Dutch Christian schools can refuse gay teachers

Christian schools are within their rights to refuse to employ gay teachers if homosexuality breaks school principles, the Nederlands Dagblad reports on Tuesday, quoting the government’s Council of State advisory body.

The paper says that confidential recommendations from council state that while anti-discrimination measures remain paramount, religious and other belief-based institutions ‘can impose specific demands under strict conditions’.

These conditions have to be ‘desirable, legitimate and just’ and show ‘good faith and loyalty’ to the religious principles, the council says.

The Netherlands has dozens of fundamentalist Christian schools which oppose homosexuality on Biblical principles. While funded by the government, they are run independently. Such schools may not discriminate but are free under European rules to determine their own ‘professional demands’ for teachers, the paper says.

Last month a strict Protestant primary school in Gelderland suspended a teacher because he was gay and lived with another man. That case is being taken to the equal opportunities commission.

Should ‘alternative medicine’ be taught in universities?

The use of complementary therapies on the NHS will be explored in a More 4 documentary, which will reveal that £12m has been spent on homeopathy over the last three years.

Why does it matter? Homeopathy – where patients are treated with a diluted dose of the substance that caused their original symptoms – has been widely discredited as little more than “sugar pills” by scientists.

After a six-year campaign by Professor David Colquhoun at University College London, the last BSc in homeopathy was suspended by Westminster University in March after it failed to recruit enough students. Five homeopathy degrees have been scrapped since 2007.

But there are still plenty of complementary and alternative medicine (Cam) courses available in universities, and the NHS continues to offer a variety of therapies, including homeopathy, despite a lack of research evidence to show their effectiveness.

The Liberal Democrat science spokesman, Dr Evan Harris, says the NHS is wrong to spend money on unproven treatments and effectively to give them a “stamp of approval” by doing so.

But Dr Peter Fisher, of the Royal London Homeopathic hospital, argues that there is strong evidence that patients benefit in the long term.

What do you think? Should universities be allowed to run such courses, or the NHS to provide patients with these alternative therapies?

Militant Atheist cleaners could sue Christian care homes over crucifixes

Church care homes could be forced to remove crucifixes from their walls in case they offend “atheist cleaners” under the new Equality Bill, Catholic bishops have warned.

The way the bill is written means non-Christians could sue for harassment if church authorities do not remove religious imagery, according to Monsignor Andrew Summersgill, general secretary of the Bishops’ Conference of England and Wales.

He said the bill, currently being examined by Parliament’s Equality Bill Committee, could have a “chilling effect” on religious expression.

Under the terms of the bill, harassment is defined as “unwanted conduct with the purpose or effect of violating a person’s dignity, or of creating an intimidating, hostile, degrading or offensive environment”.

Bishops are concerned that religious authorities could be left in an impossible legal position, because under the bill it would be up to the employer to prove that displaying such an image did not amount to harassment or an employee.

In a written statement to the committee, Mgr Summersgill said: “A cleaner may be an atheist or of very different religious beliefs. Nonetheless if a cleaner found the crucifixes offensive there would be no defence in law against a charge of harassment.”

He added: “If this bill is serious about equality, everything possible must be done to avoid it having a chilling effect on religious expression and practice.”

The bishops are also worried that they Equality Bill will establish what they believe would amount to a “hierarchy of rights”, with the rights of homosexuals overruling those of religious expression.

BNP poll win brings cash and staff – and legal challenges over racism

The BNP will inevitably face a series of legal challenges on issues ranging from discrimination and employment law to possible criminal offences, lawyers say, following two candidates’ election to the European parliament.

The party’s constitution, which says membership is “strictly defined within the terms of … ‘indigenous Caucasian’ and defined ethnic groups emanating from that Race” is a breach of the law against discriminating in membership organisations, according to legal experts.

“An unincorporated association like the BNP which has genuine screening for membership cannot unlawfully discriminate,” said Gavin Millar QC, who specialises in election and discrimination law. “There will inevitably now be legal challenges to this.

“It was presumed before that the BNP were so unimportant that it wasn’t worth trying, but now this is a live issue, and the BNP’s constitution must be challenged.”

Possible challenges to the constitution could make use of a Lords ruling which found that political parties could be regarded as “members’ clubs” and therefore fell within discrimination law.

Lawyers also said that as the BNP gets access to the European parliament, with a budget for employing staff and contracting services, it would also be open to employment law, which prohibits direct and indirect discrimination.

