Tuesday, January 30, 2007

Ógra Shinn Féin Discussion Paper - Faith and the State


Delivered at the recent 8th Inter-Isles Forum in London

We in Ógra Shinn Féin believe that everyone should have the right to express their own faith. In a non-secular society, this can never be truly achieved. The freedom to express a person’s religion is a fundamental of civil liberties. By imposing a set of values from one religion or even common values from a number of religions, we begin to alienate people of non mainstream faiths and agnostics.

It is because faith is viewed by people as having a central place in their lives that many regard religious freedom as the most important

History has shown that when you introduce faith as an integral part of the state, you begin to repress people of other faiths. Faith has an amazing ability to unite people with common beliefs but also has the ability to divide people more than any other. When a state adopts positions and laws based on faith, it is potentially dividing its own people.

The law should be applied equally to all members of the state, including equally to all faiths. To ask for anything more would be run against the principal of equality for all.


Faith and State Institutions

Keeping the state and faith isolated from one another within institutions of both the state and faith, is paramount to upholding the people’s freedom of expression. The perfect example of this is Education.

Education is based on fact and scientific method. An education based on faith is not education but merely speculation. Our children have the right to have all the facts, all the theories, all the possibilities put before them. By allowing faith to determine what can be taught in a state classroom, is to shut down both the progress of a people, both culturally and scientifically. We recognise that faith is an extremely important factor in some peoples lives and for some people, having that faith means questioning new ideas and theories put forward by science, however to ask that no one be shown these ideas, on the basis that they do not adhere to your own personal religion, is to impede on others rights.

However, an education which has its foundations built around religious theories and dogma is one of the most important parts of some people’s lives. We should not ignore this either. The choice should be available to people, but no state run institutions should ever impose one set of values or beliefs upon a person.

Currently some state run schools adhere to certain faiths values and teachings. Religion classes mean that people who are of other faith must leave the room, often leaving no choice for two or three children but to leave their friends. Idea’s put forward by modern day science cannot be spoken about because they go against the teachings of those values. We seek to change this, so that in any school where state money is spent, teachings will not be limited to one faith’s values and theories.


Faith and the Governing of the State

Every section of the community should have a say in the governing of the state in so far as they are not impeding on the rights of others. After all, the community is the makeup of the state. However no section of the community should expect to get preferential treatment. Neither should a section of the community feel that they have moral superiority over other sections of the community. By ensuring that everyone has an equal say in the governing of the state, we preserve democracy, we preserve the freedom of speech, we preserve the freedom of expression and we preserve the rights of everyone.

Currently, one faith enjoys a special relationship with the state in Ireland. This has slowly been changing to reflect a changing society in the past 40 years. However radical change is needed in order to undo century’s of religious domination in our society. An acceleration of the general trend of secularism which is occurring within the Irish population is required, through legislation designed to further reduce institutionalised religion



Faith and the Law

This brings to question how can we preserve democracy if a majority are in favour of certain religious beliefs? Purely by identifying that in a democracy the rights of everyone are recognised and prioritised. Just as one group cannot expect to take away another group’s right to vote, neither can one group take away another group’s right to religious freedom.

Law’s based on faith are fundamentally biased to that faith. By allowing one faith to dominate over another, we allow the abuse of religious freedom to take place, using religious freedom’s as cover to trample on other rights, either knowingly or unknowingly. Repression by faiths has taken place all over the world, in times past and times present. The first step towards that repression is the institutionalisation of a single faith. The first step towards the institutionalisation is the implementation of faith based laws.

As we have outlined already, faith has the ability to unite people like no other. Faith can contribute massively to the stability of a state and to a people. People draw strength from their faith, they draw strength from their beliefs. Be it in the form of having total faith in one god, many gods or no gods. To take away that strength and stability from a people would be detrimental to a society. However faith is not universal to all and should be respected as such. For too long societies have sought to unite their people by imposing one religion on another, this is when the divisive nature of religion is unleashed. Accepting and respecting other faiths as an equal is the only true way to unite people with faith. This can only be done in a secular society.


6 comments:

Wednesday said...

I agree 100%. Ireland has to move into the modern world and part of that is shaking off the Church's stranglehold.

