The National Secular Society this week applied to the High Court to have council prayers declared  unlawful. If the society wins the case it would create a precedent that would be binding on other councils.
NSS President Terry Sanderson, left, and Executive Director Keith Porteous Wood are calling on supporters to contribute to the council prayer fighting fund
After weeks of exhausting preparation, the papers were lodged at the High Court for a “Judicial Review between the Queen (on the Application of the National Secular Society) and Bideford Town Council”.
The Council has until mid-August to decide whether to stop prayers or fight the case. Said NSS Executive Director Keith Porteous Wood:
We know that the Christian Institute and Christian Concern have been in touch with Bideford Council. So Bideford will be well supported financially, and the NSS is getting dug in for what could be a long and expensive fight – its initial budget is for £25,000 but this will rise with appeals, which are likely.
Even if Bideford do not fight, we will find quickly move on to a council that will – there are thousands to choose from. So the NSS is starting a fighting fund. We hope you will make a donation to the fund.
He added:
We would like to thank Brighton and Hove Humanist Society who unanimously voted for a £500 contribution to our fighting fund. We still have a long way to go towards our £25,000 target and would like to encourage other groups and individuals to match Brighton’s glowing example. This would be a tangible way of expressing your support for our work on this case which goes to the very heart of secularism in public life and, if successful will set a key precedent. We get numerous letters expressing admiration for, and appreciation of, our work; contributing to the fund would be a tangible way of expressing your thanks, and it would be very much appreciated.
Please make a donation securely online here, or by sending a cheque to NSS at NSS Fighting Fund, 25 Red Lion Square, London WC1R 4RL.
NSS President Terry Sanderson added:
We must grasp this rare opportunity to make public life more secular and do our very best to win. Your contribution will go to help ensure that.
Earlier this year, the Anglican Bishop of Shrewsbury strongly defended Bideford council’s “right” to say prayers before its meetings.
Bishop Mark Rylands says councils have a "right" to pray
According to this report, the Rt Revd Mark Rylands said:
I fully support Council members in continuing to offer prayers before their meetings begin. Prayers are said at each day in business in both the House of Commons and the House of Lords. Attendance at these prayers is completely voluntary and no one is forced to actively participate. The saying of prayers before meetings is an integral part of the British system of government.
Prayers remind councillors that they are answerable not only to themselves but also to those beyond the Chamber. Those who pray remind themselves they are answerable to God.
Those who do not wish to pray can easily absent themselves from the prayers or merely remain silent while those around them pray. However, if prayers are not allowed then those who wish to exercise their freedom to have corporate prayers will have their freedom denied …
The Freethinker was founded in 1881 by GW Foote, an outspoken critic of religion. After the publication of 
July 22nd, 2010 at 10:00 pm
I’m not convinced that this is the wisest use of NSS funds. I could understand it if council prayers were compulsory, but the fact is that many councils do not start their sessions with prayers because they don’t have to.
I realise this is largely a symbolic fight, but campaigning for a blanket national ban, the NSS is exposing itself to charges of authoritarianism. Do we really need more legislation? Why not let councils decide on a case-by-case basis whether or not to have prayers?
Whatever you think about council prayers – and, of course, I think they are daft – they are completely and utterly harmless. Unlike, for example, the poisoning of children’s minds in faith academies or the employment discrimination which will inevitably accompany the growth of these schools.
Shouldn’t NSS funds be reserved for more important battles?
July 22nd, 2010 at 10:19 pm
I agree with the principle but £25,000 is a lot of money that might be better spent. The stupid deluded Catholic women are forking out £10,000 on Bus Ads calling on the Pope to “Ordain Women Now”. Why the nincompoops don’t just change church if they can’t live without the Sky Daddy is beyond me. With all the hungry in the world…………
July 22nd, 2010 at 10:37 pm
“Those who pray remind themselves they are answerable to God.”
No, they’re answerable to their constituents, many of whom do not pray to that particular god, or version thereof, if any. This isn’t just an issue for atheists, it’s an issue for anyone who believes that an elected representative has no right to consider his or her particular sect/religion’s views when making a decision, rather than the views of his or her electors.