“A black or Jewish candidate who applied and didn’t get the job on grounds of their racial or religious background would have a claim in the employment tribunal,” Millar said.

“If an individual challenges and they maintain a practice not employing any visible minority people, there is no doubt that like any employer who has such practices, they can be sued,” said employment barrister and chair of the Society of Black Lawyers, Peter Herbert. “When they are in receipt of public funds they will have to be an equal opportunities employer. To do otherwise would be incompatible with public office.

“I can see the equality commission mounting an inquiry into how the BNP operate now. The office of public standards could also inquire.”

The questions came as BNP leader Nick Griffin was pelted with eggs at an event in Manchester. Griffin picked up a seat in the north-west of England and Andrew Brons won a seat in Yorkshire and the Humber, a breakthrough in national elections for the far-right party.

Labour MEP for London Claude Moraes, speaking at a Unite Against Fascism press conference in Westminster, said: “There is real damage here to Britain because we have never elected fascists in a national election. Fascists in the European parliament have long wanted members from Britain to join this transnational group.

“There was a long period in which we could have said neofascists would not be elected in Britain to represent us in an international parliament.”

In addition to the BNP’s membership and employment practices, lawyers said that policies once supported by the BNP but now abandoned by its official representatives – including non-voluntary repatriation and forced sterilisation of non-white women – may attract criminal liability for some BNP activists.

Said Millar: “One of the stresses for Nick Griffin is constantly having to say to the membership that this is no longer a policy they can espouse in public. It is a constant source of tension within the party.”

Criminal lawyers said there was no doubt that members who espoused those policies could be liable for charges of inciting racial or religious hatred. “Any policy which incites racial hatred will be liable,” Herbert said. “Twelve years after Stephen Lawrence this is a sad place to be.”

A number of BNP members already have criminal convictions for race-related offences, including Griffin, who was given a two-year suspended sentence for incitement to racial hatred after publishing material denying the Holocaust in 1998.

Although in 2006 Griffin and party activist Mark Collett were cleared of race hate charges relating to speeches he made describing Islam as a “wicked, vicious faith”, Griffin last month told BNP members in an online broadcast that he had no problem with breaking race laws.

“As you know, we don’t break the law. We never have, we never will, you know, on financial things. Don’t mind breaking the odd race law, or being accused of it, you know, inadvertently,” he said.

But lawyers said criminal convictions were difficult to obtain in practice, with an average of only three successful prosecutions per year for inciting racial hatred.

“[BNP activity] will only be criminal if … the material is threatening, abusive or insulting, and also it must be intended to stir up racial hatred,” said Kirsty Brimelow, a barrister who specialises in racial and religious hate crimes. “If BNP leaflets contain extreme racism, there will be a case that they are trying to undermine public order and the rights of the targeted minority – [so] they would not be able to rely on their right to free speech.”

Nick Griffin’s suspended prison sentence for inciting racial hatred

Nick Griffin’s suspended prison sentence for inciting racial hatred would prevent him from standing as a councillor, but not as a Westminster or MEP, under electoral laws.

The Electoral Commission admitted that the only bar to standing in a UK parliamentary seat would be if someone were currently serving a sentence of 12 months or longer. Similarly, people are allowed to stand in European seats under UK electoral law whatever crimes they have committed, provided they have not served a 12-month prison sentence. The bar is, however, set substantially higher at local elections. Anyone who has had a prison sentence of three months or more, for however trivial a crime, in the previous five years is banned from standing as a councillor.

Mr Griffin, the leader of the BNP, was found guilty , in April 1998 of distributing material likely to incite racial hatred and handed a nine-month jail sentence, suspended for two years.

In 1984, Andrew Brons, the winner of the party’s other European seat, was found guilty of behaviour likely to cause a breach of the peace after his arrest in Leeds while selling papers. He was fined £50 after being heard shouting “death to Jews” and “white power”. Members of other parties, including UKIP, have also gone on to represent voters after being convicted.

Ashley Mote, 73, who represented South East England as an independent, was found guilty of falsely claiming benefits of more than £65,000 and given a nine-month jail term in 2007. The former UKIP representantive has since been given permission to appeal against his conviction. He was elected for UKIP in 2004 but was thrown out by the party when it learnt of his prosecution. He stayed on as an independent MEP but did not seek re-election this year.

