By Hos
The hysterical reaction in the UK in the wake of a court ruling that a town council could not start session with a prayer has been amusing and disturbing at once. Most amazingly, perhaps, has been the statement from Baroness Warsi, a Muslim female member of cabinet, warning against the country being taken over by "militant secularists". Funny, there is no way she could have this job today, were it not for the work of "militant secularist" feminists like Elizabeth Cady Stanton. Or you might remind her, in Muslim majority countries not touched by "militant secularism", she couldn't get away with being out of home with her hair showing. Or you can watch this interview, where the interviewer and a woman named Anne Atkins, confront Andrew Copson from Britain's National Secular Society about his "militancy" and asking him why atheists are so angry.
May I offer an answer? I feel a double standard is used against us when we are called "militant" for objecting to have to sit through something we don't believe in, while religions have to do something way, way worse to earn the same pejorative title.
We seek religiously neutral, a.k.a. secular, government, not because we object to sitting through a religious ritual. it is because we object to governments showing favoritism for some citizens over other citizens contrary to the obligation of governments to respect equality before the law for all citizens. Establishments of monotheism conflict with equality before the law, sort of like president's who recruit the IRS to audit the tax returns of his critics is misusing government for anti-democratic, partisan purposes. Government establishments of religion tilt the political playing field, it is an unethical misuse of government authority and power.
ReplyDelete