Barack Obama nominated for Secularist of the Year

The US President-elect Barack Obama is among the 19 people nominated to receive the next £5,000 Irwin Prize for Secularist of the Year. The surprise nomination follows Mr Obama's strongly secularist speeches, in which he makes clear his support for a clear separation of the church and state.

Terry Sanderson, president of the NSS, said: "Mr Obama has a lot of expectations riding on him, and I am pleased he's been recognised as a secularist in the classic American tradition. It promises a much more just society in the USA if he can sustain his principles under the inevitable pressure from the Religious Right. If he is named the winner, I'd love him to come and accept the prize at our presentation event - but I have a feeling he may be a little tied up with other things."

The full list of nominations received, in alphabetical order:
1. Lord Avebury; 2. Roy Brown; 3. Nick Cohen; 4. Pat Condell; 5. Russell T Davies; 6. Richard Dawkins; 7. A.C.Grayling; 8. Andy Hamilton; 9. Dr Evan Harris MP; 10. Johann Hari; 11. Azar Majedi; 12. P.Z. Myers; 13. Barack Obama; 14. Pragna Patel; 15. Salvatore Pertutti; 16. Rabbi Jonathan Romain; 17. Flemming Rose; 18. Ariane Sherine 19. Ibn Warraq.

Young prefer being "spiritual" to being religious.

Editorial by Terry Sanderson, NSS

Organised religion is rapidly losing out to "spirituality" (which means whatever you want it to)
I have oft maintained that the

"I'm spiritual-but-not-religious" approach to life will eventually spell the end of organised religion.

More evidence of this comes from America, where a survey of 6,853 young people between the ages of 12 and 25 found that they preferred being "spiritual" to being religious. A third of the sample said they didn't trust organised religion.

The survey was conducted by the Minneapolis-based Search Institute and released last week. The first question was, "What does it mean to be spiritual?" There were nine choices, running from "believing in God" to "being true to one's inner self." They also could say that there is no spiritual dimension, and there was an "I don't know" option. 93% of the young people surveyed believe there is a spiritual aspect to life.

But before the "faith leaders" start jumping for joy, we have to look more closely at what these youngsters men by "spiritual". "Spending time in nature" topped the list of responses. "Listening to or playing music" was No. 2, and "helping other people or the community" was third. "Attending religious services" came ninth.

The churches are helpless in the face of this trend, which is mirrored throughout the Western world. Young people hate the authoritarian, unjust and bigoted way in which they see organised religion behaving. Some of them who were questioned further by the pollsters said they didn't like the sexism and homophobia and the attendant cruelty. They didn't like the way that religions all claimed superiority over other world views.

It's a trend we should welcome and encourage. Eventually it will rob the arrogant "faith leaders" of their power to create conflict. Young people are showing that it is time for a change. And they don't see that change coming from the churches or the mosques. They have started on a new journey, and although it will lead many of them to other forms of superstition and irrationality, many others will conclude that they don't need any of the supports of unreason and will end up perfectly contented atheists with an attendant "spirituality" that most of us would simply define as common sense and human compassion.

Christian Voice make their most hated poet famous

From NSS Newsline 21/11/08

Stephen Green has been preening himself about his "victory" in getting a poetry reading by Welsh poet Patrick Jones cancelled at a Waterstone's bookshop.

Well, Mr Green will be finding his victory is pyrrhic, because Patrick Jones' "blasphemous" poetry is getting a much wider audience than it ever would if Christian Voice hadn't opened its trap. The book of poetry, Darkness is Where the Stars Are, is flying off the shelves in Waterstones and Amazon as people buy it in support (and because they like it).

Members of the Welsh Assembly have weighed in to condemn Waterstones in Cardiff calling the cancellation a violation of the right to free speech. Now Jones, the brother of Manic Street Preachers bassist Nicky Wire, will read his poems in a room at the Welsh Assembly on the invitation of Lib-Dem Assembly Member Peter Black. This has now caused the splenetic Mr Green to turn his ire on the Lib Dems, saying the party had "made it official policy to insult Jesus Christ".