I also think that we as a party need to make more of the Religious Ethos exemption, which allows faith-based schools to discriminate against teachers because of their religion. It's too easy for this to become an excuse for other forms of discrimination. I posted about a case where this happened to a friend of mine ... here.

Jizzy said...

The Catholic Church has the right to demand that her students be taught religion from a Catholic perspective. The Church own the property of most Irish schools(and hospitals) and if the state decides to teach subjects that go against her ethos, the church could pull out of education altogether, by expelling the government from her property. This would leave most students in the country without an education. The state have the right to withdraw funding from religious organizations, if they want, but don't expect the religious organizations to accomodate the state.

Furthermore OSF are describing religion from a relativist and pluralist viewpoint. Most religious people, myself included, do not believe that all faiths are equal. I am a Christian, and as such I regard other religions as either false(thus spiritually fatal---in the case of the Eastern religions) or grossly deficient in the truth(Judaism or Islam, for eg). A (real) Christian believes in the veracity of his religion, and that scripture/tradition lays down moral absolutes which should be followed letter by letter. The Christian religion teaches that the government have both the authority and the responsibility to rule morally(ie by following God's laws). In the Abrahamic faiths, all morality is said to come from God. No-one can believe in your version of a seperation of church and state and similtaneously be a faithful Christian.

I believe in a seperation of church and state, but not in the way liberals envisage. I believe in a seperation of church and state much the same as I believe in a seperation of state and trade unions. Neither of the two should be allowed to rule over the other, but both should be allowed to influence the other. Just because the church shouldn't have direct control over the state doesn't mean the government can't rule morally. I think that not only should the government be seperated from the state, but also from the education and health systems. Government is the source of monopoly and it's time we drastically reduced its size.

Anonymous said...

The Catholic church has no right to demand that their view be thought by teachers paid by the state, or as part of a state curriculum. As for the church owning the property this is something that needs changing. A corrupt, criminally negligent, patriarchical, undemocratic and secretive organisation has no right to own propert, let alone such vital infrastructure as schools and hospitals, and should not be allowed to be in a position of management or influence in same. It is my firm belief that such public infrastructure should be put under the control of the people, and not a junta of self appointed clerics. I would call for the complete opposite of what Jizzy suggests, and call for Government expulsion of the church(es) from the health and education sector and members of the clergy who refuse to undertake not to push their views, spiritual and ethical, on others from their positions of influence.
Again in reference to Jizzy's assertation that Ogra are viewing religion in a pluralist way, that is true. As a secular and socialist organisation it would be amiss for Ogra to view one religion as more 'right' than another. It would be wrong in fact for Ogra to take any religious views.
The separation of church and state, or religion and state should be total, not only direct and statutory connections, but all influence and indirect connections. A state as an organised expression of a peoples unity and cohesion has a duty to be democratic, accountable and open. It also has duties to provide for the health, education and wellbeing of the citizens for whom it exists. Were education to be left in the hands of the church(es), a very peculiar, particular and, in this writers opinion, perverse, set of morals and ethics whould be pushed on young people. It would put an unelected quango of men in a position of tremendous power and influence.
As a democrat I cannot accept this.
If education were to be left to individual families or communities there would be huge discrepencies in the quality of education, dependant on the wealth of that family/community.
As an Egalitarian I cannot accept this.
If the provision of education were to put in the hands of corporations, we would soon see the subjugation of learning for the promotion of training. A corporate education system would use pupils for their own ends treat them as no more that a commodity that will help them in their endless and all-consuming hunt for profit. It would also lead to so-called 'rationalisation', our young people would be educated (trained) as cheaply as possible as a 'cost-saving' measure.
As a Socialist I cannot accept that.
So, Jizzy, you see why I and my comrades in OSF believe that a) religion should play no part in the provision of education, and b)why it should be the state, acting on behalf and in trust for the people should be the sole providers of education and other essential public services.

Anonymous said...