Is fascism on the march again?

Does the election of two BNP MEPs and the success of the far right elsewhere in Europe mean we are facing the threat of fascism? Or is this just a protest vote that will quickly fade?

Michael Burleigh

Author of The Third Reich, A New History

We should be wary about the rise of the far right but not panicky. Even though I write commentary pieces for the Daily Mail, I am not given to hysteria. I don’t like all these stupid historical analogies – this is not a re-run of the 1930s. In some ways, history can box you in and limit your options. We live in a very different world, and these parties organise themselves in a very different way. Hitler didn’t Twitter.

Conditions in Europe are very different now from those that prevailed in the 1930s. We haven’t had a catastrophic European war, with resentments about how that ended. We should also be cautious about saying that an economic recession inevitably leads to the rise of the far right. The fascists came to power in Italy long before the Depression. There is no automatic link. In Germany, most of the unemployed voted for the communists.

It is too early to say whether the rightwing parties that did well in the European election will have any historical significance, or whether they will offer a Europe-wide threat to mainstream politics. Although I suspect they may be better co-ordinated than leftwing parties, they are all subtly different. We should also be aware that rightwing parties can evolve. It is odd that the evolution of communist parties into Eurocommunist parties was recognised, but these rightwing parties are seen as mysteriously static and rooted in the 1930s. You just have to look at the BNP to see how it is trying to adapt its approach to changed circumstances, ramping up its hostility to the EU while playing down other aspects of its policy.

The left has a vested interest in playing up the threat of fascism. It uses it to reoxygenate itself: Margaret Hodge has been doing this for years, and Labour was doing it again before this election. A better approach is to take the BNP seriously. Don’t turn them into martyrs by banning them from the airwaves. Ask them about their other policies: how they would get us out of recession; what their foreign policy is. Launch an assault on the BNP brand, and don’t let them appropriate symbols of Britishness – such as the Spitfire they were using on their posters in this election.

We shouldn’t panic about these results. The real story is that the centre-right has done very well across Europe. Where far-right parties have been elected in the past they have tended to be woefully incompetent and lackadaisical, and on the whole they haven’t been re-elected. Supporters of the BNP tend to be disaffected Labour voters who are voting as an act of defiance against the political elite – and the elite has given them plenty to be defiant about. I’d only start to worry if this became a trend. The real danger, though, may come in the Baltic states and eastern Europe. Countries there have been hit by severe economic turbulence, they have little experience of democracy and politics is volatile. Parties can come from nowhere and win power.

Richard Overy

Professor of history at Exeter University and author of The Morbid Age: Britain Between the Wars

The BNP have been around for a long time and have never managed to make a serious breakthrough, so we have to get this into perspective. This should be seen as a protest vote at a difficult moment; it does not mean that the UK electorate is swinging in favour of fascism.

The Ukip vote is more interesting. That is a vote the BNP might have been expected to pick up, and if it had won 20% or more, that would have been worrying. With the loss of public confidence in parliament, growing nationalism and alarm at terrorism, this is a moment when you might have expected votes to flow to the BNP. A loss of confidence in parliamentary institutions is characteristic of all periods when fascists have come to power – in Italy and Germany, for example – but on this occasion the BNP has not done especially well. People have preferred to vote for Ukip. It is essentially a protest vote at a moment of crisis in the political system. Parliamentary politics will eventually be restored, but almost certainly not under Gordon Brown.

I am more worried about the drift to the right in the rest of Europe, where the mood is fearful, anti-immigrant, anti-Islam and deeply hostile to the left. Europe clearly feels embattled because of factors such as terrorism and the rise of China, and has been moving to the right for some time. But we shouldn’t interpret this rightwing drift as a return to fascism.

Fascism with a capital F was a phenomenon of the 20s and 30s. It was a revolutionary movement asserting a violent imperialism and promising a new social order. There is nothing like that now. Far-right parties now are based on fear – fear of immigration, fear of aliens, fear of being Europeanised. They have no vision of a new social order, nor can they legally campaign for the replacement of a democratic government by an authoritarian regime. This is a protest vote by fearful people.

Kathleen Burk

Professor of modern and contemporary history at University College London

If we think about Oswald Mosley’s Blackshirts, we shouldn’t be too apprehensive about where the BNP might go in the future. Even at their height, the entire membership of the British Union of Fascists could barely raise a single marching column. It is unfortunate that the BNP have won seats and some will see it as alarming, but I can’t see it spreading all over the country. The BNP did badly in east London, for instance, where they would surely have hoped to do well, especially at a time of economic recession.

