Category Archives: Secular

NSS congratulates BA for having defied ‘the religious lobby’

Posted on by Bob Pitt

There are striking parallels between the BA cross-wearing case and a similar dispute at Denbigh High School last year. There, the Luton school had a uniform policy that was agreed with and respected by all parents and pupils, except that is for one selfish religious extremist who demanded it be changed to cover her more personal statement of her Muslim faith, namely wearing a jilbab.

The Muslim Council of Britain inevitably took her side, placing the chance to advance the religious cause against the school’s common-sense approach which had the agreement of the wider community.

BA has a uniform policy respected and adhered to by all its 34,000 uniformed employees, and one which doubtless has been the subject of discussion and agreement with unions.

Again, one selfish religious extremist wants the rules changed to fit her personal demands. Again, a spokesman for the religion involved, in this case the Archbishop of York, places that demand above the need for the company to apply a commonsense dress code that 33,999 other people appear happy to accept.

BA is to be congratulated for sticking to its guns. No company should have its policies dictated to it by any one religious fundamentalist engaged in silly posturing, nor be intimidated by the religious lobby.

Letter from Alistair McBay of the National Secular Society in the Courier, 27 November 2006

Mass protest against Khatami at St Andrews

Posted on by Bob Pitt

St Andrews protestAbout a dozen protesters gathered outside Younger Hall, where the university principal, Brian Lang, presented the former president with his degree.

Among the protesters was Maryam Namazie, of the Iranian Women’s Liberation group, who fled the country in 1980. “It is disgusting that St Andrews University is conferring an honour on this man, he is responsible for more than 1,300 deaths during his presidency,” she said.

The university defended its decision to invite Mr Khatami, citing his moderate views and willingness to talk with the west as reason to engage with him. The students’ association backed that decision.

“What we can offer is acknowledgment of a courageous stand against insularity and congratulations on real and persistent efforts to reach out and engage with nations of the west,” said history professor Michael Bentley, speaking after the former president received his honorary degree.

Associated Press, 1 November 2006

Muriel Grey on ‘Enlightenism’

Posted on by Bob Pitt

Muriel Grey joins the massed ranks of those defending the Enlightenment against religious belief in general and Islam in particular. Apparently, Enlightenment values are compatible with describing the Aishah Azmi case in the following terms: “some woman (we think – for all we know it could have been Paul Gascoigne under that niquab [sic]) was claiming her right to mumble lessons at children while wearing a bag over her head.”

Sunday Herald, 29 October 2006

Continue reading →

Right wing Christians and secularists join in condemnation of Rowan Williams

Posted on by Bob Pitt

Anger Over Church BackingThe Archbishop of Canterbury prompted anger yesterday by putting Muslim veils on an equal footing with Christian crosses.

Britain’s most senior churchman, Dr Williams, said talk of banning the full-face niqab reminded him of China, where the state controls all religious life. He said: “The ideal of a society where no visible public signs of religion would be seen – no crosses around necks, no sidelocks, turbans or veils – is a politically dangerous one.”

But Stephen Green, the national director of fundamentalist group Christian Voice, said Dr Williams appeared to be ranking Islam alongside Christianity. He said: “We Christians should be more ready to stand up and be counted. We have to say that our faith is a world view and it’s not just something we do on a Sunday.”

Alison Ruoff, a member of the CofE General Synod, said: “The Archbishop should be standing up for the Christian faith in a much more visible way. He should be making a more public stand for Christianity and not for other religions.” Roy McCloughry, director of evangelical think-tank the Kingdom Trust, said: “The veil is not a religious issue – it is a cultural issue.”

Terry Sanderson, vice-president of the National Secular Society, which campaigns against all religious interference in non-believers’ lives, said: “Minority religions are now demanding a place at the table. Dr Williams is using phony arguments. Comparing ministers’ criticism of veils in Britain with what goes on in China is ridiculous. He’s running a hare that does not exist. There is no ban on veils in this country.”

Daily Express, 28 October 2006

Manchester imam ‘backs execution of gays’

Posted on by Bob Pitt

“A row has blown up over a claim a prominent Manchester Muslim has defended the execution of sexually-active gay people as ‘justified’. Arshad Misbahi, a junior Imam at the city’s Central Mosque is alleged to have confirmed that it is an acceptable punishment in Iraq and Iran. His comments are said to have been made to psychotherapist Dr John Casson who is researching the persecution of gays in Islamic states. But they have been condemned as ‘encouraging conflict between the area’s large gay and Muslim communities’.”

