Welcome to the god-free of Derbyshire

Everyone is welcome. Please click here for details.

Advice for secular, humanist, atheist and agnostic parents in Derby/Derbyshire

We receive many emails from parents in Derby and Derbyshire concerning religion in schools - worship, Religious Education and religious speakers in schools.

We have put together some advice which we hope will be useful. Please click here for more details.

Humanism on the RE syllabus for all schools in Derby and Derbyshire

A non-theist view, such as humanism, is now part of the Agreed Syllabus for RE for all Derby City and Derby County local authority schools.

Teachers, parents, students and others requiring background material about humanism are advised to start here - and perhaps follow up with our concerns about moral relativism. Those feeling brave might like to pause for thought.

If you are a teacher, please contact us if you would like us to visit your school for a chat about humanism on the syllabus, to help with INSET training for you and your colleagues, or to take part in assemblies, talks or debates. We are qualified teachers and CRB checked - and we do not charge for our time.

Please click below for:

• Suggestions for teaching about a non-theist view of life
• An open letter to teachers in Derby/Derbyshire (.PDF format)
• A glossary of terms used in RE (.PDF format)

What is humanism and what are secular aims?

92% of the UK population has nothing to do with regular religious practice and over 60% has no need of gods - we represent the god-free.

• Please click here to find out about humanism. Millions of people are humanists - they just don't call themselves by that name.
• Please click here for a list of secular aims. There is not such thing as "secularism" - there is no "secular ideology" - it is simply a small set of aims.

Our booklet: "A guide to Humanism" We have produced a 12 page A5 full-colour booklet as a guide to humanism. Humanism: is not a religion. It has no belief in the supernatural, no holy books, no holy men, no churches or holy places and no acts of worship or reverence. is not dependent on science though humanists are sceptical freethinkers. If an idea is unnecessary we reject it. If an idea has no evidence for it, we reject it. supports freedom of thought and expression while promoting strong moral values and personal responsibility in the society we share. Other topics covered include: What is a humanist? Creating a set of moral values Answering the big questions Questions people ask about humanism Things that make humanists cross Free copies available Please send us an email to obtain a free copy.

Send us an email to obtain a copy

"Moral relativism" and a set of commandments for the 21st century

Please click here for details about why we are not moral relativists and our stab at replacing the ten commandments. One law for all The "One Law For All" campaign, which opposes the imposition of Sharia law, is one example of humanists and secularists fighting against the ideas of moral relativism.

Click for more details

A few definitions

We are really keen on the careful use of words - so please contact us if you feel we have not explained thing clearly, or not used words correctly. We are freethinkers - we welcome comments, criticisms and contributions - we love having our ideas taken apart - that's part of the fun of life.

• Atheist: a person who is god-free and who can answer the big questions of life without need of gods or religions.
• Atheism: there is no such thing as "atheism". Atheists share no ideology - apart from being god-free. When used, "atheism" means a state of being god-free.
• Humanism: a set of moral and ethical values that puts people first. Humanists have no need of gods or religions.
• Secularism: a set of aims designed to remove the privileges enjoyed by religions in our society.

Israel and Palestine - some thoughts

We have no sympathy for Judaism, Islam or Christianity but there are a few things worth considering when thinking about what is going on in the Middle East.

• For over 2,000 years Christians have systematically persecuted Jews as "killers" of their prophet Jesus.
• The record of the Christian church is disgraceful and, over the centuries, hundreds of thousands of Jews have been killed because of such persecution.
• Hitler remained a Catholic until he died - he was never excommunicated by the Catholic Church.
• The SS oath included reference to god and Hitler referred to the Christian god in over 200 speeches.
• Concentration guards were all German or Eastern European - most of them Christian.
• Almost all Jewish families have relatives who were in the Nazi concentration camps.
• No Palestinian family has relatives who were concentration camp guards or who took part in the Nazi genocide of Jews.
• Christian guilt led to support for Zionism - a homeland for the Jews. (Originally the British suggested Uganda because "the natives won't mind.")
• Why are the Palestinians now paying the price for Christian atrocities and Christian guilt?