However, Tory AMs are objecting to the reading. But in the meantime, Borders bookshop in Cardiff has stepped in and offered Patrick space to do a reading. He'll also now be doing one in Borders in London, too. The whole ballyhoo has also brought an invitation for Patrick Jones to speak at the Hay Literary Festival next year.

I suppose Stephen Green would advise us that the Lord moves in mysterious ways - which is certainly true when it comes to the answering of Stephen Green's prayers.

Our Secular President

"Obama's religion, far from resting on the Supernatural, is summed up in the State and driven by democratic ideals and possibilities. Therefore, when he talks, he sounds much more like a Jacobin from the French Revolution than he does a Christian from the Protestant Reformation that so impacted this nation's beginnings. In speech after speech, he asserts a type of democratic unity as his ultimate goal while discarding the religious convictions of our Founders."
(A.W.R. Hawkins, fulminates about a secularist president on Human Events, a "conservative" US website)

Comments

Consider the following words from Obama’s speech during the “Call to Renewal” conference in 2006: “Politics depends on our ability to persuade each other of common aims based on a common reality [and] this is going to be difficult for many who believe in the inerrancy of the Bible, as many evangelicals do, but in a pluralistic society we have no choice.”

Please understand what he said here. When Obama uses the word “inerrancy,” he is referring to the knowledge and conviction that God is perfect in all his ways and in all his words, and therefore cannot be in error. BUT THAT DOESN’T MATTER TO OBAMA. What matters is that we make ourselves willing to ignore or at least suppress what the Bible teaches so we can achieve a secularized, “pluralistic,” common aim.

BBC thinks its job is to promote religion

Editorial by Terry Sanderson

This week I made a contribution to a programme about "exploring faith" that will be broadcast later this month on Radio 2. I suppose I should be cheering that at least they thought to include a secular voice in the endless religious programming. But at the same time, I have to ask why they are making such programmes when patently the audience is not demanding them.

There is absolutely no evidence that people tune in to Radio 2 (the easy listening channel) to hear about Jesus. Generally they tune in for Tammy Wynette, Deep Purple or Terry Wogan. But there we are - the BBC has obviously reached the conclusion that it is its duty to not only provide a bit of religion, but to provide lots of it and to openly evangelise on its behalf.

Of course, the ultimate expression of the religious discrimination and partisanship that goes on at the BBC is the execrable Thought for the Day. It has become a symbol of the Corporation's obsession with religion, an obsession that is not shared by the licence payers who have to foot the bill.

When Ofcom asked viewers and listeners to place in order of importance a list of twenty genres of programme, religion was placed next to last. Other research shows that when religious programmes start, viewers and listeners flee almost in their entirety to other channels that have more interesting programmes on offer.

So, it wasn't a surprise when one of our members wrote to Mark Damazer, the controller of Radio 4, to complain about a particularly biased Thought for the Day and was given the usual brush off. However, Mr Damazer went a little further than the usual patronising dismissal, and revealed a bit more of the thinking that goes on at the BBC. His response is so astonishing that we are reproducing it in full:

In response to your query about Thought for the Day on Radio Four, this reply is on behalf of everyone at the BBC you have contacted.
TfTD is commissioned as a theological reflection on current events. It is not an opinion piece. All contributors are told to ground their 'thought' in their own theological tradition, using the words of scripture or liturgy that have been worn smooth as a pebble by centuries of repetition and devotion. Their authority is drawn from faiths that have survived the centuries, including periods of persecution and intense scrutiny and still proved themselves valid. It is therefore a unique voice on the BBC. I would contend that the BBC should strive to maintain its 'uniqueness' in an increasingly overcrowded market place and serve the audience by giving them a chance to hear a perspective from the great faith traditions that have shaped our society and continue to wield enormous influence over current events.

So if you change the commissioning brief to allow in secular voices it would no longer be Thought for the Day and I hear no appetite for such a change from Radio Four.

