We Don’t Do God
February 12, 2012 by Jason Maude
- What place does prayer have in public?
This week the High Court ruled that Bideford town council was acting unlawfully when it formally summoned councillors to attend prayers said before meetings. Not being a legal expert I do not wish to discuss the ramifications of section 111 of the Local Government Act 1972 the holding of prayers was breaching according to the High Court. I want instead to talk about the wider issue of religion in the public space.
The atheistic councillor Clive Bone, whose original objection to the prayers started off the case said: “Religious freedom is an absolute right and so is freedom from religion an absolute right, in my view.” This is a perfectly reasonable statement. No one should be forced to believe in religious teachings that they don’t believe in, but everyone should have the right to believe in religious teachings that they do believe in. In this matter the NSS and I (and I guess most other people) are in agreement. The disagreement comes on the role of religion in public, in business, in government, in civil society. The question which needs to be answered here is: Do religious people have the right to put their views into practice in public?
A society without public religion is generally known as a secular society. The NSS defines secularism as being about two basic principles: “The first is the strict separation of the state from religious institutions. The second is that people of different religions and beliefs are equal before the law.” I think that there is a tension between these two principles. If a person who holds religious beliefs wants to start council meetings with a prayer then according to the second principle they should be able to promote that point of view and try to make it part of the policy of that council as much as someone who wants all council meetings to start with the singing of the national anthem, or saluting the flag, or the reading of the names of the war dead. However if prayer counts as a religious institution then this would contradict the first principle.
In my view religion, when correctly used, is not just a private guiding principle for individuals. It is a guiding principle that can and should be used for all of society. In my opinion anyone attempting to restrict religious views to the private sphere only is not allowing religious people the same freedom that they accord to other political, economic or social belief structures. If no-one wants to follow religious belief structures then that is their choice and democratically, if enough people don’t want to follow religious belief structures, then they should not be put into practice. But if people do want to use religious beliefs to guide their thinking and if they have been democratically elected then they should be as entitled to use that belief system as any other.
We Don’t Do God
February 12, 2012 by Jason Maude
This week the High Court ruled that Bideford town council was acting unlawfully when it formally summoned councillors to attend prayers said before meetings. Not being a legal expert I do not wish to discuss the ramifications of section 111 of the Local Government Act 1972 the holding of prayers was breaching according to the High Court. I want instead to talk about the wider issue of religion in the public space.
The atheistic councillor Clive Bone, whose original objection to the prayers started off the case said: “Religious freedom is an absolute right and so is freedom from religion an absolute right, in my view.” This is a perfectly reasonable statement. No one should be forced to believe in religious teachings that they don’t believe in, but everyone should have the right to believe in religious teachings that they do believe in. In this matter the NSS and I (and I guess most other people) are in agreement. The disagreement comes on the role of religion in public, in business, in government, in civil society. The question which needs to be answered here is: Do religious people have the right to put their views into practice in public?
A society without public religion is generally known as a secular society. The NSS defines secularism as being about two basic principles: “The first is the strict separation of the state from religious institutions. The second is that people of different religions and beliefs are equal before the law.” I think that there is a tension between these two principles. If a person who holds religious beliefs wants to start council meetings with a prayer then according to the second principle they should be able to promote that point of view and try to make it part of the policy of that council as much as someone who wants all council meetings to start with the singing of the national anthem, or saluting the flag, or the reading of the names of the war dead. However if prayer counts as a religious institution then this would contradict the first principle.
In my view religion, when correctly used, is not just a private guiding principle for individuals. It is a guiding principle that can and should be used for all of society. In my opinion anyone attempting to restrict religious views to the private sphere only is not allowing religious people the same freedom that they accord to other political, economic or social belief structures. If no-one wants to follow religious belief structures then that is their choice and democratically, if enough people don’t want to follow religious belief structures, then they should not be put into practice. But if people do want to use religious beliefs to guide their thinking and if they have been democratically elected then they should be as entitled to use that belief system as any other.
Share this:
Related
Posted in General Comment | Tagged government, religion | Leave a Comment
Comments RSS