I cannot imagine what cataclysm would have to happen for a far-right party not only to be able to grow but to win power in the UK. This is an extremely old country with old mores, and the great rump of the people are not going to be attracted by a far-right party. What we have seen is the sort of protest vote that often happens midterm, and it won’t occur at the general election, when real power is at stake.

The only countries in Europe that I would be apprehensive about are Austria, which did, after all, welcome the Nazis back in 1938; Romania, which has a nasty rightwing party; and Hungary, where the Roma are a big issue. Poland is encouraging in the way it has taken to membership of the European Union, and the election there has been won by a mainstream centre-right party. In general, this is not at all like the 30s: some voters are supporting alternative fringe parties, but I would be astonished if they were able to consolidate their power.

Eric Hobsbawm

Author of The Age of Extremes: The Short Twentieth Century (1914-1991), among others

It is not the threat from the extreme right that is the most striking characteristic of these elections, though clearly there is a shift to the right, and centre-right governments are likely to make more concessions to the far right. The real story is the crisis of the left .

We have been here before, in the 1930s when the net effect of the Depression was to strengthen the right and nullify the left – Labour was reduced to 50 MPs in 1931. The left rose again, but I am not optimistic about it being able to do so this time. Social democratic parties across Europe are in decline. That decline is not as dramatic as the communists a generation ago, but it is still marked. The European left relied on a working class that no longer exists in its old form, and in order to recover it will need to find a new constituency. That may be hard.

The left is in trouble everywhere: Labour in the UK, the French socialists, the Italian democrats. The Spanish socialists, one of the few leftwing parties to gain in recent years, have also slipped. The SPD in Germany are not doing as badly as expected, but they are down to around 20%, and these losses are not compensated by the votes for the New Left party. We have seen the demoralisation of the French left and a degree of disintegration of the left in Germany. Social democrats will need a new vision as well as a new constituency.

Joanna Bourke

Professor of history at Birkbeck College, London

We shouldn’t panic, though nor should we be complacent. The levels of racial hatred and antisemitism and all those things that the far right feed on are remarkably small in comparison with the past and in comparison with the rest of Europe and the United States. The far right has much more purchase in the US than it does in the UK, especially the religious right.

Here I tend to be much more optimistic about British institutions and about the ways they have managed these sorts of hatreds. What was interesting about Mosley in the 1930s is that our institutions did not give legitimacy to the claims of the far right. They didn’t make them into scapegoats or martyrs; they responded with the force of law in a fairly reasonable fashion. If you oppress them or deal with them heavyhandedly, it only serves to unite them and justify them using force in return.

In Italy, the fascists, faced by an oppressive state, were seen as martyrs, and that won them popular support. In the UK, they were seen as thugs and marginalised. Mosley’s New Party, which sought to work through the democratic system, attracted a large membership, but once he openly became a fascist and his party became virulently antisemitic and anti-immigrant, that support melted away. Don’t censor or oppress the BNP. Marginalise and ridicule them. Ridicule is an underestimated weapon.

David Kynaston

Research fellow at Kingston University and author of Austerity Britain

As Nadezhda Mandelstam, wife of Russian poet Osip Mandelstam, said of Stalinism in her book Hope Against Hope, “Don’t think it can’t happen to you.” There are definite parallels between Germany in the prewar years and now, most obviously the economic crisis that sparked mass unemployment. The Wall Street Crash took place in 1929 but it wasn’t until January 1933 that Hitler became chancellor of Germany; I would suggest that we are a long way from seeing the worst of our own economic crisis and if we date the start as being September 2008 then we still have a while to go in which the far right could gain a stronghold.

More worryingly, the recession has been accompanied by a rise in populism and a loss of faith in democratic politics; the sort of people who, a generation ago, did not used to be cynical about politics now are. Worse still, people are not just indifferent to politics, they are ignorant about it: the level of hostility to intellectualism in this country is deeply depressing.

The BNP is a different animal to Ukip. Ukip can at least make a defensible democratic case for itself; we were promised a referendum on Europe and we haven’t been given one – almost certainly because it would be lost. There is something far more sinister about the BNP because it is an overtly racist party. This is a problem because liberal democracies are not good at dealing with extremism.