I do not accept that the majority of the country are [sic] atheistic or agnostic. The last census showed 71% declaring themselves Christian and another 8% spiritual. Since then with immigration continuing apace from countries more religious than our own I see no reason to think the religious majority has declined. In a survey a few years ago Radio Four discovered that one in four of its audience go to a worship service every week so we know there is a lot of interest in the subject.

Secularism has not swept religion aside as some would have hoped, indeed some academics are writing about the new visibility of religion, albeit more fractured and fragmented than before. With religion so high on the agenda it would be a strange time to change the one place where it is possible to hear the intelligent religious voice in a secular setting and understand something of why millions if not billions of people still put faith at the centre of their lives.

The founding director of the BBC, Lord Reith, said that the BBC was the "nation's church". Lord Reith was a pious man and like all Christians felt it was his duty to try to bring others to the fold. It seems Mark Damazer is determined to keep the Reithian legacy of the 1920s flourishing into the 21st century. But should he be using public money to promote his religion to quite this extent?

Quotes of the week - NSS Newsline

www.secularism.org.uk

"All the research shows that the majority of people in this country do not want their lives to be run by religious leaders or religious institutions. But the entrenched power of the churches will be difficult to remove, and unless we band together to resist, religion will continue to dominate our schools and play an undemocratic part in our governance. Join the growing resistance – join the NSS. Go to www.secularism.org.uk and pay securely on-line today."

30 May 2008

Quotes of the week
"We realised that all our doubts, all the things we had been fobbed off about by priests and teachers, we had been right about all along. We were right to ask these questions and, no, they didn't have an answer, they were just very good at telling you to stop looking for it."
(Novelist Christopher Brookmyre telling of his loss of faith in Scotland on Sunday)

"You would think that by now Allah's message might be getting through. Time after time Muslim fanatics attempt to wreak devastation in Britain - and succeed only in blowing themselves up, or setting themselves on fire, or their explosives refuse to do the decent thing and explode - while we infidel cockroaches look on in bemusement, quite unharmed. If you were a devout believer, you might put two and two together and begin to suspect that Allah doesn't entirely approve of blowing British people to bits. He would much rather his jihadis stayed at home and watched the Eurovision Song Contest, or did a spot of gardening, or took the dog for a walk."
(Rod Liddle, Sunday Times)

"As noble as this fight against abortion may seem, Pope Benedict and the Vatican hierarchy are using it as a not-so-secret weapon to bend national governments to their will. As pro-Catholic governments start popping up across Europe, in part on account of the abortion issue, what other doctrines will begin to be enforced? What started out as a fight for the lives of unborn babies could end up as a fight to enforce Sunday worship or universal acceptance of papal infallibility."
(Editorial, The Trumpet)

Finally – the blasphemy law is dead and buried

Finally – the blasphemy law is dead and buried via NSS Newsline 9/5/08
The House of Commons voted overwhelmingly on Tuesday to support the abolition of the common law offences of blasphemy and blasphemous libel. This was the final stage in the Criminal Justice and Immigration Bill, and the amendment was carried by 378 votes to 57. The Bill received Royal Assent yesterday, so the blasphemy law is now officially dead and buried.

In a tetchy and bad-tempered parliamentary debate, Conservatives put in their final bid to block the abolition, arguing that it represented a significant step in the secularising of Britain. Some raised the spectre of it being the beginning of a process that would eventually lead to disestablishment. Government Minister Maria Eagle MP assured MPs that there was no such "hidden agenda".

Other MPs were, though, less shy about hoping that one day the Church of England would be disestablished. David Howarth, Liberal Democrat shadow Solicitor General said:

"It is the policy of my party to work towards the disestablishment of the Church, and the separation of Church and state. I am fairly comfortable with that position."

Mr Howarth continued: "The principle of the separation of Church and state is not about the separation of religion and politics, which I think is impossible. We cannot separate people's moral, religious views from their political views. We are talking about the state, not about society, and about the religious commitments of the state, not about whether people in society are religious or not. In the course of debate we have heard three separate arguments against the idea of state neutrality in religion. One of them; it might be called the "this is a Christian country" argument.

