UK Is Persecuting The Christian Minority?

 Media, Politics, Religion  No Responses »
Mar 302013
 

In something I first heard about in the Daily Mail, so there was an instant credibility gap, it seems that Lord Carey has been blathering on about how Christians feel like a persecuted minority, and that the government is discriminating  against them.

Which is of course complete rancid rhino bile.

And any christian who feels persecuted against needs to take a good hard look at things.

According to the 2011 census, 59% of the UK population claimed to be christian. Given that 59% is more than 41%, I’d say that any christian who feels that they are a minority probably needs to take their socks off to count above 10. It is the rest of us – humanists, secularists, muslims, buddists, hindus, atheists, agnostics – who have the right to claim to be a minority. Given that 2001 (72% christian) was the first time the question was asked, it is hard to make historical observations regarding levels of christianity in the UK. Christians would of course say that we have been historically a christian society where everyone was a christian; others would say those who weren’t christian were under a great deal of pressure to pretend.

There are occasions when we get forced to sit through some sort of christian ceremony, although it was more common in the past than today. And it can be quite creepy listening to you guys speaking to your imaginary friend (or is it friends?).

Nothing to do with what goes on inside your churches of course, but christian ceremonies in public life can be excluding to those who are not christian. Take for example, the infamous council meetings where pre-meeting prayers are no longer permitted. Or rather praying out loud as part of the meeting is no longer permitted. If such prayers are part of a council meeting, they are effectively an unconscious expression of the kind of people who should take part in the meetings – that is practising christians. Or in other words, you are saying that the real minorities – atheists, muslims, etc. are not welcome.

Not that a period of silent contemplation at the start of a council meeting is a bad idea – indeed, it is probably a very good idea. And nobody is saying that you cannot talk with your imaginary friend(s) in the silence of your mind.

Carey specifically mentions the legalisation of gay marriage as one of the symptoms of “aggressive secularisation” within the government. Actually legalising gay marriage is simply doing the right thing; there is nothing in the legislation that forces anyone to get married to someone not of their choice! So it is merely allowing those who choose to, to get married to the person of their choice.

What christians who oppose gay marriage are complaining about, is that they are no longer allowed to impose their views of what marriage should be onto those who believe differently.

In other words christians are complaining about not being allowed to persecute others.

If christians still feel they are being persecuted in the UK, perhaps they should look at some of the real examples of christians being persecuted around the world (see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Persecution_of_Christians). Any kind of inspection of what happens around the world will make any decent person claiming that UK christians are being persecuted thoroughly ashamed. Whatever the rights or wrongs of the case (and frankly in the case of the BA employee, both sides could do with being told to just grow up), being unable to wear a cross in jewellery form at work hardly compares to being stoned to death.

Mocking Islam

 Politics, Religion  No Responses »
Sep 232012
 

Over the past few weeks, there have been dramatic (and violent) protests over a certain anti-Islamic film clip from which were originally released to YouTube on the 1st July this year. The film was made in America, but apart from that it’s origins appear very shady although an organisation called Media for Christ, although it seems there are multiple organisations with that name.

It would appear that the film is a deliberate attempt to stir up trouble in the Middle-East, and it appears that Islamic extremists have played into the hands of the film makers. Whilst peaceful demonstrations against the film are both understandable and indeed perfectly justified, some of the reactions come across as extreme or bizarre in the extreme :-

  1. Attacking a US diplomatic missions (and even killing the US Ambassador in Libya) when the US government had no involvement in the film.
  2. Ransacking a Catholic cathedral in Niger … even if the original film-makers were Christian, the Catholic church had nothing to do with it.
  3. Increasing the bounty on Salman Rushdie’s life despite his condemnation of the film.
  4. Torching various US fast-food businesses. Sure the food is awful, but burning the business down is a little extreme.

What is less well known is that most of the protests around the world were peaceful (excluding a touch of flag burning). It is also remarkable that the protests happened to have occurred on or around the 11th September, which may have something to do with another event in history. It is also interesting to note the reactions of Libyans to the storming of the US consulate in Bengahzi – which probably had nothing to do with the film.

Given the numbers who turned up at the various violent protests, it is blindingly obvious that the overwhelming majority – however unhappy they may be with the film – are not violent extremists.  But the violence does give the impression that Islam is extremely intolerant of any form of criticism. Of course that is not limited to Islam as most religions have their extremists who react in similar ways, but it does seem that Islam is particularly prone to extremism.

