Government Opposition to Secularism Should Concern Us All

Andrew Copson, Chief Executive of the British Humanist Association

To call Britain a ‘Christian country’ is only marginally more sensible than calling Italy a ‘Roman country’ and it was appropriate that Baroness Warsi made her most recent rallying cry against secularism amongst all the archaic pomp of the Vatican state. As a simple factual statement the ‘Christian country’ line is of course demonstrably false (the most recent British Social Attitudes Survey published at the end of last year put the proportion of Christians at 40% and falling) and as a historical claim it omits as much of our cultural past as it includes. But on this occasion it was not so much Christianity the Baroness had come to praise but secularism she had come to attack.

But it is not overweening secularism that is the UK’s problem -- it is continuing and entrenched privilege for Christianity and Christian churches, and the consequent efforts by other religious groups for privileges of their own.

It was especially surreal of the Baroness to accuse secularism of being ‘intolerant’ and ‘illiberal’. It is not secular schools in England that are allowed by law to discriminate against children on the basis of their parents’ religious beliefs: it’s the thousands of state-funded Christian schools and the handful of those run by other religions. It is not secular agencies that reserve employment opportunities for staff according to their beliefs, but the many Christian and other religious agencies who are increasingly having public services contracted to them by the state. It is not non-religious organisations which lobby for and have received special exemptions from laws -- like equality laws -- that should affect everyone equally. It’s not the British Humanist Association that has unelected representatives as of right in our national legislature -- it’s the 26 bishops of the Church of England who are there.

Baroness Warsi and the Pope.

These and many many other examples of religious privilege and continued official discrimination on grounds of religion or belief give the lie to Lady Warsi’s oft-repeated smears.
by would be good if we could dismiss her as just a minority of one but -- at least in her views on this issue -- she is far from isolated. Eric Pickles just last week jumped into the row about local councils not being able to include prayer on their formal agendas with the same anti-secularist gusto he has displayed on previous occasions. At the end of last year, David Cameron made his own extraordinary speech on Britain’s status as a Christian country, a speech which provoked more astonished bemusement than outrage, with its self-evidently ahistorical and bizarre statements, and its improbable calls on us all to be confident in our Christian nature.

When they are so palpably out of kilter with reality, why do present day politicians keep saying these things?

The most hopeful political reading is that they don’t really mean it and are just attempting to pacify the small but increasingly strident minority of Christian lobby groups who are seeking yet great influence in our public life and greater privilege for those with Christian beliefs. It would be a shame that politicians had bought into the crazy narrative of ‘christianophobia’ that these lobby groups promote, but at least we could rest assured that it would just be political rhetoric and no practical harm would come of it.

More alarming is if Warsi, Pickles and Cameron are serious in their message. A government that tried to make Christianity and Christian beliefs the foundation of British values or a social morality would be building on seriously unstable and unshared foundations. Secularism is essentially a political strategy that says, in the context of a diverse society, the state should not discriminate in favour of or against any person because of their religious or non-religious beliefs. For a government to set itself against that principle is concerning, and the expansion of state-funded religious schools, contracting out of public services to religious groups, and official guarantees of Christian privilege in public life give increasing plausibility to this second interpretation of the politicians’ words.

If the latter interpretation is the correct one, then politicians should remember that their approach is far from popular. In a 2006 IpsosMori poll, ‘religious groups and leaders’ actually topped the list of domestic groups that people said had too much influence on government. In the research released yesterday by the Richard Dawkins foundation, over 90% of self-described Christians said they did not think religion should have special place in public policy. A majority of the public surveyed -- including a majority of Christians -- repeatedly say they are against new religious schools. Policies that pursue religious exceptionalism in defiance of demographic reality and public opinion can only cause division and dissent.

Huffington Post | Andrew Copson | 16th February 2012

Central London Humanists at the Rally for Freedom of Expression

Pictures from the National Secular Society:

Dear friends,

I am the Campaigns Organiser of the Central London Humanist Group. I am here to convey to this gathering our group’s wholehearted support for the noble cause of freedom of expression.

Freedom of expression is a non-negotiable prerequisite for all other human rights.

While incitement to violence is unacceptable because it would be a danger to the safety and rights of others, all of us must make clear and unambiguous our commitment to your right to express yourself as you wish no matter what we may personally think of the quality of what it is you wish to say.

Accepting  your right  to say something with which we agree is not all that difficult.  What is more challenging is to defend your right to say something of which we don’t approve.