"We do indeed have an established Church, we have Acts of Parliament such as the School Standards and Framework Act 1998, which mandates an act of broadly Christian collective worship in schools, and we have Prayers in this place. The trouble with that point is that what is, is not necessarily what ought to be. It ignores the new circumstances in which we find ourselves, which make it important now more than ever to reject the idea of the mixture of Church and state, any notion of theocracy or any hint that the state should be built on a particular religious view."

NSS honorary associate Dr Evan Harris, Lib Dem MP for Abingdon and Oxford (the original architect of this amendment), challenged Tory MPs who were arguing for the preservation of blasphemy laws. In an earlier debate that evening on the same Bill they had argued that new proposals to outlaw hatred against homosexuals would unnecessarily restrict the right of religious people to make clear their disapproval of homosexuality. Now they were arguing that the blasphemy law was necessary to protect religious people against offence. It seemed that their defence of free speech was not entirely consistent.

Dr Harris said: "When it came to the issue of incitement to homophobic hatred, we heard a number of speeches and interventions from Conservative Members claiming that freedom of speech was critical and that freedom of expression was under threat. Yet when it comes to an issue—blasphemy, as opposed to incitement to hatred—that causes individuals themselves no damage, making the case for proscribing it much weaker, those very same people argue that freedom of expression has to go in order to maintain their version of no change. They want to maintain some symbolic law or the safety of the UK constitution, which they fear may be shaken to its foundations by the abolition of these unnecessary and discriminatory laws."

Read the whole debate here

You don't have to be religious to be crazy, but it helps.

"You don't have to be religious to be crazy, but it helps. Indeed, if you are religious, you don't have to be crazy in the medically certifiable sense to do massively crazy things. And — this is the worst of it — religious faith can give people a sort of hyperbolic confidence, an utter unconcern about whether they might be making a mistake, that enables acts of inhumanity that would otherwise be unthinkable."
(Daniel Dennett, Globe & Mail, South Africa)

NSS Newsline 02 May 2008

Archbishop and Pope blame secularists for their failing faiths

by Terry Sanderson, NSS President, 25 April 2008
1. The Archbishop.
"The Secularists" (that's you and me and anyone else who doesn't trust religion to behave properly when it gains any kind of power) have been given a new adjective to go before their name. We're familiar with the "militant" secularists, "fundamentalist" secularists and "extremist" secularists tags, but the Archbishop of Canterbury has decided that he will call us "principled secularists". We are the people he seems to fear most, the ones who he claimed in a speech last week, are staging an organised assault on all religion.

Rowan Williams was talking about the drift away from the churches and the increasing embrace instead of an undefined

"spirituality" – a sort of internalised and private connection with all those things you can't buy with your credit card.

But, naturally, being the cheerleader for organised religion, the Archbishop doesn't think that this is necessarily the answer.

He still thinks organised religion is the best way to make the world work as a unified whole, rather than tribal parts. History doesn't support him in that, but hey, the man's got a living to earn.

However, what is clear from the speech is that the Archbishop doesn't really know what secularism means.

He thinks secularism means attacking the core doctrines of religion and trying to destroy them (a la Richard Dawkins and Christopher Hitchens). But I think secularism means simply persuading religious people that their beliefs are a private matter and that they must not be permitted to dictate policy in the spaces that we all have to share.

I have no problem with religious people holding whatever strange and fantastical beliefs they want – so long as they keep them inside their heads or in their homes or places of worship. Once they leave those places, and believers reach the conclusion that everyone must share their faith, that's when the problems begin.

That is why I think the growth of personal spirituality is a good thing, and should be encouraged.

When people say they are "spiritual but not religious" what do they mean? I don't know, and I'll wager they don't, either. But their vague ideas of "spirituality" are unlikely to harm anyone. If it just means that they will do their best to behave in ways that do not harm or disadvantage others, then what more could one ask?

Let's all be "spiritual not religious". It could save the world.

