Newsline 7January 2005

Newsline 14 January 2005

Newsline 21January 2005

Newsline 28January 2005

Incitement of Religious Hatred Speech to Lords by Keith Porteous Wood

Incitement of Religious Hatred Speech to Lords by Rowan Atkinson

Religious Incitement Statutes PDF

Home Page NSS

Further updates will become available soon.

The National Secular Society apologises for the interruption in our service.

Home Page Atheism Central

In this week's issue:

A fortnight is a long time

Quotes/essays of the fortnight

Incitement law is a political fix

France celebrates 100 years of secularism

NSS speaks out

News shorts

Letters to Newsline

Telly and radio



A FORTNIGHT IS A LONG TIME

Since the last edition of Newsline several events - some far more significant than others - have literally shaken our world. The cancellation of the play Bezhti in Birmingham, following violent protests from religious fanatics, brought home to us the dangers of giving religious feelings a privileged place in our society.

Then came Christmas with its hysterical reaction from propagandising Christians that "secularists" were taking religion out of "their" festival. The Queen gave another of her Bible-thumping Christmas messages, telling us that we must respect our multicultural society and live peaceably with those of different faiths, even if they don't want to live peaceably with us and, indeed, seem intent in some cases on taking away the freedoms that we treasure.

We were then told that the newly-appointed Education Minister, Ruth Kelly, has close connections with the sinister Catholic cult Opus Dei, which seeks to promote fundamentalist Catholicism through unseen political influence. It then emerged that the speaker Michael Martin, the Welsh Office Minister Don Touhig and Ealing North MP Steve Pound are also connected with the secretive organisation (source: Mail on Sunday)

But worst of all was the earthquake. After the scale of the devastation became apparent, the questions began. Where was God in all this? The obvious answer was "nowhere", but the religionists were determined that this would not bring down their rickety house of cards, would not disturb the fantasy on which they have based their lives. The "faith leaders" were quickly on hand to reassure their few remaining followers that God was innocent of all blame. Some of their messages were just plain crass, others were deeply, desperately, pathetically illogical. (here and here)

The Dean of Sydney opined that God had sent a message to warn us of our immorality (here) although he failed to tell us precisely what immorality three month old babies had committed.

At least the Archbishop of Canterbury had the courage to say that the cataclysmic events in Asia had made him doubt the existence of God - although not for very long; it might put his pension at risk. The dramatic headlines about God being a figment of his imagination did not reflect what he actually wrote (here) - and Rowan Williams continues to cling to and promote his fantasy. However, Williams' Unwinian mode of expression was once more criticised, this time in an editorial in the Daily Telegraph(here)

Richard Dawkins, like so many more of us, was furious at this "cringing to bogeymen" and wrote angry letters to the Guardian provoking equally angry responses. (here, here, here, and here).

But for all this, the grip of superstition still holds firm for most people around the world. For a prime example of the human desire to excuse "God" his every horror, see here.

And for the ultimate in - well, it can't be described. You have to see it to believe it. here and press God Hates Swedes.

See also: Richard Holloway (former Primus of the Scottish Episcopal Church) here (Replies to Richard Holloway here) Tsunami has not shaken our faith here

QUOTES/ESSAYS OF THE FORTNIGHT

"Perhaps Prof Flew can tell us who created the God whom he has now rediscovered?"
(Martin O'Brien, Sunday Telegraph)

"This is the end game of 'multiculturalism' aka tribalism; the end result of treating people as 'groups' rather than as individuals. The solution: return to treating people as individuals. Equality under the law and social interaction for individuals, not groups. No special favours, no laws or social interaction based on 'celebrating diversity.' Individuals, not groups. End of story."
(Susan, blogger, commenting on banning of Sikh play) "The Counter-Enlightenment surges onward - witness 11 September 2001 and the US election - and the barbarians are at the gates, literally in the case of the Birmingham Rep. Those who treasure the values that made Europe pre-eminent and shaped the modern world must fight back or yield."
(Roger Martin, Independent)

"From the trials of witches in Salem to the talking-head evangelists of the present day, we have a rich tradition of faith-based bullying in the USA."
(Anna Quindlan, Newsweek)

"Not only does science know why the tsunami happened, it can give precious hours of warning. If a small fraction of the tax breaks handed out to churches, mosques and synagogues had been diverted into an early warning system, tens of thousands of people, now dead, would have been moved to safety. Let's get up off our knees, stop cringing before bogeymen and virtual fathers, face reality, and help science to do something constructive about human suffering."
(Richard Dawkins, Guardian)