The problem of "respect" and "causing offence"

The Racial and Religious Hatred Act 2006 states in section 29J "Protection of freedom of expression":

We argue about ideas and beliefs - which cannot in themselves take offence - but we wish to make it crystal clear to all readers of this site that we do not hate religious people and we support the right of everyone to believe whatever they wish (as long as they cause no harm to, or discriminate against, anyone else) even though we may think their ideas are nonsense. This site does criticise religious ideas (and sometimes mock them) and no doubt some readers will be offended.

Well, we are sorry, but that is what freedom of speech is all about. We criticise religious ideas - not people - unless they do or say things that may cause physical or psychological harm to others (by indoctrinating children for example.) We have no doubt that Adolf Hitler would have been deeply offended by our criticisms of his sincerely held anti-Gypsy, anti-homosexual, anti-Semitic and other Nazi beliefs. No-one has the right not to be offended.

We do not "respect" ideas - religious or otherwise - the concept of "respecting" inanimate ideas or objects is nonsense. We respect people for what they do - not for what they claim to believe. We don't respect someone simply because they claim to be a Muslim, Christian, Judaist or whatever. We do respect many religious people - for example, Hanan Ashrawi who sometimes speaks on behalf of the Palestinian people and happens to be a Christian.

We are critical of the actions of the Israeli government because we feel their actions insult the memory of the six million Jews who died in the Shoa in Nazi Germany. It is not anti-semitic to criticise Israel - and many Jewish writers feel exactly the same way - Finkelstein, Pappe, Neumann etc.

"It's OK not to believe"

We atheists are quite happy to say "It's OK to believe" - after all, a secular state is the only state that guarantees freedom of religion and belief. We therefore feel it fair that religions reciprocate by supporting our campaign for kids - "It's OK not to believe" and we would like this made crystal clear in RE lessons in schools. Of course, some religious people might find this hard to swallow - after all, some religions call this "apostasy" and threaten to kill people who abandon or change their religion - and all religions bring enormous emotional and social pressure to bear on those who wish to give up religion. Kids need to understand that they are free to decide for themselves to believe or not - without undue outside pressure. Please click here for more details. Free leaflets available Click here to see the contents of the leaflet to accompany this campaign and contact us for free printed copies.

Click for our leaflet

"Moderates" and "extremists"

"Don't tar us with the same brush - the vast majority of religious people are moderates - not extremists."

We atheist humanists have a problem. To us, anything that calls for harm to, or discrimination against, a fellow human being is morally wrong - all very simple.

However, we are faced with religious people, moderates and extremists, who read the same holy books, have the same prophets/messiahs and have the same, or similar, priests/scholars - yet one side takes a view which allows them to commit atrocities while the other condemns them for being "extremist".

The question is: what is the yardstick by which religious people determine which interpretation is "right" and which is "wrong" - which is morally "good" and which is morally "bad"?

Could it be that there is a higher level of morality than their holy books, a moral system that says that causing harm to fellow human beings is wrong?

If there is such a higher level of morality (which there is), why do they need all the mumbo-jumbo in their holy books? Why do they need gods and religions? Do they think morality is hard? It isn't - it is simple - it certainly isn't rocket science!