2: The Pope.
The Pope, too, is very worried about secularism. He gave a very similar speech to that of Rowan Williams during the papal trip to New York last week. He told 250 Christian "faith leaders" about the

dangers inherent in "the rise of 'individualism' in the modern world". Mr Ratzinger said that "rapid changes resulting from globalisation" threatened their collective faith. "Also of grave concern is the spread of a secularist ideology that undermines or even rejects transcendent truth,"

he said.

What can Mr Ratzinger have thought, then, of the speech before his appearance at the United Nations by the UN General Secretary Ban Ki-moon, who declared

"The UN is a secular organisation, with six official languages but no official religion. We do not have a chapel, but a room for meditation".

Let us hope it can be kept that way. But the invitation of religious leaders to give contentious speeches which cannot be challenged or questioned does not bode well for claims of a secular ethos at the UN. Every religion in the world is represented there, so how come the representative of only one denomination of one of them is given this privilege?

Dr Who to meet Dawkins?

Dr Who to meet Dawkins?
Richard Dawkins is to have a cameo role, playing himself, in the final episode of the new series of Dr. Who.

Series producer Russell T Davies, who declared himself an ardent atheist and a fan of Dawkins' work, said: "He was just brilliant. He has brought atheism proudly out of the closet. When he came on set people were falling at his feet."

Professor Dawkins has another connection with Dr Who. His wife – the actress Lalla Ward – starred in the series between 1979 and 1981. She played Romana, an assistant to the fourth Doctor, Tom Baker, during his time in the Tardis.

11 April 2008

'lack of faith should also be taught' by Ben Elton

source: Newsline 04 April 2008

"I think that lack of faith should also be taught [in schools]. I think the concept that faith in itself is a good thing should be questioned from day one, which it isn't. There's a presumption on chat shows and on the news that if you're a religious leader you are in some way already halfway up to the moral high ground and your opinion has more relevance than anyone else's."
(Ben Elton, The Times)

BBC is too scared of Islam, says Ben Elton

Ruth Gledhill, Religion Correspondent (source)

Ben Elton has accused the BBC of unjust political correctness by allowing jokes about vicars but vetoing gags about imams.

Elton, whose children attend a church school, said that the BBC was too “scared” of Islam and of jokes about Islam to let them pass.

Asked about the new law on religious hatred, and whether too much deference was being shown to religious people, he said: “I think it all starts with people nodding whenever anyone says, ‘As a person of faith . . .’

“And I believe that part of it is due to the genuine fear that the authorities and the community have about provoking the radical elements of Islam.

“There’s no doubt about it, the BBC will let vicar gags pass but they would not let imam gags pass.”

He said the BBC might pretend that this hesitancy had something to do with moral sensibilities. “But it isn’t. It’s because they’re scared.”

Elton said the situation was so bad that even everyday sayings were frowned upon: “I wanted to use the phrase ‘Mohammed came to the mountain’ and everybody said, ‘Oh, just don’t! Just don’t! Don’t go there!’

“It was nothing to do with Islam, I was merely referring to the old proverb, ‘If the mountain won’t come to Mohammed, Mohammed must go to the mountain’. And people said, ‘Let’s just not!’ It’s incredible.”

The writer, whose latest novel, Blind Faith,

David Frost interviews Ben Elton about Blind Faith.

addresses the cult of the individual in postmodern society, continued: “I’m quite certain that the average Muslim does not want everybody going around thinking, ‘We can’t mention you. We’ve just got to pretend you don’t exist because we’re scared that somebody who claims to represent you will threaten to kill us.’” The comedian, who was interviewed by Third Way, a Christian culture magazine, admitted believing in “almost nothing”, even though his children attend a church school.

He said people should be taught the essentials of Christianity, if only for cultural reasons. But he also said that “lack of faith” should be taught in schools. “I think the concept that faith in itself is a good thing should be questioned from day one. There’s a presumption that if you’re a religious leader you are in some way already halfway up to the moral high ground and your opinion has more relevance than anyone else’s.”