"There is no mystery about any events in the natural world if God is removed. It all makes sense."
(John Horsley, Guardian)

"We live in an uncaring universe. When we die it will continue on its way without thought of us. Any idea that it was created for our felicity must be nonsense, for each wonder to which we may point is countered by a monstrosity. To believe in the anthropic principle, that the world was created to serve us, in the face of so much suffering, is absurd, indeed it is narcissistic, even infantile."
(Peter Sellick, Online Opinion)

"The continuing collapse of liberal, democratic, secular and humanist principles in the face of the increasingly strident demands of organised religions is perhaps the most worrying aspect of life in contemporary Britain."
(Salman Rushdie, Guardian)

"Let's hope that God's (if there is one) New Year's resolution is no more acts of God for 2005."
(Michael Freeman, The Age)

"You report that going to Church makes you live longer. No, it just makes it seem longer"
(KMR Price, in letter to Sunday Telegraph.)

A fortnight of essays: How can religious people explain the Asian earthquake?
(Martin Kettle, Guardian here)

[readers replies to this here ]

It is Muslims who have most to fear from Islamists
(Charles Moore, Daily Telegraph here)

Can offence be avoided in this life?
(Arnold Wesker, Independent here)

The limits of liberalism
(Jonathan Freedland, Guardian here)

Non-belief rots our heart
Please note, this is likely to irritate the hell out of you.
(Janet Daley, Daily Telegraph here)

The problem of atheism
An example of the growing contempt for non-believers in the USA
(Joe Bell, Opinion Editorials here)

INCITEMENT LAW IS A POLITICAL FIX

Former Today editor Rod Liddle has been investigating the arrest of Nick Griffin of the BNP, who was accused of "inciting racial hatred" by saying that Islam is a "wicked, vicious faith". Mr Liddle has discovered that, as we suspected, this is a politically motivated arrest to placate the Muslim community, with no real prospect of any charge sticking. Read it here.

The fact is that the new incitement to religious hatred law is totally unnecessary and is being implemented almost entirely to try to regain the Muslim votes lost because of the war in Iraq. A severe threat to free speech is being introduced in order to get David Blunkett, Jack Straw and other Labour MPs with heavily Muslim constituencies re-elected.

The Bill which contains the Incitement to Religious Hatred proposals is making its way through parliament. This is the timetable as it stands at present:

11 - 20 January: Commons Committee Stage. The committee will sit for 8 sessions during this period. The Report Stage and Third Reading will be in the last week of January or first week of February. The Bill then goes to the Lords.

We are pleased to see that NSS honorary associate Dr Evan Harris has been appointed to the Commons Committee. Other members are: Adrian Bailey, Vera Baird, Ms Hazel Blears, Mr Russell Brown, David Cairns, Mr Alan Campbell, Mr James Clappison, Mr Geoffrey Clifton-Brown, Mr Jonathan Djanogly, Paul Farrelly, Caroline Flint, Mr Dominic Grieve, , Mr David Heath, Mr John Heppell, John Mann, Mr Andrew Mitchell, Ms Dari Taylor, Claire Ward and Brian White.

There is a possibility that the Committee will propose that clause 119 banning Incitement to Religious Hatred should be removed from the Bill. Even if this is successful, it is expected that the government will be able, even with a rebellion, to reverse this in the votes at the Report Stage/Third Reading.

If you haven't already done so, please write to your MP and make your opinion known about these incitement proposals.

FRANCE CELEBRATES 100 YEARS OF SECULARISM

This year sees the centenary of the separation of the Church and State in France. On December 9 1905, the Socialist Member of Parliament Aristide Briand put to the vote a bill on separation. The bill applied to the four main religions practised in France at the time: Catholicism, the Augsburg faith (Lutherans), the Reformed (Calvinists) and Judaism. The new law put an end to the Napoleonic Concordat of 1801 which governed links between the State and the Catholic Church. The law ensured freedom of worship and laid the foundations for secularism in France. Article 1: "The Republic guarantees freedom of conscience and freedom of worship." Article 2: "The Republic does not recognize, pay or subsidize any religion".