Manchester Evening News, 26 October 2006

Predictably, this “story” originates with Outrage! – who dedicate most of their efforts these days to encouraging conflict between the gay and Muslim communities. Outrage! issued a press release a week ago, based on alleged remarks made by Arshad Misbahi in a private conversation initiated by Casson. This was then taken up by Pink News and Gay.com. As Massoud Shadjareh of the Islamic Human Rights Commission told BBC News: “Just one man talking to another becomes an issue, Muslims are being put under a magnifying glass. I think that this is part of demonising Muslims.”

‘The veiled conceit of multiculturalism’

Posted on by Bob Pitt

The Australian offers its contribution to the veil “debate”:

“Religious beliefs are by definition sacred, and as much as possible they should be a private matter. But when an individual or a community feels that their personal practices should trump widely held values while also setting themselves apart, the question arises as to whether those people would not be more comfortable in a place where such behaviour is the norm.

“At its heart is the question of where tolerance should end and the old adage, ‘When in Rome, do as the Romans’, should kick in. While tolerance is certainly a positive virtue that should be strived for, it cannot be a cultural suicide pact…. Disappointingly, those who have traditionally been a positive force for the liberation of women against oppression in other spheres have here largely been silent on the question of Islam’s beliefs concerning half of humanity.

“… what confronts the West today is not so much a clash of civilisations as a clash of centuries. The jumbo jets that have enabled the mass immigration from Muslim countries to the West are, in effect, time machines that have brought millions of people from a pre-Enlightenment world – where men are the unquestioned bosses, stoning and forced amputation are punishments rather than crimes, and sectarian differences are worth dying over – to secular, liberal and postmodern democracies such as ours.”

Editorial in The Australian, 24 October 2006

Muslims challenged by gynaecologists

Posted on by Bob Pitt

“France’s leading gynaecologists have challenged hard-line [sic] Muslims to bow to France’s secular, ‘modern’ rules of society, and to stop insisting that their wives are examined by female doctors. The heads of the French National College of Gynaecologists and Obstetricians issued a public declaration, rejecting any moves to undermine the principle that public hospitals are part of a secular state, in which patients must accept being examined by a doctor of the opposite sex.”

Daily Telegraph, 23 October 2006

NSS on the Aishah Azmi case

Posted on by Bob Pitt

“When I was the Chief Officer of an organisation (a Council for Racial Equality in Yorkshire as it happens) I would not have tolerated any member of my staff wearing a niqab, or any other kind of non-medical mask over their face. Had I ever been approached by a woman wearing a niqab (though I never was) I would have done exactly as Jack Straw claims he would do, and politely asked her to remove it.

“I do not know Ms Azmi or her personal circumstances but I do have some familiarity with the various communities in Kirklees. I was a founder member and the first Secretary of the Kirklees Community Law Centre but I resigned from the Management Committee over a decade ago because the other members were not willing to stand up to the unreasonable demands of the leaders of the local Pakistani Community Association.

“These so-called community leaders were so used to being indulged and deferred to in all matters relating to ‘their’ communities that their response to any opposition was to bully and bluster. I suspect that some of these same people will be bending the ears of the local authority at this very moment, demanding all sorts of concessions and assurances about future practices in schools and other areas of the public sector.”

Steve Radford on the National Secular Society website.

The worrying thing is that someone like this was ever responsible for racial equality in the first place.

The veil – a woman has no right to choose

Posted on by Bob Pitt

P. Toynbee“This has been a real test of Labour politicians. It is the first time in years that there has been a hard choice about women’s rights – and many failed miserably. Here is a conflict between two principles – respect for a religious minority and respect for women’s equality…. When it comes to something as basic as women hidden from view behind religious veils, is it really so hard to say this is a bad practice? Because some racists may jump on the bandwagon to attack Muslims, that’s no reason to pretend veils are OK….

“The veil turns women into things. It was shocking to find on the streets of Kabul that invisible women behind burkas are not treated with special respect. On the contrary, they are pushed and shoved off pavements by men, jostled aside as if almost subhuman without the face-to-face contact that recognises common humanity.

“The classroom assistant in a Church of England school in Kirklees removed her veil for a job interview, but now expects to go veiled in corridors or whenever she might meet a man. What does that say to children about the role of women as victims and men as aggressors? Of course it should be banned in all places of education, and the community cohesion minister is the right person to say so. The veil is profoundly divisive – and deliberately designed to be….

“Prescott, Hewitt, Kelly, Hain and others failed the test, saying it was women’s ‘choice’: can they really believe that’s the whole story? Here is an uneasy blend of nervousness about racism and fear of already angry Muslims. It was left to Harriet Harman to make the unequivocal case for women’s rights: ‘If you want equality, you have to be in society, not hidden away from it,’ she said. ‘The veil is an obstacle to women’s participation on equal terms in society.’ No nonsense about choice.”

Polly Toynbee in the Guardian, 17 October 2006