Somehow we need to find a way of exposing the BNP, while stopping it from manipulating the system to its advantage. It would help here if politicians from the main parties were more honest and treated the electorate like adults. It is clear from the budget forecasts that the country is basically bust, yet the Labour party carries on its “yah boo” politics of claiming it is not going to cut any public services while the Conservatives have fudged the whole issue on what they intend to do. Both stances are patronising and unsustainable. The public knows the country is bust and there are hard choices to make: it’s time the main parties allowed us to join in a grown-up debate about them.

Norman Davies

Supernumerary fellow at Wolfson College, Oxford, and fellow of the British Academy

Any comparisons with 1920s Germany are completely overstated. Fascism grew out of the crushing military defeat in which millions of Germans were killed and the moral humiliation of the Treaty of Versailles which held that Germany alone was responsible for the first world war. This was tantamount to saying that German families, who had done exactly the same as the British and Americans in sending their conscripted sons to fight, had killed their own children and was the catalyst for anti-Jewish conspiracy theories and the emergence of a far-right nationalist movement. Economic depression on its own would not have allowed fascism to flourish.

That does not mean we should be relaxed about the rise of the BNP. While Ukip thrives on the notion that the EU is the new Third Reich, the BNP is much more Anglo-centric; it wants to reclaim an imagined Albion dominated by white nationals. It is a party that is actually misnamed, for its essence is the English National party and, with the collapse of the Labour vote in Scotland giving the SNP an overwhelming majority, the break-up of the United Kingdom must be a possibility.

The BNP also has more natural allies among the far right in Europe – the Dutch Freedom party and the French National Front in particular – than Ukip. However, it is worth remembering that the one thing on which you can rely is that far-right parties will fall out with each other, so they are unlikely to form a mass European movement.

What we do need to be concerned about is David Cameron’s current flirtation with the Polish rightwing Law and Justice party, led by Jaroslaw and Lech Kaczynski. Up until now the British media has been giving the Kaczynski brothers far too easy a time. The brothers, totally lacking in ideology, are falling over themselves with joy at being courted by the Conservatives. They are manipulative politicians with no scruples. In the past they have boycotted state TV, restricting their appearances to Radju Marija – the station belonging to an extreme Catholic nationalist group – and have repeatedly tried to smear centrist politicians and have even claimed that Lech Walesa was a Soviet agent. It’s too simplistic to call them merely far-right – homophobia and anti-Semitism aren’t nearly as much of a problem in Poland as is often claimed – but they do hold the communist-era assumption that Germany is plotting to take over Poland again. Fundamentally, they are anti-liberal and determined to do down democracy. Cameron will definitely come off badly if he gets too close to them.

David Stevenson

Professor of international history at the LSE; author of The Penguin History of the First World war

The election of two BNP MEPs is a very depressing development. But in some ways the surprising thing is that their support hasn’t gone up more. The recession, the influx of immigration and the fact that all the mainstream parties are tarred with the same brush in the expenses scandal should work in their favour.

The parallel I would make is not with the rise of fascism in the 1930s but with the success of Jean-Marie Le Pen in France in the 1980s. He made his breakthrough in areas where the French communist party had been strong. As the communists collapsed, Le Pen’s Front National came in and took over. Now, in the UK, a portion of the vote that traditionally went to the Labour party has gone to the BNP. When Nick Griffin talks about the country being full and immigrants taking British jobs, he strikes a chord.

The BNP is different in style and structure from fascism in the 1930s. Clad in uniforms, fascists then organised themselves in paramilitary groups; they marched and engaged in street fighting. Far-right parties still have their bully boys, but there are fewer of them, though the danger is that they will multiply.

Even more worrying, though, is what will happen in other parts of Europe. The far right did badly in France and Germany, but areas of concern are Hungary and the Baltic states. Then there is the whole question of Italy. Berlusconi has strengthened his support and is a threat to civil liberties. He controls the media, and the left are weak and powerless against him. He is not far-right in the sense that Hitler was far-right, but he is a threat to democracy. Italy has become a western-European equivalent of the sort of guided democracy you get in Russia.

There are many worrying developments across Europe, and a number of different phenomena we need to be aware of. It is wrong to expect that an economic depression will help the left. It didn’t in the 1930s, nor in the 1870s and 80s, when the radical, populist right was born. It seems that in periods of economic uncertainty, people look to authoritarianism rather than democracy.

