Joining the debate a little late, but there has been some talk recently about religion. I believe the issue was that a court had ruled it was unlawful to enforce prayers on the agenda of a local council meeting.
A councilor who was consistently referred to in the press as an "atheist" won a high court ruling to say that prayers on the agenda of a council meeting were unlawful. Unlawful, by the way, is a very key word here.
It's not that the prayers have been decreed to be "unwelcome" or even "unnecessary", they have been ruled as "unlawful". It's against the law to put prayers on the agenda on council meetings. I think that's quite important in this story.
Eric Pickles, the communities secretary waddled into the affair claiming that "Christianity plays an important part in the culture, heritage and fabric of our nation."
Can't argue with that, although while Pickles is suggesting this is a positive thing, I would claim otherwise. But that's a different debate entirely. However, Pickles went on to say:
"The right to worship is a fundamental and hard-fought British liberty."
Now that is a hideous piece of linguistic prestidigitation if ever I've seen one. Who exactly is claiming that the "right to worship" should be rescinded here? No-one.
Our laws are secular laws and faith is a personal thing. No-one has even come close to hinting that the "right to worship" should be removed. Correct me if I'm wrong, but the Church of England's primary place of worship is not St. Paul's Council Meeting Room.
If you want to believe in religions (my own views notwithstanding) then feel free to do so in your own time. But don't impose your insane faith on grown-up political matters than are actually important.
No comments:
Post a Comment