The NSS will be joining in with its sister organisation Libre Pensee for a special event in July in Paris, but before then we have made a joint declaration following on from the Conference in Paris last December, calling for a secular Europe, and announcing a demonstration to be held in Brussels on April 3 protesting about the inclusion of article 52 in the European Constitution. See here for details.

NSS SPEAKS OUT

The NSS once more found itself at the centre of national debate on the issue of freedom of expression in relation to the cancellation of the play Bezhti in Birmingham after violent protests and the attempt to have Jerry Springer- the Opera banned from the BBC.

NSS Honorary Association Evan Harris MP spoke out on behalf of the Society against the violence and censorship in the Today programme. (Read part of the debate with Sikh spokesperson Jasdev Rai here ).The story was picked up by the Press Association here.

Vice President Terry Sanderson was on Radio Five's Richard Bacon programme on Sunday 19 December debating the same topic with Catholic representatives. The following day he was on BBC Radio 2's Jeremy Vine Programme, Sky News and Southern Counties Radio and Radio Lancashire. He was also extensively quoted in another Press Association story here, . On Tuesday he was on BBC Radio Belfast, Radio Humberside. The NSS was quoted in the Daily Mail, Daily Express and London Evening Standard here as well as numerous other regional papers.

NSS Honorary Associate Joan Smith was on Radio 4's The World Tonight and gave an excellent account of herself up against Lord Ahmed, who seemed unable to grasp that his desire to limit freedom of speech to Material that was not offensive meant he didn't uphold freedom of speech at all.

Terry Sanderson had a letter in the Daily Telegraph here.

He was also quoted in the Malaysia Star here.

NSS President Dennis Cobell delivered an alternative Christmas message on BBC London (read it here).

Barbara Smoker, former President of the NSS, was on BBC Radio Oxford discussing Christmas.

Terry Sanderson was on Radio Five Live giving the NSS's view on whether Britain is still a Christian country.

Then the controversy over Jerry Springer - the Opera exploded, and once more, the NSS was at the heart of the debate. Our protest was reported on the Press Association news wire which resulted in worldwide coverage The Scotsman here, BBC here, TV Newsroom in Depth here, Daily Mail here, Tirkish Press here, Dailty Telegraph here, and many other sites.

Terry then recorded a comment about the controversy for the BBC's local radio network that will be broadcast on Sunday morning. He was interviewed on BBC WM Drive Time programme on Thursday. He will also be interviewed on BBC Radio Shropshire on Saturday morning at 7.15am and on BBC Radio Wiltshire on Monday at 10.15am. He did an interview on BBC Radio Three Counties and then on to Radio Five Live for a confrontational appearance - with a demonstration of hysterical Christians taking place outside the studio. Christian Voice, a small evangelical group, has threatened the BBC with legal action if it presses ahead with the broadcast.

NSS member, Will Wyatt, a former director of the BBC, then appeared on the BBC1's flagship Breakfast programme this morning to talk about the Society's concerns for free speech under this religious onslaught.

NEWS SHORTS

SOP TO MUSLIM VOTERS? While many feared that the Incitement to Religious hatred law was a sop to Muslim voters, the Daily Mail led its edition today with banner headlines saying how much was being done for Muslim voters. It was the only story on its front page, headed "Shameless - Labour's cynical bid to win back the Muslim vote it lost over had Iraq." It reported that Energy Minister Keith O 'Brien had written in Muslim Weekly that the Government agreed to introduce a ban on religious discrimination two weeks after a request from the Muslim Council of Britain. Mr O'Brien was reported to have asked: "What will Michael Howard do for British Muslims? ... Will he promote legislation to protect you form religious hatred? Will he give you the choice to send your children to a faith school? ...."

BELIEVERS ARE IN A MINORITY IN UK - SO WHY ARE THEY RUNNING THE COUNTRY? A poll by Yougov for the Daily Telegraph (taken before the tsunami) showed that the majority of people in Britain no longer believe in God. A big majority also don't agree with faith schools. See full results here.

VARDY IN TALKS ON NEW ACADEMIES Millionaire businessman and propagandist for creationism, Sir Peter Vardy, is in talks to sponsor two more of his controversial academy schools in the North East. Northumberland county councillors were impressed after visiting existing fundamentalist schools Emmanuel College in Gateshead and King's Academy in Middlesbrough. The councillors plan to talk to Vardy, who made his fortune from the Sunderland-based car dealership Reg Vardy, about investing £2m each into two schools to create two academies, possibly in Ashington and Berwick.