This is important. For one thing with freedom of expression comes respect for you as an individual as someone with dignity and autonomy. And for another, true progress, which in the end will benefit us all, is almost always made by those who swim against the tide of current opinion.

Having things said which we find shocking, or boring, or upsetting or in poor taste is a small price to pay for freedom and progress.

Human rights like human bodies need exercising regularly. So I am pleased to be able to inform you that the Central London Humanists with the British Humanist Association, the National Secular Society, the Secular and Humanist Student Societies, One Law for All, the Gay And Lesbian Humanist Association, Survivors Voice Europe and over 80 organisations across the old continent will be again inviting your participation  in our annual March & Rally for a Secular Europe.

Together we will express our determination to protect freedom of religion, freedom of conscience and freedom of speech.
To achieve women’s equality and reproductive rights and equal rights for LGBT people.
To secure a Secular Europe – democratic, peaceful, open and just, immune to the clandestine influence of privileged religious (or other) organisations. One law for all, no religious exemptions from the law. And State neutrality in matters of religion and belief.

Save the date: Saturday 15th of September, here in Central London, starting from Storey’s Gate, close to Parliament Square. You will find all the details on the website of the Secular Europe Campaign: http://secular-europe-campaign.org 
Please bring your support and bring your friends: it will be another important day to exercise our freedom to fight for the rights of all.

Thank you!

Marco Tranchino

 

 Audio recording of all the speeches from the POD Delusion:

 

YouTube video from :

Freedom of Expression

Firmly the artist’s hand
transcends the moment
associates freely
craft and usefulness
inspires words to realise solid dreams
conjures colour to novel forms
composes discord to freshen sound.

 

Grimly the dullard’s hand
crushes the promise
breaks silence
grasps hollowness
repeats mantras to block out thought
abuses the abused with old abuses
threatens bones to dumb down wit.

 

Opposing thumb and finger
that would, that could
fashion enlightenment
from present darker days
unsteady hand, unready hand
unyielding bleeding broken
shuttered up and closed

 
Filleted  bodies proclaim
terror’s consanguinity
ignoring the artist’s doubt.
Suffer the censor’s curse
strike, cut, slash and burn.
Obeying ancient mystic rites
sacrifice our modern rights
blenching to dull  consistency
the brightest bloom of brains.

To keep things as they were
as they were
as described
as ordained
as firmly fixed by tribe
as it was done
so it be done
over and over
Amen.

 

And many say ‘amen’, save the artist.
Save the artist who must work
mustering  strength to point a finger
raising doubts  beneath the surface.
Save the artist who looks and sees.
Save the artist who is just like you or me
owning a new and dangerous idea
risky as a leaping thought must be.
We must save the artist to save ourselves.
And then, we can begin again.
Again.

 

Josh Kutchinsky

Central London Humanists join the BHA in wishing David Pollock a Happy 70th Birthday

British Humanist Association (BHA) Trustee and President of the European Humanist Federation (EHF)  David Pollock is celebrating his 70th Birthday this week.

David has over fifty active years in the humanist movement, since he first became involved with the Oxford University Humanist Group in 1961. Since that time he has made an enormous contribution to Humanism both in Britain and internationally. He has been President of the EHF since 2006 and in those five years has been relentless in pursuing the humanist agenda of secularism, human rights and equality within European and international institutions: the Council of Europe in Strasbourg, the OSCE in Vienna, the EU institutions in Brussels. He has been a director of New Humanist magazine for over 30 years and a trustee of the BHA for 24 years, serving as its chair in the 1970s.

In more recent years he has chaired the BHA’s Parliamentary Working Group and has worked tirelessly on its public policy and campaigning agenda and in 2011 received the Distinguished Service to Humanism Award from the International Humanist and Ethical Union (IHEU) at the World Humanist Congress in Oslo. He has contributed original thought to the movement as well as personal dynamism.

Speaking to The Times from Strasbourg, where he was meeting NGOs, ministers, and European humanists, he said: ‘I absolutely ignore birthdays; life is a continuum, and I don’t get any older.’

Nonetheless, the Central London Humanists join the British Humanist Association in wishing David a Happy Birthday.