Statements like that above are exactly why this is a bigger issue than it might appear. For example, the pope virtually instructs catholic MPs to vote against allowing such things as stem-cell research, and party leaders allow them so-called ‘conscience’ votes — it’s most definitely not an abstract point or just a principle.
July 22nd, 2010 at 10:51 pm
Those who wish to pray can do so beforehand. Why should those who do not wish to do so absent themselves. And as for the last sentence, playing the victimisation card again.
I think this is an important fight because of the principle, separating church/religion and state. By allowing prayers it sends out the message that religion is important and privileged.
July 22nd, 2010 at 11:31 pm
“Attendance at these prayers is completely voluntary and no one is forced to actively participate.”
The very next sentence:
“The saying of prayers before meetings is an integral part of the British system of government.”
Ten people in the room praying and the odd one out is already excluded from the clique before the meeting starts. That’s right in the halls of power.
I disagree that this is some unimportant fight the NSS are wasting money on, its not just arguing about whether tea or coffee should be served at meetings. In my opinion, politics is THE place religion should be fought. I’d be suprised however if a conservative government conceded to this, the afternoon tea with the vicar demographic is theirs.
July 22nd, 2010 at 11:34 pm
And he fell to the earth and heard a voice saying to him, Saul, Saul, why do you persecute Me? And he said, Who are you, lord? And the Lord said, I am Jesus whom you persecute. It is hard for you to kick against the goads.
(Act 9:4-5)
Why if you believe that God does not exist, you lot put so much effort into trying to prove He does not??
And now I say to you, Withdraw from these men and let them alone. For if this counsel or this work is of men, it will come to nothing. But if it is of God, you cannot overthrow it, lest perhaps you be found even to fight against God.
(Act 5:38-39)
Let us live in peace, why fight??
Your very denial of God proves His existence, how? Too much effort to deny the existence of the eternal Creator!!
GB
Les
July 23rd, 2010 at 12:04 am
Thanks Les, could you point to the post on this thread that argues against the existence of a god? I seem to have missed it.
July 23rd, 2010 at 12:09 am
The denial of prayer!! lol
GB
Les
July 23rd, 2010 at 12:20 am
Hmm, you mean the denial that prayer has a place in politics. A small difference, but a crucial one. Anyway, philosophically speaking, the denial of prayer doesn’t deny the concept of a god, just the concept of a god who can be swayed by prayer. Less specifically, the removal of Christian prayer from council meetings gives people of all faiths, and of none, equality.
July 23rd, 2010 at 12:25 am
S’funny. I would have thought it illegal for a council to take money/help etc, from a private group. Conflict of interest and such like plus it’s not the council but the councillors who are doing the praying. Still, I’m no lawyer.
July 23rd, 2010 at 2:52 am
“So we’re all going to stand here and drone away at the sky faerie just because that’s the way we’ve always done it”.
It’s about time someone stood up and asked why this happens in a supposedly secular society.
I’m contributing to the NSS fund.
July 23rd, 2010 at 2:54 am
Or at least I would cough up if the link worked.
July 23rd, 2010 at 4:10 am
Les ?
“Your very denial of God proves His existence, how? Too much effort to deny the existence of the eternal Creator!!”
Would you mind explaining the above….it is convoluted to say the least…can you write in in a “religion for dummies” version ?…so we can see what you getting at here.
Oh and we don’t do the “LOL” thing here ….this site is a more cerebral than some other blogs you may frequent.
July 23rd, 2010 at 8:37 am
While I have to agree with the goal, I can’t help but think that in what actually is technically a christian nation this is likely to be unwinnable at a legal level. Without a shiny new First Amendment equivalent of our own I would think there was more for the council to stand behind than for the NSS.
I think the first things to attack is the funny hat brigade in the Lords, since it is the clearest sign of bias in the mechanics of government.