Updates

Setting the record straight - lies and half-truths told by religious leaders

We feel sad for some religious leaders - if they would open their hearts and minds, and allow reason to enter, they would find that they have nothing to fear from death and they can make the best of the one life we share together without gods, holy books, religious leaders, "thou shalt not" and the million-and-one excuses of religion. Religious leaders are great ones for using emotive language to whip up emotional reactions. Cormac Murphy-O’Connor, Catholic Cardinal and Archbishop of Westminster, in his outburst over the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Bill used words like "Frankenstein" and "monster" to describe groups of cells. "Putting the fear of god into them" comes naturally to religious leaders - a task made easier by the gutter press (Daily Mail, Express etc.) whose interests are best served by a society based on fear. The Catholic Church has a long history of rational argument (!) - if it had its way we would still be living on a flat earth with the sun going round it and with no advances in medicine, no contraceptives, no organ transplants and certainly no embryo research. 75,000 women die and 2.5 million are seriously injured each year from back street abortions thanks to the Catholic Church. Catholics seem to forget that they are free not to take advantage of any medical break-throughs that may follow from embryo research - but they have no right to dictate what the rest of us do. Question: how come Catholic families are so small in England (and Italy)? It couldn't be that European Catholics are selective about which parts of the Church's teachings they follow could it? If only Catholics in the third world had the same selective freedom! Tom Wright, C of E Bishop of Durham, says that "utopian secularism ... believes that we have the right to kill unborn children and surplus old people..." Cormac and Tom are being rather wayward with their use of language - perhaps they need to sit down with a nice cup of tea and a biscuit. Some information about us for religious readers

An excellent rant!

• We are a peaceful lot - no one has ever gone to war in the name of "atheism" (They would have a job since there is no such ideology as "atheism" - atheists don't need a god but they don't share a common ideology!)

  The emotive "Stalin was an atheist and look what he did." is as silly as saying "Hitler was a Catholic and look what he did after 2,000 years of violent Christian anti-semitism." Totalitarians are not motivated by their religious beliefs/non-beliefs - though they may find them useful when persuading people to follow them. (Note: Stalin was the son of an abusive father and was trained in a Russian Orthodox seminary which may be where he derived his hatred for organised religion.)

• We don't go round killing "babies" - we can quote hundreds of religion-inspired wars throughout history where entire cities and populations: men, women and children, were wiped out in the name of a god. Christianity has by far the highest historical body count, followed by Islam - the others trail a long way behind.

  We try our best to use words carefully - a "baby" is born, a "foetus" is in the womb. To us life begins with the brain activity that creates consciousness - and we are happy to accept abortion up the point where a neonate has an excellent chance of a long and healthy life outside the womb.

  Note: we do not "support" abortion - no-one "supports" or advocates abortion. Millions of women find themselves with an unplanned and unwanted pregnancy (for many reasons - we are not judgmental - glass houses and all that) and they have a right to decide for themselves whether they wish to continue with it or terminate it. Women do not take abortion lightly - a decision to terminate is not a trivial one - so we support their absolute right to choose for themselves.

• We do not go round killing old people - some of us are quite old ourselves! Again, we can quote hundreds of examples of the old being slaughtered in the name of religion. (See, we can also use emotive language!)

  We believe that everyone has the right to a dignified death. Everyone should have the choice of ending their own life if they consider that their pain and suffering is just too great to carry on.

• We are not out to end religion. A secular society is the only one that guarantees freedom of belief to the religious and the non-religious. It is the opposite of a religious state which guarantees oppression in the name of writings in religious books.

  We don't hate gods - you can't hate something that does not exist! We don't hate religious people. In fact, we don't "hate" anything or anyone. We judge people by what they do not by what they say and if people do bad things in the name of religion we condemn them for it. History shows that a lot of bad things have been done in the name of religion - and they continue to be done - count the bodies!

  We happen to think that religion is superstitious nonsense - but we fully understand that it provides the support and comfort needed by some people - and we would not dream of trying to take that away from them.

  We understand that some religious people feel threatened by what they see as "the relentless march of secularism". Perhaps they forget that a very large proportion of religious people are secularists - they believe that religions can stand on their own feet without the protection and support of the state.