Over all a good document but a bit aspirational. In the south of Ireland the vast magority of primary school is through a religious ethos. I dont think one can stop anyone operating a religious school and this is still the first choice of the magority . Educate together have struggled to get schools going over the years.
A possible practical suggestion that might be submitted to the Government would be that outside Dublin each primary pupil would have the choice of a non religious school
within 12 road miles of his or her home by the year 2020. This sounds
as a very mild suggestion but compared to previous decades it would actually require a huge build ing programme possibly including talking over some disussed school rooms or school houses. There may even be some property swaps provided for with the religious sector . Just a thought.

Anonymous said...

I was intrigued to read what jizzy said. He says:

"I am a Christian, and as such I regard other religions as either false...r grossly deficient in the truth".

What a pile of bullshit. Why do you regard other religions as false or deficient of truth? What evidence is there for the existence of a Christian God. I find your attitude extremely arrogant. The only reason you happen to be a Catholic is because of where you were born. If you were born in Saudi Arabia to Muslim parents, would you still be a Catholic?

You also say:
"Christian religion teaches that the government have both the authority and the responsibility to rule morally(ie by following God's laws)"

This is very contradictory. One cannot be moral and follow all of God's laws, as the God of Abraham is truly one of the most immoral and dispicable charachters I have ever read about. Here are a few quotes from your beloved bible:

1:"If a man lies with a male as with a women, both of them shall be put to death for their abominable deed; they have forfeited their lives."(Leviticus 20:13)
2: Whoever sacrifices to any god, except the Lord alone, shall be doomed. (Exodus 22:19)
3: That night the angel of the Lord went forth and struck down one hundred and eighty five thousand men in the Assyrian camp. Early the next morning, there they were, all the corpuses of the dead. (2 Kings 19:35)
4:All who curse their father or mother must be put to death. They are guilty of a capital offense. (Leviticus 20:9)

Is it moral to kill aduterers, homosexuals or teenagers who curse their parents? Of course it isn't! A twisted and sadistic book like this should have no place in modern society, let alone government.

Anonymous said...

I am writing in response to the Ógra Shinn Féin Discussion Paper surrounding the issue of Church and State. Firstly I welcome the opportunity to discuss this issue and, in particular, thank Barry McNally for bringing this to my attention. As the issue of faith for a considerable section of society is an extremely important and emotional issue I hope that this debate can be conducted in a true Republican, comradely and friendly way.

After reading the discussion paper I take quite a number of issues with it, not least the vagueness of the paper but also with the offensive and patronising language that is used in certain sections of the paper. The first question I must ask the writer(s) of this paper is what exactly are they proposing. The document allures to a number of preferred options but does not exactly state what she/he wants to see. This alone makes a response quite difficult.

What is a secular society? What do the writers envisage an Irish secular society will entail? Can a truly secular society be achieved? Personally, I think not. We have seen examples of secular, communist regimes in the former U.S.S.R. and modern day China, which totally reject faith in any form. These secular societies not only denied people their human rights of religious freedom, but also persecuted and murdered countless numbers simply for daring to acknowledge the Almighty. A truly secular society can never be achieved as faith is a personal choice. A choice that people will express in public as is their human right. But there have also been examples of great crimes committed in the name of God, the Crusades for example, and I believe that neither religious nor atheistic fanaticism has a place in a modern democracy.

The first paragraph of the discussion paper makes the claim that by imposing laws based upon faith, people from religious minorities or no faith become alienated. I disagree. It is true that Ireland, like most European countries, traces its basic laws to that of the Ten Commandments, the 613 Mitzvot and the core teachings of Christ. These are; respect for human life, for others and the belief in a better society based on mutual respect and equality. I don't know of anyone, irrespective of whether they believe in God or not, that rejects the notion of respect and equality.

Other laws such as those relating to abortion are more controversial and because of this any decision surrounding such a controversial issue should be left to the people to decide. What is also important to acknowledge is that it was the people who brought a religious ethos to law, not the other way round. Also equally important is the cultural and historical significance that faith has played in Irish life though the centuries. Refusing to recognise this or attempting to condemn it does not reflect the equality ethos of Sinn Féin or Irish Republicanism.