At the altar of non-belief: philosopher Alain de Botton proposes a temple for atheists

Alain de Botton has been accused of many things – of being superficial, self-absorbed and most recently (by Terry Eagleton) “banal” – but no one would call him stupid. The PR campaign for his latest book Religion for Atheists: A Non-Believer’s Guide to the Uses of Religion, is a case in point. To accompany the book’s publication he has launched a campaign to build a “£1 million atheist temple” in the City of London, dedicated to the wonders of the evolution. It sounds rather nice – a 46 metre narrowing tower (De Botton himself refers to it as “A Temple to Perspective”) with a roof open to the sky, with layers of fossil-studded rock representing the different eras of the earth’s life, ending at the ground with a wafer-thin strip of gold depicting the infinitesimally short span of human life on the planet.

De Botton, who has some previous motivating property developers to invest, claims he has already raised half the money, but, more importantly for the sale of his new book, he has raised the ire of Richard Dawkins and the interest of the media. According to today’s Guardian, Dawkins is appalled at the idea, and would prefer to see the money sunk into his (not entirely uncontroversial) idea of secular schooling. It was also dismissed by Andrew Copson of the British Humanist Association, who said humanists can get their sense of awe and wonder from art, theatre and long walks in the country, thanks very much.

Some on the other side are not happy either: Rev Katharine Rumens, rector of St Giles’ Cripplegate church, in Barbican, near where the temple is likely to be located, suggested that it would lack the sense of community of a church and wouldn’t really speak to the human condition. However, media vicar George Pitcher welcomed the move as offering a more positive form of atheism than that represented by Dawkins.

All in all a perfect strategy. Reject God and piss of Dawkins? Check. Have a groovy picture and a slick website? Check. A million quid to chuck in the headline? Check. Stoking the embers of the debate over modern architecture, and available for comment at short notice? Check and check. Which is probably why every newspaper appears to have run with the story, no doubt the TV news shows will follow suit, and Hamish Hamilton will be licking their chops.

I interviewed De Botton at length last week for the next issue of new Humanist (out Feb 16). No spoilers, but I’ll say this: he’s a smart guy.

New Humanist – Blog | Caspar Melville | 27 January 2012 

Happy birthday Peter! We salute you!

Peter Tatchell at his home in south London. Photograph: Richard Saker

It looks as if Robert Mugabe will die in his bed rather than in the prison cell where he so richly deserves to eke out his days. During his time as dictator of Zimbabwe, he has had just one intimation of the fear he has inspired in so many others.

On 30 October 1999, while Mugabe was visiting London, two men jumped in front of his car. A third stood behind, so the driver could not reverse away. A thin, neatly dressed Australian opened the passenger door. He held up his left hand, palm forward, to show that he was not carrying a gun. He laid his right hand on the tyrant’s shoulder and said: “Robert Mugabe, you are under arrest on charges of torture. I am now summoning the police.” Mugabe’s eyes popped, his jaw dropped and the blood drained from his face.

The police came, sure enough. But they showed their pinched priorities by arresting Peter Tatchell and his fellow gay activists. The moment is worth savouring, nevertheless. For a few seconds, Tatchell had succeeded in giving Mugabe a taste of how a just world would treat him.

Tatchell turns 60 this week. January 2012 also marks the 45th anniversary of his career as a human rights and gay rights activist. These labels have been so devalued I need to elaborate. Every respectable person claims to support human rights. In Bridget Jones’s Diary, Helen Fielding’s Mr Darcy was no longer the wealthy landowner of Jane Austen’s imagination but a wealthy human rights lawyer.

Tatchell is no one’s idea of a good catch or reliable provider. He lives in some poverty and suffers for his beliefs. As for gay rights, when even the leader of the Conservative party finds it politic to legislate for gay marriage, homosexual liberation appears the most mainstream of causes. Yet Tatchell wants nothing to do with the British political class and the feeling is reciprocated. Rather than showing how yesterday’s rebels become today’s conformists, Tatchell’s life illustrates a rarer and nobler theme: how a commitment to freedom for some can meld seamlessly into a commitment to freedom for all.

If he were not an atheist, who receives death threats from Islamists, I would say that there is something of the saint about him.

He lives in the Elephant and Castle in south London, one of Britain’s great planning disasters. His tiny flat is on the first floor of a deck-access block, in a district riven by urban motorways and pockmarked with decaying council estates. Inside, you cannot move without stumbling over piles of books and papers. The only modern appliance is his desktop computer, on which he receives 900 to 1,000 emails a week. With typical courtesy, he replies to them all.

Tatchell reveals in an embarrassed voice that he manages on about £8,000 a year. It’s not the meagre income that worries him. He does not want us to think that he engages in anything so solipsistic as self-pity. “I’m not poor,” he shouts as he turns his life into an argument. “I can wake up every morning and run clean water from my taps. One billion people don’t have that. If the world were to cut defence spending by 10% – just 10% – everyone could have what we have.”

