 
> and scientific grounds, whereas the latter choose their diet on the basis of 
> irrational medieval and pre-medieval myths and prejudices and often  use 
> these to justify barbaric treatment of animals. Whoever wrote that shameful 
> paragraph should direct their attention to the creeping enforcement of Halal 
> meat on society and other such matters based on belief rather than reason.
>  
> On Remembrance Sunday, I happened to attend a ceremony at the war memorial in 
> a Dorset village this year. I was not surprised to see the well-attended 
> ceremony led by a man of the cloth, but was appalled at his opening gambit: 
> "We are all gathered here this morning to celebrate the glory of God the 
> almighty and all powerful..." It was only my respect for the names on the 
> memorial and for other members of our armed forces that have been killed and 
> injured in the defence of our liberty that prevented me from yelling out "No 
> we're not, we are here to honour the fallen, and you would do well to 
> remember that!"
> 
> From Kevin Jones: 
> Please advise what Christian church services have to do with remembrance? I 
> feel fully part of the whole remembrance ideology and ceremony but yesterday, 
> for the first time in my life, I was shocked at how it is hijacked by the 
> Christian church in Britain.
> 
> What I instantly realised was that religion is totally separate from 
> remembrance. What do all the muslim, atheist, hindu, sikh, pagan, agnostic 
> soldiers and families feel about being excluded from the remembrance 
> ceremonies across Britain?
> 
> I notice that the royal family was also a central part of the ceremonies. The 
> sooner religion and religious leaders are separated away from the remembrance 
> ceremonies, the better. And the sooner we have a head of state that is 
> democratically elected the better. It is most sad that a wholly worthwhile 
> and dignified ceremony to remember the sacrifices of brave people in conflict 
> has in many cases been brought about by the actions of reckless politicians, 
> conducted by the leaders of religions which are discredited and irrelevant, 
> in the presence of, and paying homage to, heads of state which are unelected, 
> out-of-touch and irrelevant. There is a BIG gap in the market for a relevant 
> remembrance ceremony. I for one would welcome such a ceremony 100%.
> 
> From Graham Davis: 
> A Secular Thought for Armistice Day
> 
> At 11 am today many of us will share a moment of silence to remember those 
> men and women from the armed services that have died serving this country. It 
> is hard to imagine the pain felt by mothers and fathers, husbands and wives 
> and especially the children who know that they will never see their loved one 
> again. And for comrades who shared the horror of war comes the survivors' 
> guilt, reawakened at the passing of each anniversary.
> 
> War is started by a conscious act; it is never inevitable but is sometime 
> necessary. The justification for it can seem overwhelming at the time but 
> sometimes less so when the verdict of history is delivered. Those bereaved by 
> conflict draw comfort that their loss was for a noble cause and that it was 
> not in vain. For their part, our leaders both political and military, display 
> fortitude and resolution when the coffins of the dead and the wheelchairs of 
> the maimed pass before them.
> 
> But in all conflicts there are those who question the assumptions that lead 
> to war and the expectations raised in the pursuit of it. Do we have accurate 
> intelligence? Is it legal? Is it just? Are we adequately prepared? And in a 
> world that we hope is governed by reason and not emotion is there an 
> alternative? 
> 
> In the early 19th Century Clausewitz described war as "diplomacy by other 
> means" a callous if realistic definition, perhaps apt for those times but not 
> for our own. We see war as an aberration, we attack in order to defend and 
> not to conquer. In the end what is needed is a moral justification for war, 
> not a political or economic one. We must be as certain as we can be that all 
> options have been pursued before we send our young men and women into battle. 
> We must ensure that they are protected as much as is possible, both by 
> adequate training and the best equipment; if we do not, the covenant between 
> us and them is broken.
> 
> Our leaders have to shoulder this enormous burden of responsibility. We hope 
> that they will be guided by a strong moral compass as well as good advice 
> from their colleagues. Hardest of all is to admit that the sacrifices made by 
> the armed forces are not achieving the intended results. This may or may not 
> be the case in Afghanistan but if the time comes that we realise that our 
> objectives cannot be met then it will take tremendous courage to admit 
> failure. Let us hope that our politicians can muster this courage in the same 
> way that our armed forces have done.