Blasphemy abolition moves closer

Blasphemy abolition moves closer
The abolition of the blasphemy laws took a decisive step forward this week with the tabling of a government amendment to do so in the House of Lords.

In January the Government had promised in the House of Commons to table a Lords amendment after a "short and sharp" consultation with the churches. This was prompted by the tabling of an amendment by NSS Honorary Associate Dr Evan Harris. The Government amendment this week, however, comes at a considerably earlier stage than had been expected as it is very unlikely that the consultation has been completed. What appears to have happened is that the Government has been panicked into tabling its own amendment following a near identical one being tabled by Lord Avebury. Lord Avebury is a long-time secular campaigner, with whom the NSS works closely. The Government is determined that changes to blasphemy are made through their amendments, to give the appearance that they are in control.

The Bill is scheduled to be debated on Wednesday.

New study on the comfort of imaginary friends

MURIEL FRASER looks at new research
In terms of companionship, God may function like a Yorkie with a hairbow. This is the conclusion of a new study which finds that

both God and anthropomorphised pets can represent attempts to populate one's environment with pseudo-people, and that the impulse to do this appears to be reinforced by loneliness.

The paper, to be published in next month's Psychological Science, concludes that "social disconnection increases the tendency to create humanlike agents...."

This makes good evolutionary sense. Even moderate isolation from other people can compromise one's immune system, while also elevating blood pressure, stress hormones and even the incidence of clinical depression. Taken together, the effects of loneliness turn out to be as damaging to the health as smoking cigarettes. Thus anything that decreases the feeling of isolation is going to be a survival benefit, regardless of whether the "friend" is non-human or even non-existent.

In experiments where people are subjected to extreme isolation, they quickly begin holding conversations with imaginary people, animals or deities. Recent surveys suggest that people feel more connected to God when praying alone than in a group. And the lonely are more likely than others to report having a personal relationship with God. The death of a loved one also tends to increase religious beliefs.

In the new study,

these results from previous ones were checked experimentally by artificially inducing a sense of social isolation in both believers and non-believers. As expected, this resulted in increased expressions of belief in the religious and even, to a lesser extent, in the doubters. As the psychologists noted, "Social disconnection does not turn atheists into fundamentalists, of course, but it may nudge religious belief for believers and non-believers alike."

Many studies have shown that both believers and pet owners tend to be happier and healthier, but until now no one had pointed out a connection: the comfort of imaginary friends.

Source: N. Epley et al., "Creating Social Connection Through Inferential Reproduction", Psychological Science, February 2008.
Source: 18 January 2008, NSS Newsline

BA needs defending from religious zealots, not the other way round - says NSS

BA needs defending from religious zealots, not the other way round
After being bullied into changing its uniform policy to suit Christian activist Nadia Eweida, British Airways has now fallen foul of another religious zealot, as an orthodox Jewish man claims the company is "forcing" him to work on Saturday, the "holy day" for Jews.

Customer service agent Daniel Rosenthal claims he was disciplined by the airline when he failed to turn up for work on a Saturday. In a case that echoes aspects of the Eweida incident, Mr Rosenthal says he has been forced to use annual leave days and had to offer to work New Year's Eve as a trade-off. He said BA had given him permission to have Saturdays off through unpaid leave and rostering for the first 18 months that he worked at the airport as a baggage processor. But then he was transferred to the passenger services unit after which he claims the company demanded he work on Saturday.

On the first Saturday he was due to work, he stayed at home as a direct challenge to the airline's policy.

Despite BA practice being to discipline staff after two "no shows", Mr Rosenthal said he was dealt with immediately after his first absence. "I feel I have been a victim of religious discrimination and I feel that the airline has pulled the carpet from beneath my feet and not allowed me to practice what I believe and stand for. There is no further grace period with Saturdays. My objective is not to be treated unfavourably on the grounds of my religion."