Abused while in care of Church

Andersonstown News Monday 26th of May 2009

Ciarán Barnes

A West Belfast community worker who was sexually abused whilst in care has accused the Catholic Church of protecting paedophiles.

John Leathem was beaten regularly by nuns while growing up as a child in the Nazareth Lodge orphanage on the Ormeau Road.

On his 13th birthday John was moved to the De Lalle Salle boys’ home in Kircubbin, Co Down.

For the next four years he was molested by older boys, until he left the institution aged 17.

He claims Brothers, some of whom were raping the teenagers, turned a blind eye to the abuse.

Last week the Ryan report into abuse at Christian Brother-run institutions in the South revealed sex attacks were “endemic”, that thousands suffered, and Church leaders knew what was going on. John says exactly the same thing was taking place at Catholic Church-run institutions in the North and has called for an inquiry, similar to the Ryan investigation, to probe the catalogue of abuse here.

JOHN  Leathem was born on June 12, 1957. A week later he was abandoned by his mother.

With no family to care for him, he was sent to St Joseph’s Orphanage for babies at Nazareth Lodge.

The sprawling complex, then at the junction of the Ormeau Road and Ravenhill Road, had been taken over by the Catholic Church in the mid-1950s. Run by nuns, it looked after orphaned children up to the age of 12.

John has little memory of the St Joseph’s baby unit. However, his recollections of being moved to the children’s section of the orphanage are  vivid – and the stuff of nightmares.

On his fifth birthday John became a ‘child’ and moved away from the ‘babies’ and into the main building at Nazareth Lodge.

That was to be his home for the next seven years – a living hell where beatings, humiliations and abuse at the hands of nuns was widespread.

“My earliest memory is being woken up as a five-year-old and having to get down on my knees and wax the floor,” recalled John. “We would use orange wax, I’ll never forget the colour. I would wax while another boy with two rags on his feet would come after me and rub the floor.

“You had to have the floor waxed before you got washed or had your breakfast.

“I remember at Christmas local businesses would organise a big party for all us orphans.

“We’d be given toys at the party but as soon as we got back to Nazareth Lodge the nuns would take them away. The toys were then sold in the  New Year bazaar.

“That sounds terrible, but at the time, because we were so young, we never asked any questions.”

The staple meal for orphans at Nazareth Lodge was porridge and water. Occasionally they would be given rare luxury – fried bread.

“We used to steal fried bread from the kitchen, it was a real luxury,” said John.

“That and black bananas from a vegetable and fruit hut at the back of the orphanage. If we were caught stealing the nuns would give us terrible beatings.

“To escape the beatings we used to hide in a hen hut with the hens and chickens – it was the only place you could get away from the abuse.”

John explained how orphans were banned from sleeping on pillows. Nuns ordered the children to remove them from their beds each night.

“I didn’t know what pillows were used for until I left Nazareth Lodge.

“When we went to sleep we had to be entirely under the blanket. If even a lock of our hair showed we would get a crack on the head.

“I remember having a cough and having to not let on by coughing under the blanket. If you were sick you were beaten, that’s just the way it was. It was only when I was taken to the hospital later that I was diagnosed with severe asthma.”

John says children who wet the bed were put into industrial tumble dryers.

“People don’t believe me, but it’s true. The nuns used to beat us with these big serving spoons. One wee lad, he must have been only nine, fell down the stairs after having a bucket of scalding water thrown over him because he answered a nun back.”

Kind-hearted families would come to Nazareth Lodge at the weekends and take the orphans out for a day.

The children loved going out on these trips but dreaded going back to the nuns – knowing that they faced another round of beatings.

“A family took me out to Cookstown one Christmas and they bought me a Ludo set, two packets of Tayto crisps and gave me a £1 note,” said John.

“I was sick while I was with  them and the doctor was called. When I got back to Nazareth Lodge the nuns beat me because the doctor had to be called.

“They broke my glasses and took the pound note from me to pay for the repairs.”

Shortly after his 12th birthday John was moved to De La Salle Boys’ Home at Kircubbin, Co Down.

Unlike Nazareth Lodge beatings were not as common – but sexual abuse was rampant.

“The Brothers knew what was going on and they all turned a blind eye to it. Some were even involved in the abuse, having sex with and molesting the boys,” said John.

