politics

You are currently browsing articles tagged politics.

This press release (John Denham: Appointment of new faith advisers) from the Department of Communities and Local Government outlines John Denham’s silly Faith group.  The Heresiarch has profiled this gang of 13 (Heresy Corner: The God Squad) very comprehensively.  Number one on this list also received congratulations from Platitude of the Day (Congratulations to Rev Canon Dr Alan Billings).  I was interested to know what this miscellaneous group of believers in mumbo-jumbo are actually being assembled to achieve.  And why do believers in mysticism get a hotline to Government that’s not open to humanists (or indeed to other sects)?

The press release begins reasonably

To encourage a deeper and broader relationship between Government and faith communities, Communities Secretary John Denham today announced the appointment of 13 new faith advisers who will act as a ’sounding board’ to advise on effective engagement with faith communities, and the impact of Communities and Local Government policy on faith communities.

So, on the face of it, this is entirely reasonable.  Insofar as it goes.  Because of course if advice of faith groups is really needed, there do seem to be a lot of gaps.  And why do those with no faith not deserve greater understanding by Government?  It also seems to be a rather unnecessary group, since as the press release goes on to say:

Government already engages with faith communities through the Faith Communities Consultative Council (FCCC) and their important role will continue. However over recent months John Denham has said that he wants to see as many channels of communication open as possible and this includes hearing from a wide range of expert voices.

Quite why John Denham wants to see this additional channel is unclear.  Perhaps the FCCC is under the control of a different Department*.  Things get a little murkier later in the press release, with this quotation from John Denham:

“This new panel brings together an unprecedented wealth of knowledge and experience that will help advise on the big issues facing society such as the economy, parenting, achieving social justice and tackling climate change.

“For millions of people the values instilled by their faith are central to shaping their behaviour. We should continually seek ways of supporting and enhancing the contribution faith makes to the decision-making process on the central issues of our time.

“Each adviser is has an outstanding track record of achievement. Together they will help inform Government on the views and values of faith communities, enabling us to learn from the unique insights that faith groups bring to contemporary issues.”

So these advisers are getting their faith-based opinions (presumably informed by their interpretations of their sects’ dusty and holy tomes)  listened to in the “decision-making process” in relation to the “central issues of our time”.  Where does that leave those of us with no belief?  Or indeed members of other (sometimes very large) sects?

*It would seem not.  From the footnote to editors: “The FCCC is a non statutory body, facilitated by CLG. It aims to provide a national strategic forum, chiefly concerned with issues related to cohesion, integration, the development of sustainable communities, neighbourhood renewal, and social inclusion.”

Powered by ScribeFire.

Share on Facebook

Tags:

Just before Richard Dawkins made a visit to address an audience at the University of Oklahoma (I believe as part of a Darwin 200 celebration), The Oklahoma Legislature passed a wacko motion (Oklahoma hates Richard Dawkins):

WHEREAS, the University of Oklahoma is a publicly funded institution which should be open to all ideas and should train students in all disciplines of study and research and to use independent thinking and free inquiry; andWHEREAS, the University of Oklahoma has planned a year-long celebration of the 200th birthday of Charles Darwin and the 150th anniversary of Darwin’s theory of evolution, called the “Darwin 2009 Project”, which includes a series of lectures, public speakers, and a course on the history of evolution; and

WHEREAS, the University of Oklahoma, as a part of the Darwin 2009 Project, has invited as a public speaker on campus, Richard Dawkins of Oxford University, whose published opinions, as represented in his 2006 book “The God Delusion”, and public statements on the theory of evolution demonstrate an intolerance for cultural diversity and diversity of thinking and are views that are not shared and are not representative of the thinking of a majority of the citizens of Oklahoma; and

WHEREAS, the invitation for Richard Dawkins to speak on the campus of the University of Oklahoma on Friday, March 6, 2009, will only serve to present a biased philosophy on the theory of evolution to the exclusion of all other divergent considerations rather than teaching a scientific concept.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES OF THE 1ST SESSION OF THE 52ND OKLAHOMA LEGISLATURE:

THAT the Oklahoma House of Representative strongly opposes the invitation to speak on the campus of the University of Oklahoma to Richard Dawkins of Oxford University, whose published statements on the theory of evolution and opinion about those who do not believe in the theory are contrary and offensive to the views and opinions of most citizens of Oklahoma.

THAT the Oklahoma House of Representatives encourages the University of Oklahoma to engage in an open, dignified, and fair discussion of the Darwinian theory of evolution and all other scientific theories which is the approach that a public institution should be engaged in and which represents the desire and interest of the citizens of Oklahoma.

THAT a copy of this resolution be transmitted to the President of the University of Oklahoma, the Dean of the College of Arts and Science at the University of Oklahoma, and the Chair of the Department of Zoology at the University of Oklahoma.

I confess to being darkly amused by the bit where the foolish legislator says: “an intolerance for cultural diversity and diversity of thinking”.

According to PZ Myers’ account over at Pharyngula (The greasy fingerprints of the Discovery Institute are all over it), not only was this a watered down version, the original version of which was highly critical of the University of Oklahoma’s Department of Zoology, but there are suggestions that the Discovery Institute was connected with the motion.