Without knowledge of the full facts, religious figures immediately sprang to Mr Rosenthal's defence. They claimed to be defending "religious freedom". The former Archbishop of Canterbury, Lord Carey, was first on the scene: "I am very sad that British Airways is taking this attitude. Jews are a significant and welcome section of British society. The Sabbath means far more to Jews than Sunday means for the Christian. It seems that BA has learned nothing from the criticism it received following its treatment of the Christian who was disciplined for wearing a cross. If BA cannot find ways to be inclusive, it will not reflect the values of Britishness that our nation is noted for," he said.

London Beth Din (a religious court of judgment) also came out in support of Mr Rosenthal and criticised BA.

But it is clear that BA has done everything it can to accommodate Mr Rosenthal, although it is also clear that, just like Nadia Eweida, Mr Rosenthal is on a mission to get BA to give his religion special privilege.

Meanwhile, an employment tribunal last week dismissed all claims of discrimination against Nadia Eweida. This seems strange having read media reports of the case, which presented Ms Eweida as a victim of religious discrimination because she was "banned" from wearing a small cross at work.

The judgment of the Employment Tribunal paints a very different picture. It reveals Ms Eweida to be a blinkered and intransigent woman who is wont to fling wild accusations at her employer and her colleagues without any evidence and without regard for the consequences.

She suffered absolutely no discrimination — as the employment panel found — and BA jumped through hoops to try and accommodate her many, many demands.

Nadia Eweida was the nightmare worker that any company would dread. Constantly complaining, demanding privileges, accusing co-workers of things that the tribunal said were impossible to substantiate, and pushing her religion on to her colleagues very much against their wishes. You can read my assessment of this case in the Guardian's Comment is Free.

But the full story has not been told about this case and it should be. And now the media is set to pull the wool over our eyes again with this latest case.

Just reserve your sympathy for BA, which seems to be under sustained attack from religious zealots.
See also: Row as Muslim shop worker refuses to sell "unclean" Bible book
18 January 2008 NSS Newsline

Quotes of the week

Quotes of the week
"Any person who has knelt in prayer to the Almighty has a friend and ally in me."
(Mitt Romney, US presidential hopeful)

"The hand of God today is in every step of what happens with me and every human being that exists on this planet."
(John Edwards, US presidential hopeful)

"I have had a grounding in faith that gave me the courage and the strength to do what I thought was right, regardless of what the world thought. And that's all one can expect or hope for."
(Hillary Clinton, US presidential hopeful)

"My Bible tells me that if we train a child in the way he should go, when he is old he will not turn from it. So I think faith and guidance can help fortify ... a sense of reverence that all young people should have for the act of sexual intimacy."
(Barack Obama, US presidential hopeful)

"The Bible was not written to be amended. The Constitution was,"
(Mike Huckabee, US presidential hopeful speaking of making gay marriage and abortion constitutionally impossible)

reposted from: NSS Newsline 19/1/08

What Secularism has meant

reposted from: NSS Newsline 30th November 2007
Chris Street comments are in bright green;

highlights in yellow blockquotes.

Bruce Pitt (Nov 16) says .. We may all find different definitions of secularism using different dictionaries. Reader's Digest (1964) gives primacy to the root meaning (it comes from Latin, saecularis: a lifetime) and notes that it is concerned with this world, before getting to: "sceptical of religious truth or opposed to religious education." Chambers (1972) does similar before getting to "the belief that the state, morals, education, etc, should be independent of religion." Oxford (1998) puts this world first but goes on to imply neutrality towards religion in other matters. (A Catholic dictionary would probably define it as Satanism.) It would seem that secular has lost its age old meaning and may be losing its statutory element. "Challenging religious privilege" (or, perhaps: "Promoting freedom from religion") already reclaims the devoutly-worldly meaning.

Let us not do anything that would encourage believers in socially-sanctioned superstition to join the NSS and destroy it from within.

Quotes of the week - on Slavery, faith schools, secularism

reposted from: Newsline 19 October 2007
Chris Street comments are in bright green; highlights in blockquotes (yellow).