“You had charge boys, usually about 15 or 16 years old, who were in charge of the dormitories. They had their own rooms and us younger kids were made to warm their beds for them.

“I remember waking up one time at night and an older boy was molesting me. Another time I was taken into the forest and stripped naked by older boys. I ran screaming back to my dorm.”

John explained how youngsters were beaten with a strap if they reported the abuse to the Brothers.

“They also banned us from watching Top of Pops and Dr Who. But it was better than Nazareth Lodge, even though we were all being molested, because there weren’t as many beatings.

“You have to understand that when you grow up in an environment like that – an orphanage – you don’t know any better.

“We all thought beatings and sexual abuse were what happened everywhere – not just at Nazareth Lodge or at Kircubbin.

“We thought it was a normal part of life so we didn’t complain. Anyway, who would listen to us? We were orphans. We had no-one to go to – we were in there because no one wanted us.”

On his 17th birthday John left the home at Kircubbin and was dropped off by a Christian Brother on the Glen Road.

He was given two options – live with a foster parent in the Lower Falls or stay at a Christian Brothers-run boys’ home on the Falls Road.

“I moved in with my adopted mother, Elizabeth Leathem, who had been visiting me for years while I was in care,” said John.

“I’ve got my life back on track now but it’s been difficult. I’ve self-harmed and tried to kill myself and it can all be traced back to my experiences at Nazareth Lodge and at Kircubbin.

“I know loads of people who were in those places and who have committed suicide as adults.

“Reading the Ryan report into the abuse at Christian Brothers homes in the South has brought the memories flooding back.

“There also needs to be an investigation into what happened at care homes up here.

“Children in the North suffered just as much abuse as those in the South. The Church owes us an apology too.”

Hit those unhappy mediums

The people who visit psychics are vulnerable and unlikely to complain – new consumer legislation is letting them down

William Little

This time last year you’d be forgiven for thinking that mediums and psychics had finally run out of luck. New consumer legislation that replaced the Fraudulent Mediums Act (FMA) was widely interpreted as forcing psychics to put up a disclaimer saying what they did was not scientifically proven. Under the old law, prosecutors had to prove an intent to deceive, but under the new regulations psychics had to prove they did not mislead, hence the disclaimers. The British Humanist Society announced at the time that people would be better protected from psychics preying on the vulnerable. They are not.

Phone calls to trading standards officers around the country by aggrieved mediums at the Spiritualists National Union revealed that some officers didn’t know how to interpret the new law, while many didn’t know that it had changed at all. This confusion is reflected in the official figures. Since the legislation came into force a year ago (regulating all trades, not just mediums), Trading Standards have received more than 872,000 complaints, of which only 240 were about psychics. Now the Department for Business and Regulation, in an email to the Spiritualist Union this year, has openly stated: “It’s not clear why mediums believe there is now a need for disclaimers.”

Now according to legal representation for the Spiritualist Movement, putting up a disclaimer was always discretionary – a matter of psychics showing due diligence that they had made every effort to warn people that it’s just a demonstration, a mere distracting entertainment. As everyone who visits a medium believes in his/her psychic abilities, they will no doubt feel they’ve received what they paid for, disclaimer or no disclaimer.

But the people who visit mediums are vulnerable; they are attached to their beliefs like a comfort blanket in a storm. In that state of mind, would they realise that they should complain? The Office of Fair Trading has a measure of vulnerability that determines not just how harmful fraud is, but to what degree a person’s belief makes them more willing to believe and thus be duped. But complaints that Trading Standards investigate are almost always of financial loss or physical harm rather than psychological damage, which gives little recourse to those harmed by psychics.

So what makes someone vulnerable enough to see and believe in a psychic? To answer that we first have to control our knee-jerk attitude that stigmatises people who visit mediums as ignorant and stupid – that in itself shows a staggering ignorance of the social and personal forces that construct and reinforce someone’s belief. No one would disagree that health inequalities are a complex interaction of social forces that reward the less well-off with shorter lives. Guardian readers wouldn’t shout at a morbidly obese person, “it’s ‘cos you’re stupid”, so neither should we do the same to someone who gets comfort from a medium, rather than a Mars bar. Sure, it might not lead to cancer or heart disease, but the social causes are similar, though the consequences are not as straightforward.