As for Les, please at least raise your game above the distinctly ridiculous “denying god proves he exists” bollocks, and please note that quotes from your book of contradictory fairy tales hold no more weight than would anything the Brothers Grimm may have written.
July 23rd, 2010 at 9:05 am
This is a very important fight that everyone who cares about equality should support. A privilege the religious forced upon local Government is being removed so that all Council members have equal status – where is the problem? The xtian loony zealots like Les are playing the victim card [again] because they are being told to leave their ridiculous beliefs outside of the Council chamber; no-one is denying the religious their right to pray – they have churches for that.
July 23rd, 2010 at 9:42 am
Les Healy
July 22nd, 2010 at 11:34 pm
And he fell to the earth and heard a voice saying to him, Saul, Saul, why do you persecute Me? And he said, Who are you, lord? And the Lord said, I am Jesus whom you persecute. It is hard for you to kick against the goads.
(Act 9:4-5)
The librarian said “ook”.
Discworld series, Terry Pratchett.
We can all quote from books, especially fantasy books.
July 23rd, 2010 at 10:07 am
I’m not really for or against a change in law. I’ll admit to being a spiritual person, although I am definitely not what you would call a religious one. Willing to except criticism toward my views I think the truth is it shouldn’t matter if people pray or not, either way you’ll have one or the other feeling the status quo is wrong or that their liberty has been deprived. To say their own personal religion shouldn’t influence a politicians decision is asinine. Your beliefs whatever they may be, based on what you hear, see, learn, know, or feel influence your decisions. I do not think a politician should be able to say “Because god said so” or “Because I don’t believe in god”. They should handle their work objectively without mention of god or religion when the meeting is in session. That is what I consider separation of church and state. Religion for the faithful is something intrinsic, such as an Aethiest’s skepticism stems from disbelief, why? Well perhaps you weren’t raised religiously, something bad happened to shake your faith, you never felt faith to begin with, etc. Who cares. My point is… [whether you consider it invalid or not] as stated the prayer is not mandatory, so it really isn’t something those not wishing to partake or hear couldn’t avoid. Perhaps those wishing to pray could convene outside the council room/where ever to do it so it didn’t take place in the room… which still seems a little silly to me. As long as the prayers themselves don’t make their way onto any official legislation I see no harm in it. I don’t pray myself, but I think it wrong to deny someone else the liberty based on my beliefs that it is pointless or nonsensical. It just doesn’t matter to me. Unless the prayers were taken into context during the meeting and had a lasting impact on the legislation or decisions… a persons beliefs whether they pray or not are going to influence their vote whether they bow their heads before its cast or afterward… or not at all.
July 23rd, 2010 at 10:40 am
It would cost a lot less to print some bumper stickers or badges for all concerned citizens to use. People who pray never stop to work out how utterly ineffectual their prayers are. If children were exposed to bumper stickers like “Nothing Fails like Prayer” or “Science works whether you believe in it or not,” they might reflect. For 2,000 years people have been, doG damn it, praying without ever stopping to think! Maybe nonbelievers should just start laughing every time prayers were said. It would cost nothing and probably be just as effective.
July 23rd, 2010 at 10:53 am
Most religions promise a glorious future, often after death, without being able to proof this. Anyone offering goods or services of any other kind than religion can be fined if he can’t live up to the expectations of his buyers. As long as mankind is stuck with politicians who take the empty promises or veiled threats of religious fraudsters seriously we’ll be stuck wit stuck with anomalies like royalty, bishops in parliament and, if not there, a big say in politics. I don’t know if I would be willing to start this legal fight with some many relidiots willing to cough up good money for a stupid cause. There must be other ways and time seems to be on the side of atheism anyway.
July 23rd, 2010 at 11:19 am
Re Les Healy’s pithy bible quotes.
Why do the religious muppets always pull a verse from the bible in such a manner that they think we will either be in awe or tremble?
It has no relevance to non believers.
So I’d like to follow Graham Martin-Royle’s example and qoute from Terry Pratchett.
Pyramids p251: ‘They’re my gods and they will learn to do as they are instructed!’