Apart from the clutter, the visitor cannot help but notice the oppressive security. Tatchell lives with CCTV cameras, a reinforced steel front door, fire extinguishers in case arsonists attack and a rope ladder to throw out of his bedroom window if he needs to make an escape. He has been beaten up dozens of times. At first, his enemies were white homophobes. They were egged on by the 1983 Bermondsey byelection, one of the filthiest campaigns of the 20th century, in which Tatchell stood as the Labour candidate. The Liberals and others made sure the voters knew he was a homosexual and were in no way abashed when Simon Hughes, their victorious candidate, turned out years later to be gay too. Then black thugs came for him because he campaigned against homophobic rappers. Then Islamists came for him because he loathed the theocratic superstitions of the religious right and had the courage to say so.

Unlike so many, when Tatchell says he believes in universal human rights he has the scars to prove he means it. When he was a teenager in Australia, he opposed the execution of a man many in authority believed was innocent; he came to Britain in 1971 to avoid the military conscripting him. He found a British left that regarded homosexuality as a “bourgeois deviation” and despite the abuse he received set about trying to change it.

He was the first man to stage a gay rights protest in the old communist bloc and was arrested by the Stasi for his impertinence. Ever since, from Castro’s Cuba to Putin’s Moscow, he’s been prepared to put his body on the line to protest against oppression.

In 1994, Tatchell outed gay bishops. I criticised him at the time for behaving like a tabloid editor. He is too polite to bring up my unduly harsh words but explains that he was not revealing private secrets for the hell of it, but exposing phonies who conformed to society’s prejudices by calling for gay teachers and youth workers to be sacked.

Who now denies that his shock tactics had an effect? That he taught powerful closet cases that if they oppressed homosexuals they could not expect homosexuals to keep quiet about their private lives?

Far from making him a single-issue campaigner, gay rights brought Tatchell a universal understanding of human suffering. Because he knew that the left could be as prejudiced as the right, he never fell into relativist excuse-making for socialist dictatorships. Because he opposed the supremacist attitudes of heterosexual men towards gays, he became a natural supporter of the emancipation of women. Because he saw how religion is everywhere used to justify the persecution of homosexuals, he became an unbending opponent of all God-inspired hatreds.

He warns anyone seeking political change that they must prepare for the long haul. “Savour your victories when they come,” he says, “and don’t be put off by defeat. Above all, never lose your idealism.”

Happy birthday, comrade. If the British are slightly more tolerant than we once were, it is in part because we had the good fortune to have you live among us.

The Guardian | Nick Cohen | Sunday 22nd January 2012

 

HUMAN RIGHTS DAY 2011

This year, millions of people decided the time had come to claim their rights. They took to the streets and demanded change. Many found their voices using the internet and instant messaging to inform, inspire and mobilize supporters to seek their basic human rights. Social media helped activists organize peaceful protest movements in cities across the globe – from Tunis to Madrid, from Cairo to New York – at times in the face of violent repression.

Human rights belong equally to each of us and bind us together as a global community with the same ideals and values. As a global community we all share a day in common: Human Rights Day on 10 December, when we remember the creation 63 years ago of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.

On Human Rights Day 2011, we pay tribute to all human rights defenders and ask you to get involved in the global human rights movement.

The High Commissioner for Human Rights hosted a global conversation on human rights through social media on Friday, 9 December at 9:30 a.m. New York time.

See a sampling of the questions we received on our Storify page.

Help us celebrate human rights!

This year everybody has an opportunity to support human rights by joining our celebration. Invite your family and friends to participate in our social media campaign. Become a human rights campaigner; learn more about your rights and spread the word www.celebratehumanrights.org

United Nations | 10th December 2011

It has been a year like no other for human rights. Human rights activism has never been more topical or more vital. And through the transforming power of social media, ordinary people have become human rights activists.

FOLLOW UNITED NATIONS HUMAN RIGHTS:

Facebook ButtonTwitter ButtonYoutube Button

 

Richard Dawkins to guest-edit the New Statesman Christmas issue

The Four Horsemen of New Atheism reunited, plus Philip Pullman, Carol Ann Duffy, Bill Gates and more.

In a 100-page special issue, the evolutionary biologist and bestselling authorRichard Dawkins brings together some of the world’s leading scientists, thinkers and writers. His Christmas double issue follows the much-discussedNew Statesman guest edit by the Archbishop of Canterbury, Rowan Williams, in June this year.