Criticism? Of course this latest film probably (I haven’t seen it) doesn’t qualify as criticism, but is probably just some Christian extremists trying to get a rise out of Islamic extremists. Mocking someone’s beliefs is fundamentally a nasty thing to do. But so is threatening people with eternal damnation.

But genuine criticism also seems to generate this sort of reaction. And the dividing line between genuine criticism and mocking someone’s beliefs is very grey; you could even argue that mocking Islam to generate the kind of reaction it provokes is itself a piece of criticism through demonstration (although  going too far).

Criticism is not necessarily a bad thing. At “best” it allows for misconceptions of Islam to be corrected – perhaps that the death penalty for apostasy is a radical interpretation, and at “worst” could provoke a useful discussion.

 

Knowing The Lord’s Prayer

 Politics, Religion  No Responses »
Apr 032012
 

A few days ago now, a report came out indicating that today only 50% of children know the Lord’s Prayer off by heart whereas in 1972 the rate was 90%. Shock horror!

Before worrying about whether this matters or not, does this survey actually say what we think it does ? In 1972, there was a far greater expectation for children to memorise things and that is less so now. Ignoring whether this is good or bad, it may well be that children in 1972 would claim to know the Lord’s Prayer when they didn’t quite. And children today are perhaps less likely to exaggerate their knowledge.

As an example (although I’m long past the age where I can claim to be a child), I’m not likely to claim I know the Lord’s Prayer off by heart, but if I find myself in the sort of surroundings where the Lord’s Prayer is solemnly chanted, the words are likely to come back to me.

And does it matter ?

Well, a child who goes to church to plead with their god is going to pick it up pretty quickly anyway (at least if it’s a christian church of the persuasion that believes in the Lord’s Prayer), so there is no worry about that point.

As to establishing the cultural tradition of the UK, it seems to me that knowing the Lord’s Prayer is less important than knowing Beowulf or Gray’s Elegy yet how many people know either off by heart ? Or have even read it ? Being aware of (and having read) all three is much more important than having memorised any.

Gay Marriage? Why Not?

 Politics, Religion  No Responses »
Mar 172012
 

Given that I’m not exactly a fan of state-sanctioned marriage and in the unlikely event of me marrying someone, it is not going to be a man (sorry guys!), I’m pretty disinterested in if gay marriage becomes legal or not. Just like anyone else who is heterosexual, the only effect that legal homosexual marriage has on me is that I might just find myself attending such a marriage as a guest.

But given that it makes no great difference to me, I’m in favour of the recent plans of the UK government to legalise gay marriage – if something has no harmful effects on anyone else, why should it be illegal? If two people want to make the public commitment of marriage, what right has anyone to forbid that?

The religious conservatives are up in arms about the plans of course – anything that sanctions anything to do with homosexuality is going to cause them to come out of the churches up in arms, and frothing at the mouth.
Of course they have a perfect right to protest against this. And they have a perfect right to forbid homosexual marriage amongst their own congregations.

But they do not have the right to impose their views on the rest of us.

Prayers At Council Meetings? I Pray Not!

 Politics, Religion  No Responses »
Feb 192012
 

To be honest I don’t pray to any gods – I don’t feel the need to speak to imaginary friends.

In a recent court case, an atheistic ex-councellor and the National Secular Society won a court ruling that a local council was wrong to put prayers on the official meetings agenda. Not because anyone’s human rights were being abused, but because the council was not empowered to do so under an interpretation of the old law governing local councils which explicitly prohibits that which is not explicitly permitted.

Given that this law is currently being revised to give far greater powers to local councils, the brouhaha that has exploded from the moral minority (I’m thinking of Eric Pickles) ever since is really rather uncalled for. This ruling (unless someone interferes) is a really rather temporary victory.

But without considering the legal position, it is time to consider whether it is really appropriate to have public prayers to begin a council meeting. One councillor interviewed about this situation said that her council brought back public praying as a way of bringing the council members together. Undoubtedly it works for those who believe in a certain god.

But what might be easily overlooked is that it is also a very good way of excluding those who don’t believe in that god – atheists or people with a different religion. Whilst this country has a christian past, there is no reason for going out of your way to making others feel uncomfortable. Even if the others are in a minority, or even especially because they are a minority.

After all praying out loud before a council meeting is totally unnecessary.

There is no trouble with having a minute of quiet contemplation where those who choose to do so can talk with their imaginary friends silently if they choose to do so.

 

 Older Entries  Newer Entries