Quotes of the week
"Whether I like it or not, I belong to the Church which participated in the transatlantic slave trade. The actions of my forebears are my actions. I can't distance myself from the terrible things that the Anglican Church did to my brothers and sisters who were sold as slaves and for that I deeply apologise."
(John Sentamu, Archbishop of York, in a speech at the University of the West Indies)

"Unless we create a system where all children have equal access to a good education, millions of children will be denied a fair start in life,'
(Bob Reitemeier, chief executive, Children's Society, commenting on news that 23% of parents would lie about their beliefs to get their children into a "faith school".)

"If people want to believe in God, the Great Pumpkin, or a Jesus who lives in Missouri, that's up to them. But religion has no place in the public life of a democracy. None."
(Ted Rall, Yahoo News)

Pray for Madeleine?

reposted from: NSS Newsline 5/10/07
Chris Street comments are in bright green; highlights in blockquotes (yellow).

From Robin Blick:
This nauseating orgy of praying for the missing Madeleine requires some blunt speaking from atheists. We should ask ... what exactly do those who encourage and engage in this brainless activity actually want or expect to happen? Either the girl is dead, or held captive. In the first instance, is God being asked, without the aid of his earthly incarnation, to raise her like Lazarus from the dead and return her unharmed to her parents, presumably at some specified location? If so, why the agonising delay? And, equally to the point, why did the God of infinite power and goodness now being implored to restore innocent life permit its destruction? After all, the girl's parents belong to a church that believes not only in the miracles of the bible, but those such as at Lourdes being performed in the here and now. Goalkeepers who cross themselves when facing penalties obviously believe God cares about football results. So why doesn't he seem to care about Madeleine?

In the second case, what impact are the millions of prayer hours supposed to have on the evil ones who hold her captive? Will God persuade them to return her, again, we must suppose, at some pre- arranged rendezvous? Or will she be whisked bodily from their grasp? Do those who 'pray for her return' as the phrase has it, ever asked themselves such simple and to me at least, obvious questions? What are you actually asking to be done, and how? Clergymen and theologians will tell us 'it doesn't work like that'. God moves in mysterious ways. Easily said when it's not your child. But then, if it doesn't work like that, what exactly is all this praying about?

how to spend xmas in a totally non-religious, less consumer-crazy way?

reposted from: NSS Newsline 5/10/07
Chris Street comments are in bright green; highlights in blockquotes (yellow).

From Tina McSporran:
Valerie Moyses' reference to anti-christmas has prompted me to ask members for their tips on how to spend the xmas period in a totally non-religious, less consumer-crazy way.

If it were just me and partner there'd be no difficulty; my problem is how to include family who may have other views (particularly of the 'let's overeat and overspend or be labelled wicked' variety). Personally, I hate the whole vile xmas concept

Religion Must Die, says believer

reposted from: NSS Newsline 5th October
Chris Street comments are in bright green; highlights in blockquotes (yellow).

Religion Must Die, says believer
We have a new book in our shop called Religion Must Die and it is written by a man who purports to believe in God. Rich Sanit describes himself as

a deist who thinks "there may well be a God…who created the universe, but has since left his creation to just get on with it, and has had no further input since".

He asserts that deism is not a religion in itself, rather a way of "freeing one's mind from the limits of superstition." He says "religion must die so that God may live."

By using the texts, scriptures and teachings of most global religions, the author provides ample evidence as to why religion must die. Most religions provide all the ammunition needed to use against them, while other belief systems are criticised by the author through reasoned argument and common sense thinking.

This book offers the reader a choice: abandon religion and walk forward into the light of rational thinking, or nurture religion and take a leap back into the darkness of ignorance, blind faith and superstition.

It's an interesting book that doesn't mince words – it is far more scathing and unyielding in its attack on religion than other recent books – and is worth the price if only for the witheringly honest summaries of the beliefs and practices of all the well-known religions that man has inflicted on himself, from Christianity to Scientology.

The book is available from our on-line shop or by post for £10.99 plus £1.50 p&p from NSS Books, 25 Red Lion Square, London WC1R 4RL.