Full story here.

COUNCIL (i.e. you) TO PAY FOR INDOCTRINATION Jewish parents in Hendon and Edgware in north London who want their children to have a "faith education" will now be bankrolled by the taxpayer as councillors agreed to expand the borough's provision to what were previously private schools.

Hasmonean Primary School; an Independent Jewish Day School, and Menorah Foundation Primary School will each offer an additional 26 places from September 2005, while Rosh Pinah Primary School will have an extra 39 places paid for by the local education authority.

The council committee also agreed to create a "faith" nursery at one Church of England school in the borough, which has not yet been named, from April 1, 2006, also to be paid for by the taxpayer.

BBC TALKS ABOUT US, BUT WON'T LET US SPEAK FOR OURSELVES The BBC is broadcasting a series of three items about religious think tanks on its Westminster Hour (Radio 4). The question is - does religion have a place in politics? In the first part (listen to it here ) the presenter Dennis Sewell refers to the National Secular Society, explains (erroneously) what we want and then goes on to interview various religious representatives who are allowed to speak - at length - for themselves. Not one voice is heard speaking from a secularist perspective, and we have to listen as Mr Sewell repeatedly opines about "aggressive secularists" and "militant atheists". By the end, it is beginning to sound like religious propaganda. The NSS has written to protest about the nature of this programme and to demand a right of reply.

SCIENTISTS SAY WHAT THEY BELIEVE The website The Edge asked 120 leading scientists "What do you believe is true, even though you cannot prove it?" See their responses here.

LETTERS TO NEWSLINE

Please write tas@secularism.org.uk here

From Bill McIlroy:

The report (17 December 2004) that Professor Antony Flew now believes there may be a God brought to mind his undignified exit from the National Secular Society more than twenty years ago. Professor Flew's support for Right-wing causes is well known and taken in the Society's collective stride. It was he who left the NSS for political reasons, having taken great exception to the rejection at an annual general meeting of a motion to disaffiliate from the Anti-Apartheid Movement. When the motion was heavily defeated he denounced supporters of the anti-racist organisation as "socialist bastards", then stormed out of the meeting (and the NSS).

There were serious misgivings among members over Professor Flew's participation in a conference which was financed by the World Unification Church (the Moonies). Flew described the WUC as "much-abused". But a High Court jury unanimously and unreservedly accepted a charge that the church was a sinister, intensely wealthy organisation which brainwashed young people into economic servitude, broke up families and left parents in despair.

Few regretted Professor Flew's departure from the NSS, but his new-found belief in the deity may cause embarrassment in the self-styled intellectual wing of the Humanist movement. And as he drifts off into the twilight zone, where will Antony Flew next drop anchor? In the Sea of Faith?

In the last issue we asked for comments on an article in the Guardian by Seamus Milne (read it here) These are your responses.

From Ian Smith:

I have read Milne's article through four times now, and am little the wiser. I don't regard myself as either particularly stupid or illiterate, but find myself here lost in a fog of woolly, imprecise thinking couched in unclear English. One could, with a great deal of effort, go through the whole thing with a toothcomb in order to demonstrate the obfuscation, by heavy use of Guardianese, of the true issues faced by Europe in our day. But I would probably be wasting my time. In any case, an incisive and perceptive response is incidentally offered by Hanson's current article in 'National Review'.

The corrupt use of religion as a political force has been demonstrated endlessly throughout history, inevitably and unsurprisingly, as it is essentially false and therefore corrupt. Yet, I fear, we are just at the beginning of an age when religion as a cultural cancer (some have termed it a 'Fifth Column') is set to destroy, from within the body, the life and the civilisation, the traditions and the culture, of a great continent. It may not in the end succeed; we shall surely know by the turn of the next century. But if it does not, it will not be thanks to the confusion of thought in the face of danger so very well expressed by Seumas Milne.

From Dean Crawford:

It would appear that the article presented in the Guardian by Seumas Milne suggests that secularists are in some way incorrect to act against the rise of Islamic influence within the sphere of British society by opposing the Religious Hatred law. While his views are presented in a lucid manner, and well versed, it would also appear that Seumas has failed to judge the nature of what is happening, the nature of what Islam actually represents, and the social muscle that the controversial Racial Hatred Bill would give Muslims.