• We treat people as equals - all of them - regardless of their gender, sexuality, age, religion, colour, disability etc. We don't peer into people's bedrooms and tell them how to behave, nor do we discriminate against people, or treat half the world's population as second class citizens, simply because "that's what it says in our holy book."
• We don't have holy books, churches, leaders, scholars, gurus, priest, men-in-frocks or any of the rituals that go with religion - we are each capable of standing on our own two feet and living by our own personal moral code - which we consider to be better than the moral codes claimed by religions. Note: we do believe in absolute morality.
• We do not subscribe to a "do what you like" philosophy of life. We promote a society which has fair and just laws which are open to criticism but which we all subscribe to as long as they do not unfairly limit the freedom of individuals or permit any person or group to cause harm to others.
• We are not responsible for global warming, we are not the cause of consumerist greed and social disorder. Hymn-singing Christian Margaret ("greed is good", "there is not such thing as society") Thatcher must carry a large part of the blame on that one. The Catholic Church (with a few honourable liberation-theologian exceptions) has a long and consistent history of supporting the forces of repression against the people of many third world countries. The USA has always been able to rely on Catholic support for consumerist capitalism and support for American corporations controlling the natural resources of the third world.
• We did not start illegal wars against Afghanistan or Iraq - Catholic Blair and Christian-fundamentalist Bush did that in opposition to Muslim-fundamentalist Osama ("hang all gays") Bin Laden.

A definition and a question

Definition:: "Bigot: one who holds a point of view irrespective of reason and without investigating evidence of its truth or falsehood."

Question: "do religious people investigate different religions before making their choice of which one to follow, or do they grab the first one that comes their way - via family, peer group and community?"

Unfortunately the answer is the latter. Most religious people do not even understand the background controversies of their own religion, let alone investigate the beliefs of others. For example, how many Christians have explored the evidence, or lack of it, for the historical existence of Jesus? How many Muslims have explored the conflicting nature and interpretations of many of the hadiths?

We are not saying that all religious people are bigots - some of them have investigated other religions before making their choice.

It is interesting to hear a Christian Vicar say quite openly: "I am an atheist when it comes to Islam - I simply do not believe in the Islamic god." or an Immam say that "Christians are wrong and they will go to hell." (Note: we have never met a C of E vicar who does not admit to having doubts - we have never met an Immam who admits to any doubts.)

If we had a pound for every time we hear: "you do not need to investigate further when you have the truth" we would be millionaires! There is a certain cocky arrogance about the religious when they get like this - it must be the bigotry that does it.

It is not surprising that most "inter-faith dialogue" consists of cosy chats over tea and biscuits rather than discussions of theological differences.

Have we investigated religions? You bet! The average active non-believer is a great reader - our bookshelves groan under the weight of religious books and histories of what has been done in the name of religion! Of course we investigate - after all, we are fascinated as to why some people feel a need for a god and religion while we have no such need.

The facts in England and Wales

References

1. Social Trends, 2008

2. Harris and ICM polls, December, 2006
3. "Teenage Religion and Values", 1995

   This is the largest study (13,000) of pupils aged 15-19 and was carried out in 1995 by Reverend Professor Leslie Francis and Reverend Dr William Kay, Trinity College, Carmarthen - a church college of the University of Wales.

   In response to the statement "I believe in a god" Francis and Kay labelled those who disgreed as atheists and those who were not certain as agnostics. Hence 61% of the 13,000 were either atheists or agnostics - non-believers in a god.

   Approximately the same number of pupils believe in horoscopes and ghosts as in a god.

   Please click here for reasons why young people reject religion.

From pages 137 and 152 of the Francis and Kay study

Thoughts for the day

The real question is not "is there a god?" but "why do some people need a god and religion while others don't?"

• Click here for "Women's rights crushed in new theocracy of Iraq."
• Click here for "The secular state is the only way to guarantee freedom for all."
• Click here for "Religion can be cured."