Dawkins has contributed an essay, written the New Statesman leader column, and travelled to Texas to conduct an exclusive interview with the author and journalist Christopher Hitchens. They discuss religious fundamentalism, US politics, Tony Blair, abortion and Christmas.

Microsoft’s Bill Gates has written a column on the wonders of innovation, the political theorist Alan Ryan has written on Barack Obama, and there are contributions from some of the world’s most respected scientists, includingPaul Nurse, president of the Royal Society, and the space explorer Carolyn Porco, on Saturn.

Richard Dawkins says:

To guest-edit a great magazine with the status of a national treasure is the literary equivalent of being invited to imagine your ideal dinner party – Christmas dinner, in this case – and then of actually being allowed to send out real invitations to your dream companions. Every acceptance is like a present off the Christmas tree, gratefully unwrapped and treasured.

At the same time, I couldn’t help being daunted by the New Statesman‘s historic reputation for serious, well-written radical commentary, and by the need in my literary Christmas dinner to temper merriment with gravitas.

We have no reindeer, but four horsemen; no single star of wonder and no astrologers bearing gifts, but a gifted star of astronomy who knows wonder when she sees it; no kings from the east, but the modern equivalent of a king from the west; and wise men – and women – all around the table. Please join us at the feast.

In 2007, Dawkins, Hitchens, the philosopher Daniel Dennett and the neuroscientist Sam Harris were nicknamed the “Four Horsemen” of new atheism. Both Dennett and Harris have written essays for this issue, on human loyalty and free will, respectively.

Other contributors to the special issue include the human rights activistMaryam Namazie, the comedian Tim Minchin and the rabbi and broadcasterJonathan Romain.

Elsewhere in the magazine, the Poet Laureate, Carol Ann Duffy, speaks to the NS assistant editor Sophie Elmhirst about choosing morals over politics, reading poems at Occupy St Paul’s and her “Christmassy relationship” with God, Philip Pullman defends fairytales and Kate Atkinson offers an exclusive short story, “darktime”.

Jason Cowley, editor of the New Statesman, says:

Richard Dawkins is one of the world’s foremost public intellectuals, and has revived long-dormant debates on the role of both religion and science in public life. We are delighted that he has illuminated both issues in this special Christmas double issue of the New Statesman.

He has assembled some exceptional writers and thinkers, and we’re particularly pleased to welcome back Christopher Hitchens, who began his Fleet Street career on the NS in the 1970s.

The issue, cover-dated 19 December, will go on sale in London on Tuesday 13 December and in the rest of the country from Wednesday 14 December.

New Statesman | 8th December 2011

Growing majority of young people have no religion, government must start listening



Two-thirds of young people and half of the population as a whole do not belong to any particular religion, and the steady decline in religiosity in the UK is set to continue, the 28th report of the British Social Attitudes (BSA) survey has found. The British Humanist Association (BHA) has welcomed the findings, commenting that the government is ‘fast becoming out of touch with the population’ when it introduces policies and new laws with a religious bias.

Unlike the highly flawed Census question, which at best measures a weak cultural affiliation to religion, the BSA attempts to examine levels of religious affiliation, whether someone was brought up in a religion, and whether they regularly attend religious services.

The survey found half (50%) of people do not regard themselves as belonging to a particular religion while only 20% belong to the Church of England. 64% of those aged 18-24 do not belong to a religion. More than half of those brought up in a religion never attend religious services or meetings. The survey also found that levels of religiosity have declined over the past three decades and are likely to decline further, as older, more religious generations die out and are replaced by younger, less religious generations.

Andrew Copson, BHA Chief Executive, commented, ‘It is quite clear that the population is becoming less religious, particularly as the proportion of younger people who have no religion grows, so the government is fast becoming out of touch with the population when it introduces policies and new laws which actually increase the role of religion in the state. Since the general election the government has set in place policies which will increase greatly the number of discriminatory ‘faith’ schools, those which open up vital public services to any number of evangelical religious groups without proper equalities protection, and has proposed not only to keep reserved seats for Church of England Bishops sitting ex-officio in the House of Lords but to give them even more privilege.

‘It is bizarre that the government refuses to take a more secular approach to public policy, to eliminate unjustified religious discrimination and religious privilege in places such as schools and the workplace and promote a real equality between people regardless of their religious or non-religious beliefs.’

British Humanist Association | 7th December 2011

Notes

For further comment or information contact Andrew Copson at andrew@humanism.org.uk or 07534 248596.

