Featuring fresh takes and real-time analysis from HuffPost's signature lineup of contributors
Hanna Hindstrom

GET UPDATES FROM Hanna Hindstrom
 

Politicians Out of Touch With Secular Public

Posted: 16/02/2012 12:07

Bad news. Militant secularism is out to get you. It wants to deprive your children of morality, rights and religious freedom. Or so says Baroness Warsi.

And unfortunately she is not alone. Since the coalition government came into office, God has been creeping back into the public space. In December, David Cameron fervently defended the role of religion in politics in a speech marking the 400th anniversary of the King James Bible.

There is even a growing body of atheist apologists - in no small part spear-headed by Alain de Botton - who seem to maintain that non-believers have become too outspoken, too visceral, and evidently too effective in their diatribe against religion. But is this really true?

There is Dawkins, yes, who seems to have spent the last four decades honing his ability to be unlikeable. But the secular debate has nothing to do with charisma. It doesn't even have so much to do with whether or not God exists. It is about removing the (often corrosive) influences of religion from the realm of public policy.

Women and sexual minorities still bear the brunt of many didactic Christian impositions of "absolute morality" that have no place in a modern liberal society. Dianne Abbott recently resigned from a cross-party group that she dismissed as "window-dressing" for a move to deprive women of secular abortion counselling. The leader of the initiative - devout Christian and Tory MP Nadine Dorries - also tabled a bill calling for teenage girls - and only girls - to be given compulsory abstinence lessons as part of the national curriculum. Luckily it was pulled at the eleventh hour.

There is no doubt this regressive political agenda has support in the Church of England. The Archbishop of Canterbury, Rowan Williams, has himself publicly proclaimed that "it is impossible to view abortion as anything other than the deliberate termination of a human life." Meanwhile the ordination of women as bishops has only recently gained institutional footing and the vast majority of church leaders still view homosexuality as a sin.

In this context it is perplexing that so many - including Cameron - continue to brandish the bible as a shield against "moral collapse". More worryingly still is the assumption that atheists want for moral direction. Even Alain De Botton bizarrely argues that we are all "children" who need constant lessons in the distinction between right and wrong. (We can of course all breathe a sigh of relief that his School of Life is on hand to provide it.)

The suggestion that "militant" secularism is in any way discriminatory or comparable to totalitarianism is of course ridiculous. Secularism does not promote anti-religious sentiment, merely religious neutrality. This protects religious minorities - including non-believers - from intrusions from a predominantly Christian state. More importantly it protects all its citizens from the archaic moralisms of the Established Church.

Some believers suggest that atheists misrepresent secularist philosophy. Elizabeth Hunter recently argued that we should seek to "open a space where all people and all voices are allowed space to flourish" but goes on to suggest that democratic values outweigh minority opinion. She adds that the recent prayer ban controversy could have been settled outside of court - overlooking the fact that Bideford Council twice over-ruled Councillor Clive Bone's objections.

It is further difficult to envision how secularism can practically coexist with a system that is both constitutionally and politically tied to the Anglican Church. The UK is the only country - other than Iran - that grants automatic seats to senior clerics in its legislature. Daily prayers still take place in Parliament and nearly one third of the state's education budget is pumped into Christian schools. These policies are not only biased and grossly unjustified but serve to endorse a broader framework of discrimination and harmful propaganda.

For all the pushback that Richard Dawkins' latest research has received - it yields some interesting results. The vast majority (74%) of self-professed Christians support a separation between church and state. 62% are in favour of a woman's right to choose and 61% support gay marriage. These are important findings - not because they tell us whether religious self-identifications are relevant - but because they show us that it is political theists - not secularists - that have lost touch with the public.

 

Follow Hanna Hindstrom on Twitter: www.twitter.com/Hanna_Hindstrom

Bad news. Militant secularism is out to get you. It wants to deprive your children of morality, rights and religious freedom. Or so says Baroness Warsi. And unfortunately she is not alone. Since the...
Bad news. Militant secularism is out to get you. It wants to deprive your children of morality, rights and religious freedom. Or so says Baroness Warsi. And unfortunately she is not alone. Since the...
 
 
  • Comments
  • 7
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Bloggers
Recency  | 
Popularity
06:13 PM on 02/20/2012
I want to add my support for Professor Dawkins. He has never seemed to me anything other than gentlemanly and reasonable, even in the face of the astonishing ignorance and rudeness exhibited by some of his self-appointed adversaries. I consider myself a tolerant and diplomatic sort of person but I doubt if I coud keep my cool the way he does in these situations. His arguments are clear and succinctly put and he does not make ad hominem attacks on those who disagree with him as many of the defenders of religion do. I admire his courage and honesty and hope he continues to put the rational cat among the bigoted pigeons.
03:28 AM on 02/21/2012
I couldn't agree more :)
photo
HUFFPOST BLOGGER
Hanna Hindstrom
05:32 AM on 02/17/2012
I think the evidence lies simply in the fact that many people – including atheists – dislike him. Of course these are just value judgements­. And as I maintain they are completely irrelevant to the wider debate. It detracts nothing from the validity of his arguments – and certainly not from his right to express them.

And while I do not wish to speak for Richard Dawkins – I would imagine that he is less concerned with exuding "likeabili­ty" or "charisma" to garner a popular following and more concerned with promoting the scientific and rational discussion of facts.
09:33 PM on 02/19/2012
Right, well I maintain that Richard Dawkins is likeable and charismatic, and I encourage people who don't actually know anything about him to look him up on youtube and watch a few of his TV appearances, like the following for example:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZFVhzsHwWXw
12:47 AM on 02/17/2012
Richard Dawkins has always come across to me in his speeches and TV appearances as gentle and gentlemanly. I don't understand why there is this so much hatred of him in the press - what has he done to make himself unlikeable and can someone please provide evidence of this?
09:11 AM on 02/17/2012
He's challenged people's deeply held delusions, that's all. As you say he is always politeness personified, but that doesn't make any difference to someone so far gone that a question about their fantasies is taken as direct personal insult.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
dschiff
Always learning
05:01 PM on 02/16/2012
It's good that secularists in England are pushing against the regressive 'moral' agenda of the Church. You're a few decades ahead of the U.S., so keep up the good work.

I wouldn't go so far to say that the mild professor Dawkins, whose voice is almost womanly, is unlikable. He's speaking about a subject which it is taboo to speak against. I direct you to this video of Dawkins reading some of his hate mail (cat included)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-ZuowNcuGsc&feature=related