Put simply, Islam is the only religion in Britain that openly preaches intolerance for other religions, supports such bloodthirsty practices as honour killings, and promises a place in 'paradise' for those martyred whilst engaged at war with the 'infidel'. By contrast, the ordinary people of Judaism, Sikhism and Christianity seek to be a part of the culture into which they are cast, that of a democratic nation. Only Islam moves into a nation to benefit from its wares, whilst simultaneously preaching hatred of that from which it benefits. Whilst many Muslims are nominally peaceful people, it remains a much misunderstood fact that the appearance of Islam as a large peaceful religion is in fact a falsehood. Islam is as bloodthirsty as the OT, if not more so, and quite happily demands, in a highly repetitive fashion, the death of the non believer at the hands of the Muslim. Islam wants the Bill passed in this country to enable it to continue insulting other faiths, whilst enjoying protection for its own Muslims who represent a minority in this country.

On of the major pillars of a democracy is to allow freedom of speech. It is also a political and social system that is supposed to benefit the population it represents. Religious orders of ALL denominations are now a complete minority in the United Kingdom, and the passing of the Bill represents nothing more than a sop to the continued, highly vocalised demands of the Islamic community in Britain, whereas the vast majority of our population have no interest in religion and would, in fact, ignore it almost completely were it not for various Islamic organisations constantly wittering on about blasphemy and offence.

If Muslims in this country wish to be free of offence, perhaps they should stop offending the majority that shares the country with them, and stop using democratic gift of freedom of speech to ban that same freedom of speech. I notice that there is no Bill designed to prevent atheists, secularists or humanists from being offended, as we have been for the past 2000 or so years.

From Gregory Tingey:

Mr. Milne, you should, of all people know better. You are, by descent, Irish, one of the nations which has suffered most through religious bigotry.

In the past few years, Ian Paisley has been observed standing on the same platform (literally) with the RC archbishop of Ireland - a man he professionally describes as evil - in order to jointly oppose allowing women to control the insides of their own bodies, rather than allowing the priests to tell them what to do.

He assumes that because the marxists were officially "atheist" they were against religion - whilst refusing to recognise that marxism is a classic religion (as first noted by Bertrand Russell) - the structure of marxist societies is very closely modelled on that of the Church, together with a similar set of penalties for disobedience - up to and including being tortured to death for heresy. Islam is now in its own year of (2004-622) and it shows in its medieval attitude - identical to that of the church at that time. So he wants to defend "Submission" from islamophobia, does he?

Well, is it islamophobic to suggest that women have equal rights to men, and are not inferior to them, and subject to their orders? And should [they] not be sent to their quarters, and kept without food, and beaten until they submit? I know someone brought up as a Roman Catholic might find this hard to accept, but we must move on, mustn't we?

Is it islamophobic to suggest that people who decide that "Submission" is not their religion, and a matter of personal choice to have another religion, or (shock, horror) none at all, should not be hounded to death, as is suggested by "islamic" law, and is currently being actively pursued by some believers?

Is it islamophobic to suggest that mankind was NOT created from clots of blood (unspecified), but evolved through natural selection - a certain similarity with certain brain-dead christian sects may be noted here ..... ?

Is it islamophobic to suggest that people of different religions or none should have equal civil rights in ALL countries, and not be second-class (or third-class) citizens - as is presently the law in some "islamic" countries?

Is it islamophobic to suggest that religion is a private matter, and what consenting adults do in private, provided no harm is done, is their business, but if you do it (whatever it is) on the street, and frighten the horses, then it becomes everyone's business?

The other religious believers: the christians, jews, marxists, sikhs, hindus, bhuddists, jains, etc. are (usually) prepared to accept this, so why should islam be different?

Editor comments: Seaumus Milne is the comment editor of the Guardian, which may explain why there are so many articles on his pages from Muslim apologists, and so few from secularists - apart from Polly Toynbee - putting an alternative point of view.

From Barry Thorpe:

David Upton assumed that the Guardian had not received other letters objecting the common and lazy characterisation of Hitler and Stalin as atheists. In fact, the Guardian received this one from me:

"Terry Philpot, in his reply to Max Hastings phrase 'government by atheists' , trots out the usual ignorant jibe about Hitler, Stalin, Mao and Pol Pot. All of these people were driven by ideologies with the same irrational and authoritarian tendencies as religion. While I know nothing of the possible religious beliefs of Mao and Pol Pot, Hitler was certainly not an atheist, as his own writings - he was doing God's work - and the collaboration of the Nazi state with the Vatican make clear, and Stalin spent some time in his youth in a seminary, which would not have helped his thought processes. For those people who automatically equate atheist with evil-doer: get an education, will you?"