The third paragraph of the introduction continues with this theme and whilst it recognises that unity can be found in faith, is also states that it can lead to division. This is absolutely true, but this is more a reflection of human nature than it is of religion. Religion, like politics, or anything for that matter, can be manipulated by people for selfish reasons. The fault here is people not religion. Are the writer(s) suggesting that religious influence should be eradicated from society because some find it divisive. If that is the case than surely other such 'divisive' issues like politics should suffer a similar fate.

The next section of the paper deals with the relationship between faith and state institutions. The first paragraph contradicts itself, by claiming that state and faith must be isolated as this is: ''paramount to upholding the people's freedom of expression.'' But by denying the rights of the individual to choose a faith-based school you are in fact denying the right of religious freedom and expression. This document is trying to enforce a secular agenda on the population.

It may also come as a surprise that the Catholic Church, for example, supports separation of Church and state in favour of autonomy of Church and state. The position of the Catholic Church is that the Church has no right to interfere in the affairs of state unless they believe the state is acting illegally or immorally. A notable example being the Vatican's vocal opposition to the war in Iraq.

But this discussion paper goes further, it uses offensive language, makes false, untrue claims and proposes forcing legislation through in an attempt to curtail faith. What type of undemocratic and draconian state is this paper proposing? Making the accusation that religion is ''mere speculation'' is a grotesque and arrogant statement to make. It should be withdrawn immediately. This type of language would be better suited to the Progressive Democrats and not Sinn Féin, nor with anyone who believes in equality.

A further example, is the incredible question posed by the discussion paper, which asks: ''how can we preserve democracy if a majority are in favour of certain religious beliefs?'' How is religion a threat to democracy? Give me an example of how religion in Ireland is a danger to the democratic process. The central tenet of democratic philosophy is respecting the wishes of the majority whether or not you or I agree. Hence, the true threat to democracy would be for a minority to deny others freedom of religious expression. This statement is utter nonsense and I suspect the writer(s) also know this. This statement is another example of the hatred of faith that this paper emanates and it too should be immediately withdrawn.

The Ógra paper also makes the accusation that within faith-based schools, children who are not of the majority faith must leave the classroom. It also asserts that scientific theories relating to creation are smothered. Again I challenge the writer(s) to produce evidence that supports these ridiculous accusations. Theories such as the 'Big Bang' are part of the core curriculum, something that all schools must follow. I also refute the claim that Irish children are forcibly removed from the classroom simply because they are not part of the majority faith. Once again I ask for evidence.

However despite the previous offensive and untrue claims, the most frightening is the paragraph that centres around ''faith and the governing state.'' This discussion paper is proposing to force legislation through in an attempt to reduce 'institutionalised religion'. Does this mean removing Christmas Nativity scenes from council maintained village squares, stopping priests or Ministers from conducting prayers at gravesides in council controlled cemeteries or denying children the right to a faith-based education?

This document is trying to impose secularisation upon society. Secularists have no more right to impose their beliefs upon society than those who follow a religion. I support the separation of Church and state and I firmly believe in equality, true equality that cherishes all of the children of the nation equally irrespective of colour, faith or sexuality. But this document does not share this ethos, it claims to, but fails.

People of faith, who form the majority of the Irish population, deserve the same respect and equality as the rest of the society. The fanatical obsession that this document represents is determined to eradicate any public declaration of faith, stating this quite obviously in its determination to implement legislation to that affect. Discriminating against one section of society in favour of another is not equality. People have the right in a free and democratic country to express their faith both publicly and privately.

This document is discriminatory and portrays religion and those that follow it as uncompromising, divisive, fundamentalist and threatening to the democratic process itself. Attempts by some atheists to wage war against religion is a clear indication of their open hostility and hatred, something that sadly appears in this document.

I am an Irish republican and I am proud of Sinn Féin's commitment to equality, justice and respect and I hope that these values can also be extended to people of faith. If Ógra Shinn Féin is committed to bringing about a new Ireland, then it must do this in the people's interest and not to satisfy the loathing of faith by the few. I appeal to the writer(s) of this document to retract this discussion paper as it is severely flawed. Change is needed, but not to the extremities that this document suggests. I look forward to an open and positive debate.

Michael Gray - Sloan
Organiser
Pádraig Pearse Ógra Shinn Féin Cumann
South Down