 

Think carefully about this photograph ... What does the photo on the right tell you about: Prince al-Walid bin Talal al-Saud The house of Saud Saudi Arabia Wahabism Islam Saudi attitudes towards women Hypocrisy Sexism The burqa The Taliban The women who joined the cabin crew

Click for a larger image

Click for a larger image

and this cartoon What does the cartoon on the left tell you about: GAFCON - Global Anglican Future Conference FOCA - Fellowship of Confessing Anglicans The one united church of Christianity The standard religious way of getting rid of people you don't like Homer: "Duhh! Was if 'love' or 'hatred' that Jesus preached?" One god - so many hatreds The sexual insecurity of some Anglican clergy - what is their problem with sex? The failure of Rowan Williams to stand up to mean and small-minded bigots The role of African churches in the future of protestantism Christians vying with Muslims to see who can be the most extreme The general nastiness of "religion" The humanity-hating nature of all this silliness

GAFCON/FOCA has rejected pluralism, the idea that there is more than one right way to live. FOCA says that Christians who support pluralism "claim that all religions offer equal access to God and that Jesus is only a way, not the way, the truth and the life."

By contrast, they point out John 14:6, in which Jesus says "no one comes to the father except through me."

This is scary stuff - if you really believe that salvation can only come by following Christ, then you condemn the vast majority of all people to hell.

This is exactly the sort of thing that makes a mockery of "Inter Faith Dialogue" and "Inter Faith Forums." Here we have Christians saying that "you will all go to hell because you do not believe in Jesus Christ." The interesting thing is that Muslims think the same - if you don't believe in Mohammed you will go to hell. Every time they meet in their "forums" they are each aware that the other is telling them to go to hell - no wonder they stick to tea and biscuits and don't dare discuss theology!

We have a good English word for people like this - hypocrites - or, given their hangups, "sexually insecure hypocrites."

National organisations that we support

National Secular Society

British Humanist Association

Pope promotes social cohesion with attack on the god-free

Ex-Hitler Youth member, Joseph Alois Ratzinger (alias Pope Benedict XVI), has declared that atheism has "led to the greatest forms of cruelty and violations of justice."

Following on in the same tone adopted by Mr Ratzinger, we would point out that there is no such thing as atheism, that 200,000 women have had back-street abortions in Poland since the Catholic Church banned legal abortion, that over 100 women have died from back-street abortions in El Salvador for the same reason, that hundreds of thousands have died of AIDS because of the Catholic ban on contraception and that the Church continues to pay out billions in compensation for the abuse, rape, sodomy and buggery carried out by "celibate" Catholic priests.

We recommend that Joseph studies some history and comes up with the body count that has resulted from religious ideas. He might also like to explain why the Catholic Church provided escape routes for Nazi war criminals at the end of WWII, why the Church refused to ex-communication Hitler and why 2,000 years of anti-semitism promoted by the Christian church culminated in the murder of over 6 million Jews in Nazi Germany. ("Double Cross" by David Ranan)

The importance of words

Religious words are full of glib, value-laden assumptions - we need to make it crystal clear what they really mean. See the Glossary page for definitions.

Our use of key words:

• Not "god" but "a god", "your god", "their god" etc. There are over 800 different gods to choose from.
• Not "he" when referring to a god but "she". If challenged, ask "does your god have a penis?"

  The religious claim that "he" is neutral - a neutrality that has led to the oppression of women by male-dominated religions. Time to redress the balance.

• Not "religion" but "a religion", "your religion", "their religion" etc. There are over 100 different religions and sects in the world today.
• Not "faith" but "need". A god and a religion meet the personal psychological and social needs of some people.
• Not "faith school" but "segregated religious schools" - as in "the new apartheid of segregated religious schools".
• Not "atheist", "agnostic" or "non-believer" but "god-free" - this expresses a positive thing - freedom from the mental shackles of religion.

An Arab view of religion

And now for something completely different ...

Perhaps we should learn from religious extremists ...
Note for the intellectually challenged - this is an example of irony!