From James VanLint:

I am not sure who wrote the article entitled Debate on Religious Incitement Law Continues (Newsline 17 Dec). Could you ask whoever did mention Anne Atkins if they had considered that she could possibly be working under cover for the non-religious? If this were so, she is doing a good job and it might not be helping her if we don't get the balance right when passing unkind comments. I wonder if any readers might have more info and might know some more about her good works?

From James Cranch:

I read this article on the BBC News: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/west_midlands/4109315.stm

It's about a protest by Sikhs at the Birmingham Repertory Theatre, and contains a comment by the Catholic Archbishop of Birmingham: "The right to freedom of expression has corresponding duties to the common good".

These sound like fine words until you try to work out what they might mean. While this is a substantial exercise, I think I have deduced that he is saying that people should only have free speech if other people like what you say. If my interpretation is correct, this is clearly disinformation. But to realise this does not answer the most interesting relevant question: why is a Catholic Archbishop offering support to the Sikhs?

This instinct of religious types to stick together is charming; I have noticed other instances of it recently. It should perhaps be regarded as evidence that we have significantly eroded their stranglehold upon our consciences, in such a way that their only hope is to combine. Good news, then.

From Nikolai Segura:

If only everything in life could be trusted as well as the religious zealot' s overbearing tendency towards censorship of thought. Just as the government believed that they could get away with passing their new blasphemy law (sorry, Incitement to Religious Hatred Law) quietly and without too much attention from the press, the usually quiet Sikh community have put their foot right in it, and in doing so put the government's plans in the limelight.

Not happy with just ignoring or boycotting the play "Bezhti" themselves - which portrays child abuse in a Sikh Temple - the Sikhs of Birmingham have set out on a violent and illegal campaign to make sure that everyone ignores it, even people who'd bought tickets! The affect of all this fuss and bother has been to propel a modest director and an artistically questionable play to countrywide fame and notoriety - create more publicity for the NSS' campaign against the religious incitement law than we could ever have hoped to generate ourselves - and no doubt attract massive audiences when a new venue for the play is negotiated.

Moreover, it has drawn attention to the yawning gulf between civilised secular values of freedom of expression and human rights, and fundamentalist religious values of intolerance and censorship. All hail the Sikhs!

From Ian Gorman:

Literally "God bless you" for taking a stand against Marxist Labour's latest Incitement law. Something that the commentators may have missed relates to the point about the need for a race law (because you are born to it) and the religious law (because religion is a choice). For Muslims you are born to the religion and those who renounce that birth-right are often put to death. This might be why they see race and religion to be equals. Of course they are wrong, but to be honest the racial incitement laws are also unnecessary and in need of repeal. Inciting violence is wrong full stop. No special protection categories are needed.

From Ian Brittan:

I would like to make a late nomination for the 2004 Stanley Unwin Awards. In correspondence on the Indian Ocean tragedy in the Guardian the Bishop of Lincoln wrote: "However, people of faith look to a horizon beyond the limitations of scientific enquiry and secular morality. It is a horizon at the limits of time and space beyond which eternity provides a perspective which might yet make sense of what science can only explain."

From Ellen Ramsay:

I have just finished reading Norma McCorvey's excellent book "I am Roe: My Life Roe v. Wade and Freedom of Choice" about Norma's struggle for reproductive control over her own life and the intervention of the pro-choice movement in overturning abortion legislation in the United States in 1973. Unfortunately, McCorvey has now gone over to the other side and has written a new book ironically entitled "Won by Love", co-published with Gary Thomas in 2004.

Part of "I am Roe" which interested me is the section where she describes the Mount St. Michael's Catholic boarding school in Oak Cliff, outside Dallas because it sounds just like the Magdalene laundries in Ireland (see the movie The Magdalene Sisters). She says they spent 3 or 4 hours per day doing laundry. In her words, "The laundry was in the basement. Mount St. Michael's students did all their own laundry, plus the nuns' laundry, plus the laundry that the school brought in from the outside to make money. It was important that the laundry be washed and ironed just right, said the nuns. The school's reputation, and ours, depended on it."