As part of the BHA’s campaign on the Census this year we commissioned our own survey which showed clearly that there were low levels religious belief and belonging in the population.

Read the 28th British Social Attitudes survey findings

More information on surveys and statistics on religion and belief.

 

Church and humanists clash over Bishops in parliament

Rowan Williams, the Archbishop of Canterbury, and Andrew Copson, Chief Executive of the British Humanist Association.

*Watch the evidence session http://www.parliamentlive.tv/Main/Player.aspx?meetingId=9552*

The conflicting views of the Church of England and the British Humanist Association (BHA) were clear at today’s evidence session on Bishops sitting in the House of Lords, the ‘Lords Spiritual’. The Archbishop of Canterbury, Dr Rowan Williams, and Andrew Copson, BHA Chief Executive, were both invited to give evidence to the parliamentary Joint Committee looking at the draft House of Lords Reform Bill on Monday 28 November. The BHA had, last month, submitted detailed written evidence to the Committee opposing and criticising the government’s proposals on the Bishops.

In his written submission to the Joint Committee, Dr Williams described why he supports having Church of England Bishops in the House of Lords as of right and why the appointments process should also have regard to increasing the presence of leaders of other denominations and faiths. The UK is the only democracy in the world to have reserved seats for clerics in its parliament, and the BHA has been campaigning for many years to have abolished this outdated, undemocratic, unequal and unfair tradition which, if retained, would seriously undermine the validity of any reform of the House of Lords.

Mr Copson set out why there are no good arguments for keeping reserved seats for the Church of England in parliament. Throughout the evidence session, Mr Copson emphasised that there was no constitutional reason to have automatic places for the Bishops, and anyone who argued for their retention was simply arguing to extend a religious privilege which has no place in a modern, liberal and diverse democracy.

He told the Committee that the argument of tradition, that we should have Bishops because we have had them for a long time and it’s best to leave things as they are, was irrelevant and insubstantial.

Mr Copson emphasised that many would disagree with the idea that the Bishops ‘speak’ for those of all faiths and that there are many too, including Anglicans, who would disagree that they can provide a unique ethical perspective in the chamber. He described how there was no case to be made for reserving seats for Bishops in the House of Lords on the basis that those men are uniquely well placed to provide vital expertise on matters of public policy, because they are not. This is the case not least because their views on the ethics of assisted dying for the terminally ill or equal rights for gay people or state-funded religious schools were unrepresentative and often lay far outside the mainstream.

Mr Copson spoke about how, increasingly, advocates of Bishops have also built their case on the position of the Church of England as our largest NGO – a civil society group with a branch in every community. However, he pointed out that it were the case that we should treat the Church as an NGO (doubtful given its entanglement with the state), why then should we consider it unique compared with trade unions or the National Trust or the Women’s Institute?

Mr Copson detailed for the Committee how there were clear objections to having automatic places for the Church of England Bishops on grounds of equality and fairness. If parliament is supposed to represent the people, Mr Copson questioned, why should only one denomination of only one religion have a guaranteed twelve seats when other denominations of that religion, other religions and other non-religious philosophies and approaches to life have no such representation? It would only be fair to represent all religions and philosophies. Mr Copson said this could immediately be seen to be impossible, not least because we would need an unfeasibly large second chamber to represent all shades of religious and non-religious opinion. Having reserved seats for Bishops of any number represents a privilege that is insupportable in today’s diverse and increasingly non-religious society.

British Humanist Association | 28th November 2011

Notes

For further comment or information, contact BHA Chief Executive Andrew Copson on 07534 258596, or BHA Head of Public Affairs Naomi Phillips on 07540 257101.

The BHA will give evidence to the Joint Committee on the draft House of Lords Reform Bill in a session from 18.45 on Monday 28 November, in the Moses Room, House of Lords. The Archbishop of Canterbury will give evidence from 18.00.

The Joint Committee was formed to examine the Draft House of Lords Reform Bill published in May 2011 and consists of 26 members of both Houses of Parliament. In October 2011, the BHA submitted written evidence to the Committee opposing the government’s proposals to retain automatic places for 12 Church of England Bishops in the reformed chamber.

Read the BHA’s written submission to the Joint Committee

Read more about the BHA’s work on Bishops in the Lords

The British Humanist Association is the national charity working on behalf of non-religious people who seek to live ethical and fulfilling lives on the basis of reason and humanity. It promotes a secular state and equal treatment in law and policy of everyone, regardless of religion or belief.