July 23rd, 2010 at 12:52 pm
@Tony e
The religious always quote Bible verses because they are totally incapable of verbalizing an adequate reply. Perhaps they themselves were hit over the head with these quotes at an early age. Now, they imagine that all they have to do is to utter them and we will be stopped still in our tracks as flabbergasted as Saul! (Who was probably having an epileptic fit).
July 23rd, 2010 at 2:28 pm
Time to show these “humanists” what Darwinism really means!!
July 23rd, 2010 at 4:17 pm
Though the practice of exclusively Christian prayers may have been appropriate when we were all of one religion, we are now a society of many faiths and, increasingly, of none.
In a modern diverse society, councils must not be closely identified with any single belief system, particularly one which openly disapproves of the lifestyle choices of so many of us.
Indeed, to accurately reflect the needs and wishes of those they represent, democratically elected bodies should welcome and embrace social change and not resist or reject the reality of a rapidly changing multi-belief society. Anything that contributes to an impression that local government is centred around a particular gender, age, ethnicity, social class or faith should therefore be challenged.
This is about far more than a few platitudes at the beginning of meetings that few people pay much attention to. The Establishment know that this is important, and so should we…
July 23rd, 2010 at 5:03 pm
Quoting Bible verses at atheists is pretty pointless because we do not recognise it as having any kind of authority. On the other hand, the supposed words of Jesus Christ are presumably recognised as having some kind of authority for Christians.
“And when you pray, you must not be like the hypocrites; for they love to stand and pray in the synagogues and at the street corners, that they may be seen by men. Truly, I say to you, they have their reward. But when you pray, go into your room and shut the door and pray to your Father who is in secret; and your Father who sees in secret will reward you.”
Matthew Ch. 6 Vs. 5-6
July 23rd, 2010 at 5:35 pm
I read elsewhere that xians prove there is no dog each time they fix a lightning conductor to a church.
July 23rd, 2010 at 7:27 pm
@Jason
You say:
“To say their own personal religion shouldn’t influence a politicians decision is asinine. Your beliefs whatever they may be, based on what you hear, see, learn, know, or feel influence your decisions. I do not think a politician should be able to say “Because god said so†or “Because I don’t believe in godâ€. They should handle their work objectively without mention of god or religion when the meeting is in session.”
I’d be interested in your views of the specific case I mentioned; the allowing of catholic Mps to ‘vote their conscience,’ given that everyone knows that that means ‘let them vote according to the dictates of the catholic church.’ In particular, how many of their non-catholic constituents (you know, the people who they promised to represent) would be happy with that?
Or is that also an ‘asinine’ point?
July 23rd, 2010 at 7:40 pm
I think that if a few people want to have a little prayer meeting before the council meeting then let them do so. Let them do it in their own time in a room away from the council chamber. If they feel that “god/gods” can help them to make their decisions there is nothing wrong with that.
However, to have official prayers before council meetings is essentially forcing people without “god/gods” to do something that they don’t and shouldn’t have to do is wrong on every level. Akin to forcing a Muslim to eat pork and we’d never do that now, would we.
July 23rd, 2010 at 8:56 pm
@Jason
You have hit the nail on the head as far as I am concerned. I have no objection to anyone praying but it should not be part of the councils business. In the case complained about, prayers are item number 1 on the agenda. That is what is wrong. They have no place in the council chamber.
July 23rd, 2010 at 10:18 pm
@ Chris
That’s a good point. ” If you won’t force a Muslim to eat pork, don’t force me to say prayers”
July 24th, 2010 at 12:44 am
@FedupwithR
This’d make a good bumper sticker, I reckon:
http://atheistblogger.com/wp-c.....8/pray.jpg
July 24th, 2010 at 4:54 pm
If you wouldn’t force a Muslim to eat pork, then
don’t try to entrap me to partake in prayers.
A bit longer – but less likely to prompt a comeback.
Any improvements?
_____
July 24th, 2010 at 5:58 pm
Let us prey:
http://www.joe-ks.com/archives_may2005/Pray.gif