> 
> From David Dalby: 
> As I understand it, creating images of living things, people or animals, is a 
> sin in Islam, which is why Islamic art is so abstract. Also quite beautiful 
> in its own way. However, that being the case, why is it acceptable to Islamic 
> extremists to create images of themselves on fundamentalist websites?
> 
> From Dave Purnell: 
> Yes it's Samaritan's Purse time again. This time the school has put out a 
> letter to parents asking my kids to fill shoeboxes for "Samaritan's Operation 
> Christmas Child". No mention is made of any religious agenda. And the parents 
> I have spoken to all assumed this was "The Samaritans", and took quite a bit 
> of convincing that this wasn't in fact the case. I have written to the 
> school, local press etc. However given that this group has been censured in 
> the past for disguising their aims, I wondered if the above wording is part 
> of a national strategy? Have any parents in other parts of the country 
> received similarly misleading letters?
> 
> From Nigel Sewell: 
> Responding to John Bosley (Newsline November 6): There should be no problem 
> with a 'moveable feast' for winter solstice, after all, the christians 
> managed to have easter wander all over the calendar for 2000 years, why can't 
> the world handle a couple of days' variation?
> 
> From Michael Hall: 
> It is very disappointing to see today's Times seemingly reporting alleged 
> "miracles" as fact.
>  
> Notwithstanding that some people fervently believe that miracles do happen, 
> it is rather worrying to see a mainstream newspaper use such slipshod 
> language as in Ruth Gledhill's article on a supposed miraculous cure 
> attributed to Cardinal Newman. For Ms Gledhill to state that "miracles still 
> occur at Lourdes" gives dangerous weight to superstition – something that I 
> would not have expected from a supposedly quality media outlet. 
> 
> 
> Events   
> One Law for All Rally: The one Law for All Campaign, which opposes the 
> introduction of sharia — and all religious — law is holding a rally on 
> Saturday 21 November 2009 between Midday and 2pm at North Carriage Drive, 
> Hyde Park, London (Closest underground: Marble Arch). It's an opportunity to 
> show your opposition to the increased influence of sharia law and the 
> increase in the number of religion-based tribunals in Britain and around the 
> world. Demand one secular law and universal human rights. Full information.
> 
> The Making of Moo. The Orange Tree Theatre in Richmond, Surrey (easily 
> accessible from central London) is staging this play by Nigel Dennis which it 
>  describes as follows: "At the farewell ceremony for the creator of the new 
> dam, a murder is committed. The engineer, Frederick Compton, learns that 
> while he may have brought this backward nation electricity and water, he has 
> killed their river god. He and his wife cannot simply abandon the country to 
> a lawless, godless future. They must stay. A new god must be created."
> 
> It will run from 11 November to 12 December, and on two Saturday mornings 
> during the run there are seminars planned to complement the play and discuss 
> some of the issues raised by it.
> 
> Saturday November 21 at 10.30 am: Bamber Gascoigne chairs a discussion 
> entitled Why Religion? – Any Questions with guests Professor Lewis Wolpert, 
> Adam Ford and Ruth Gledhill.
> 
> Saturday December 5 at 10.30 am: The subject to be discussed is Religious 
> Belief has done the World More Harm than Good when the guests will be Lord 
> Harries (Richard Harries), the former Bishop of Oxford, and Ariane Sherine, 
> the creator of the Atheist Bus Campaign and Terry Sanderson, president of the 
> National Secular Society. More information.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Newsline provides links to external websites for information and in the 
> interests of free exchange. We do not accept any responsibility for the 
> content of those sites, nor does a link indicate approval or imply 
> endorsement of those sites.
> 
> Please feel free to use the material in this Newsline with appropriate 
> acknowledgement of source. Neither Newsline nor the NSS is responsible for 
> the content of websites to which it provides links. Nor does the NSS or 
> Newsline necessarily endorse quotes and comments by contributors, they are 
> brought to you in the interests of the free exchange of information and open 
> debate .
> 
>  
> 
> This email has been sent to you by
> National Secular Society, 25 Red Lion Square, London, WC1R 4RL, United 
> Kingdom.
> Telephone: +44 (0)20 7404 3126
> www.secularism.org.uk
> 
>