WHEREAS, the University of Oklahoma is a publicly funded institution which should be open to all ideas and should train students in all disciplines of study and research and to use independent thinking and free inquiry, not indoctrinate students in one-sided study and thinking; and

WHEREAS, the Department of Zoology at the University of Oklahoma has, as evidenced on the departmental homepage, been framing the Darwinian theory of evolution as doctrinal dogmatism rather than a hypothetical construction within the disciplines of the sciences; and

WHEREAS, not only has the Department of Zoology at the University of Oklahoma been engaged in one-sided indoctrination of an unproven and unpopular theory but has made an effort to brand all thinking in dissent of this theory as anti-intellectual and backward rather than nurturing such free thinking and allowing a free discussion of all ideas which is the primary purpose of a university;

Nevertheless, Richard Dawkins did visit the University, and  member of the audience appears to have recorded the opening few minutes of his presentation:

I think that one of the things that this clip illustrates is the bizarre way that religious fundamentalists, particularly those that are so ignorant that they cannot grasp either the scientific method, nor the discoveries so made feel they have a right to bash away like that.

Intelligent Falling vs The Theory of Gravity!  I love it.

With thanks to Thoughts from Kansas and Pharyngula over at ScienceBlogs.

Share on Facebook

Tags: , ,

Home Secretary Jacqui Smith gets pretty short shrift from me on my other blog, but that’s really about the typical Home Secretary attributes of draconian databases and drug control etc.  She recently banned  a Dutch politician (who had made an anti-Islam film) from visiting the House of Lords, and now a band of loony-tune baptists from Westboro Baptist Church.

Phelps, who runs the Primitive Baptist Westboro church in Topeka, Kansas – most of whose congregation are members of his family, including his 13 children wanted to object to a school in Basingstoke (or as Phelps puts it, Bassingstoke), who planned to stage a play about the murder of a a homosexual.  Phelps and co are real nut-jobs, and have a real hatred of homosexuals.  I hadn’t realised quite how much of a nut-job he is until I saw this video at YouTube:

This is just awesome stuff, particularly the website URLs touted at the end of this insane video.  If he wasn’t preaching such vile hate, this’d be a comedy gem. And in case you are wondering, Phelps does claim that the UK has banned God (hence the title of this post).

(Hat tip to the New Humanist)

See also The Guardian – Anti-gay American cleric banned from UK for inciting hatred

Share on Facebook

Tags: ,

One of the exciting things about American politics, it seems to me, is the grass-roots politics.  When visiting Detroit shortly before last year’s Presidential election, it was striking how many public offices are filled by election.  There is a down-side of this, as evidenced by repeated attempts of school boards to enforce teaching of creationism within the science curriculum – it is presumably relatively easy to “pack” school boards with politically and/or religiously motivated individuals.

In January, the State of Louisiana passed a bill to permit teachers to have freedom to teach non-scientific material in school science classes.  This was reported in the Science website on 15th January (Louisiana Creates: New Pro-Intelligent Design Rules for Teachers).  from that article:

Last year, Louisiana passed the Louisiana Science Education Act, a law that many scientists and educators said was a thinly veiled attempt to allow creationism and its variants into the science classroom. On Tuesday, the state’s Board of Elementary and Secondary Education adopted a policy that sharpens those fears, giving teachers license to use materials outside of the regular curriculum to teach “controversial” scientific theories including evolution, origins of life, and global warming. Backers of the law, including the Louisiana Family Forum, say it is intended to foster critical thinking in students. Opponents insist its only purpose is to provide a loophole for creationists to attack the teaching of evolution.

In response to this insidious law, The Society for Integrative and Comparative Biology has reversed plans to hold its 2011 annual meeting in New Orleans, and will now hold it in Salt Lake City, Utah (Chronicle of Higher Education blog: Biologists Won’t Meet in Louisiana Because of State Law on Teaching Evolution).  Here is a direct response to laws permitting the teaching of religion (in the shape of creationism and “Intelligent Design”) in science classes.  This seems inappropriate, no matter what one’s religious beliefs may or may not be, and presumably violates the consitutional separation of religion and state (though as a non-American, don’t quote me on that).

With that in mind, it is interesting to read the comments for young earth creationists following that article.  Spectacularly ignorant as these people always are, they focus exclusively on the evolution/atheism vs creationism/religious divide and not on the pedagogical issues, endlessly rehashing the tired old lies and misrepresentations.

So, business as usual in the good old God-fearing USA.  For my part, I’m not convinced that boycotts have much political effect, but it’s good that this action has raised the profile of this appalling law.

Share on Facebook

Tags: , , , ,

The other day, I blogged about the Christian Party’s latest response to the atheist bus (The Christian Party is still upset by the Atheist bus…), linking this to the bizarre situation regarding the BBC’s “Thought for the Day”.  I noticed from the brief biography of George Hargreaves that he leads the Christian Party, so I moseyed over to their web page for a quick squizz.  And I can’t say this is a political party that should represent a multicultural, multifaith and largely secular society.  I have been unable to identify any policies other than to defend christian beliefs and values (the website is liberally peppered with biblical quotations), and to “resist the tide of secularism and immorality that is destroying our country”.  I think there’s a clear message there that George Hargreaves thinks secularism = immorality. Read the rest of this entry »

Share on Facebook

Tags: ,

Content recommendations from Evri