“The Government this week appointed thirteen “faith advisors” to bring religion to the heart of the Government’s policy-making. Communities Secretary John Denham — a self-professed non-believer — said that religion was not just something the Government should call on “as a prop” when it had problems to solve, but should be respected in its own right.
The 13 advisers are supposed to “enhance ministerial understanding of, and engagement, with faith communities nationally.”
Government already has a “Faith Communities Consultative Council” (FCCC) but now Mr Denham says he wants to see “as many channels of communication open as possible” and this includes hearing from a wide range of expert voices. Mr Denham said the new panel will advise on the economy, parenting, achieving social justice and tackling climate change.”
Read more at Secularism.org (Thanks Tiram)
Although I am an atheist, and most will read the headline of this article and automatically disagree with it, Religion, although hard to believe, has a morally strong way of living. It has certain levels of human rights violations but again, it does also have the commandments that if our government actually lived by, we’d all be better off.
What I would hate to see is a decision being made on the basis that if not, we’d all be doomed for hell. We need to see some seriousness from the advisors. Make decisions based on what would be the ‘right’ thing.
Well, I suppose they need middlemen to communicate between the non-believers and the deluded.
affecting policy making? they should have no influence in government other than to advice on issues in relation to organised religion. Seems stupid to inject faith in government when it’s dying out
I practice Witchcraft and Voodoo…I\’m concerned my Religion isn\’t being represented.
-Ethan
Tackling climate change?!?!?!? !!?!?!?!?!?!??!?
“well if we pray it will go away”
Mr Denham said the new panel will advise on … tackling climate change.”
Always good to have people with the insight on climate change. 40 days and nights of rain? Plagues of locusts? We\’ll be in safe hands.
They should at least engage another group of 13 advisors to enhance minesterial understanding of, and engagement with atheism communities nationally. ……….And just to keep a fair and healthy middle ground…
Otherwise this whole plan rieks.
Is it just me or does that guy look like an anorexic version of Gordon Brown..?
oh for the love of {insert magical imaginary deity here}. 1/2 the problems in the world are caused by religion. also i do not want religious freaks having anything to do with government policy. its bad enough a one eyed scottish catholic is in charge of england.
OMG!! WTF?? didnt us yanks fight a revolution over this? (among other things)
13 members…Sounds like a coven to me
‘Faith Communities’ sounds like they’re planning to represent a lot of different religions, not just Christianity (as I’m sure a lot of people were thinking.) Well, that’s good, as a lot of religions are under-represented, or have stereotypes hanging over them…including Christianity, to an extent (TO AN EXTENT, I said!) Hopefully, this will result in better understanding of different religions, and some tolerance among religious communities for people with another or no faith (she said with ridiculous optimism
)
Yes, because this is what our government needs.
Religion is out of date, the planet needs to move forward, creating better living conditions for everyone, improve human rights and tackle climate change… It needs science and clear thinking, untainted by a 3000 year old book that even contradicts itself. This is no way to begin the change the planet needs before everything goes into meltdown.
Religion caused the problems, Science and Atheists will have to fix them, because religion is uncapable of anything but causing war, poverty, racism, discrimination, oh, and AID’s…
[the pope going to Angola saying condoms weren't successful in the fight against STD's... I'm sorry, but considering the death tolls of those with AID's, I personally think thats genocide.]
“13 members…Sounds like a coven to me ”
absolutely, jess xxx! jesus had a coven too!
Taking into consideration the interests and beliefs of all members of our society is democratic. Many members of our society have a faith perspective. They need to be considered, therefore this action of employing these advisors is not merely pandering to nonsense but actually trying to meet the needs of a diverse population. if they start to make policy decisons based on faith (for example, invading the middle east to meet the prophecies in the bible) that is different.
Oh wait, they already did that.
but rob, many more people watch eastenders than are religious. should we also appoint a minister of eastenders? also, many of us signed up to the religion ‘Jedi’ on the old census as if more than 10,000 people did it became an official religion (better than scientology lol), does this mean i should also get representation?
many more people do drugs in the UK than are religious, yet are criminalised.
What on earth does Gordon Brown’s country of origin or disability have to do with his ability to fulfil his role as Prime Minister?
Those kind of ridiculous, think you’re clever, remarks are just as intolerable and unecessary as the overtly religious input into legislating. Especially when the current alternative is greasy crowd pleaser who doesn’t know his a*se from his elbow.
Engagement of different groups within the community in political activities is positive, and if varied opinions is the extent of it then it should be welcomed. However, law based upon religion is abhorent and completely ignorant of the progressive scholarship on community formation and legal community.
Maybe they also need some “gay advisors”, because it seems more people are less informed about civil issues than secular ones, which are, in effect, less important anyway.
Yet another bunch of unelected n0bs jockeying to influence policy, while the government spend ever more on consultations and advisors they have no intention of listening to. I naively thought that we elected MPs to represent us… OK, they’ve been p1ss poor for the last century or so, but they are – or should be – the least worst option.
So religion, which cannot even accept the evidence for the observed age of the earth and the universe, is going to be intervening in climate change policy? Superb logic from the labour government.
BTW, LOL @ Sarah Brown (comment above) defending Gordon Brown – anyone else think it is the real wife of the PM defending him?!!!
All for people believing in what they like, it would be a very dull world if we all believed the same thing. However, religion has absolutely no place in government policy making. Deciding such things based on religious viewpoints, no matter which religion, is a terrible idea.
Clearly a last ditch effort to secure some votes before the election.
Lot of people making the point that religion causes problems, and only rationalism and science can solve them….fair enough, but isn’t that all the more reason to engage with religious communities to try and understand where their similarities and differences are; what their perceptions and concerns are? Nowhere does it say that policy decisions will be made based on religion; what it does say is that the impact of policy on various faith communities will be thought about and understood. Seems pretty sensible to me, especially if we’re arguing that it’s those religious communities who are most likely to cause conflict. We can wish for a world where everyone’s reaction to policy is based on rationality rather than religion, but the reality is we’re not there yet and pretending that’s not the case doesn’t help anyone.
“it would be a very dull world if we all believed the same thing.”
yeah, there’s nothing like someone deciding the law of gravity doesn’t apply to relieve the monotony.
@Sarah Brown do you have an interest we should know about
I completely agree with your points though.
I’m not sure which bothers me more – the vague remit of a group of people brought together to “do religion”, or the absence of Roman Catholics from that list. I have a very very low opinion of the Catholic Church, but it does have a lot of people doing a lot of good works within it, and it has been and remains a major formative influence in British culture – more so than some of the others represented. So it’s hard to think of any scenario in which one of the possible reasons for this group to exist includes any good reason to exclude the RCs. Same goes for Wiccans and Pagans to a lesser extent.