For the record, McCorvey refused to take part in catechism class and "For such wilfulness and disobedience, they said, and because I was putting my mortal soul in danger, I was given extra inspections, tests, homework and detention. Once I was locked in a music room by myself for two days". (p. 28).

From Martin Henderson:

I was intrigued by the letter from by Shaun K. Joynson on 26th November, implying that 'Jesus was never born'. Having endured many years of church going and attendance at religious schools, I had come to the conclusion that Jesus lived, but was just deluded, as were many more, into believing he was the son of his god. I've since read some articles supporting Shaun's view, mainly through the Jesusneverexisted.com web site. Is there some more scholarly reading I could be directed to?

From Charles Coventry:

Re parody of Sue Lord's version of "All things bright and beautiful," have you thought of doing the original final verse about "the rich man in his castle, the poor man at his gate?"

From Joe Rabaiotti:

Further to Alan Rogers and Sue Lord' s rewrites of "All Things Bright and Beautiful", I am surprised nobody has yet quoted the Monty Python version:

All things dull and ugly,
All creatures short and squat,
All things rude and nasty,
The Lord God made the lot.

Each little snake that poisons,
Each little wasp that stings;
He made their brutish venom,
He made their horrid wings.

All things sick and cancerous,
All evil great and small,
All things foul and dangerous,
The Lord God made them all.

Each nasty little hornet,
Each beastly little squid;
Who made the spiky urchin?
Who made the sharks? He did.

All things scabbed and ulcerous,
All pox both great and small,
Putrid, foul, and gangrenous,
The Lord God made them all.
Amen.

(from the Monty Python Songbook)

TELLY AND RADIO

Derren Brown - Messiah (Tonight, 7 January at 10.35pm, Channel 4)
Undeterred by the controversy surrounding his "seance", the brilliant psychological illusionist Derren Brown is back with a one-off special. This time he is out to show just how gullible people can be. "We so often take for granted the information we receive from writers, preachers and persuaders, and we are encouraged to make life decisions on what they tell us - but what if we are relying on false information?" he asks. "I'm not a Messiah: that's the point of the show. But could I be?" Sounds very interesting.

Abroad Again in Britain - (Saturday 8 January, 7.10pm BBC2)
Rejoice! NSS honorary associate Jonathan Meades is back. The architectural expert's deadpan wit is alive and well and being applied to all things religious. Tonight he looks at Salisbury Cathedral. But don't expect a laudatory bit of propaganda - our Jonathan is sure to cause offence to the religious (but, then, that isn't hard to do these days).

Are Muslims Hated? (Saturday 8 January, 6pm Channel 4)
Writer and anti-racism campaigner Kenan Malik sets out to challenge the perception that Britain is rife with Islamophobia. He examines the evidence and asks: do Muslim communities live in fear of harassment and attack, or are the hostilities they face exaggerated?

Jerry Springer - the Opera (Saturday 8 January. 10pm BBC2)
This one has truly got the knickers of various Archbishops and other assorted would-be censors in a twist. With literally hunrdreds of swear-words and a good dollop of tasteless profanity and blasphemy to boot, the BBC is taking a real risk here. The NSS has come to its defence - see NSS Speaks Out, above. Stand by for blasting.

The Westminster Hour (Sunday 9 January, Radio 4 10pm. Repeated Radio 4 Wednesday 8.45pm)
The second part (of three) of Dennis Sewell's examination of religious think tanks and their effect of policy making in Britain. The first part infuriated members of the NSS with its partiality and misrepresentation.

Yasmin (Thursday 13 January, 10pm Channel 4)
Topical drama from Full Monty writer Simon Beaufoy exploring the crisis of identity facing many British Muslims today. A confident and outgoing young woman of Pakistani origin living in a northern town finds herself forced to re-evaluate her faith, her culture and her relationships when she campaigns for her immigrant husband to be released from the holding centre where he has been detained.


To subscribe to Newsline, send a blank email with "Subscribe to Newsline" on the subject line to enquiries@secularism.org.uk here

To join the National Secular Society, go to www.secularism.org.uk/join.htm here Or write to NSS, 25 Red Lion Square, London WC1R 4RL

Please feel free to use the material in this Newsline with appropriate acknowledgement of source.

Newsline nor the NSS is responsible for the content of websites to which it provides links. Nor does the NSS or Newsline necessarily endorse quotes and comments by contributors.

Editor Terry Sanderson