Much of the evidence about psychics and vulnerability is anecdotal, which doesn’t invalidate the experiences, but shows that these individual cases deserve at least a measure of our empathy. So what do we think about the psychic who led on a traumatised mother with a missing child while wasting police time with her psychic hunches? We might loathe her, but what if the mother felt strengthened by her presence? Or what about the businesswoman who lost her husband suddenly to a heart attack and entered a deep depression for two years? Then for the first time in her life she saw a medium who claimed to get in touch with her husband. The depression lifted, she was able to get on with her life and she hasn’t been to see a medium since, although her belief in the afterlife has been strengthened. Are they stupid or just using the most effective tool they can to help them get through life’s traumas?

And why would the mother with a missing child feel that she should report this medium if her belief is so strong that she sees nothing wrong? Should we protect her or dismiss her as ignorant and deluded? Should the police encourage psychics by bowing to families’ wishes to include them in the search, which is current police policy? Who’s the fraud – the police or the medium? Who should trading standards investigate? And is society to blame for not coming up with a list of belief inequalities? Why do people believe, what do they get out of it and are there common forces determining these beliefs? Working class women, disempowered and poor, have been the mainstay of the psychic movement since the first eruption of psychic energy in the mid-1800s. Little has changed. Their belief in magic is an escape route from a deprived background and a call for help in a world that only gives them endless consumer goods and a bad education. It’s the middle class, remember, who can afford their own magic of opportunity and aspiration.

Yet where the new consumer protection should act, it fails. Psychics on premium rate psychic telephone services are forced to keep callers on the line for at least 25 minutes to make the company enough money. Yet Trading Standards have not prosecuted any psychics or companies ripping people off in this way. “It’s a cut-throat business,” one psychic told me. “The ladies who set up these premium-rate phone lines start with the best of intentions, after that they start screaming that we have to do and say anything to keep them on the line.” These premium psychics tell callers that unless they talk through their relationship problems they will be harmed, or that they can see a dark presence in their lives. It sounds ridiculous, but that’s not the point. The point is seeing it from their perspective, which is a lot harder than most people will accept. Only then will we come to realise that just because people don’t realise they have to complain doesn’t mean they don’t have a valid complaint.

Scientology could be driven out of France

The Scientology movement went on trial in Paris yesterday for “organised fraud” in a case which could lead to the cult’s organising bodies being outlawed in France.

The French state prosecution service has failed to back the trial but denies that its decision was influenced by the lobbying of French politicians, including Nicolas Sarkozy before he became President, by leading Scientologists, including the actor Tom Cruise. After an 11-year inquiry, following complaints from four French former Scientologists, an independent, investigating magistrate decided that the prosecution should go ahead.

Two female plaintiffs allege that, between 1997 and 1999, the French movement persuaded them to pay the equivalent of €20,000 each on drugs, vitamins, counselling, saunas and equipment to improve their mental and physical health. This included an “electrometer” to measure the state of their “spiritual condition”.

The movement is accused of pretending to “identify and resolve alleged psychological difficulties” and “promoting the personal flowering” of its adepts with the “sole aim of seizing their resources” and “establishing psychological control over them”.

Although individual Scientologists, including the cult’s founder, L Ron Hubbard, have previously been convicted in France, this is the first time that the movement itself has been accused in a French court of systematic criminal activity. Seven leading members of the movement in France are also on trial.

Scientology, officially accepted as a religion in the United States, is on trial for “escroquerie en bande organisée” – or organised financial fraud. It is also accused of dispensing drugs illegally to its members. Two of the original plaintiffs have withdrawn their actions.

If convicted after a two or three-week trial, the main French organisations of the movement could be ordered to close down.

The cult’s French spokeswoman, Danièle Gounord, protested yesterday that Scientology was the victim of a “heresy trial” and “mendacious accusations”. Maitre Olivier Morice, lawyer for the two remaining plaintiffs, said the court would have an opportunity “once and for all” to examine the evidence that the leaders of the Church of Scientology are driven by financial gain.

This was the conclusion drawn by the report submitted by the investigating magistrate, Jean-Christophe Hullin, three years ago. He said that Scientology was “first and foremost a commercial organisation” motivated by “an absolute obsession with profit”.

The French state prosecution service rejected Judge Hullin’s conclusions and decided in 2006 that Scientology should not be sent for trial. Whatever outsiders might think, the prosecution service decided, Scientology was motivated by “religious conviction” and not “personal gain“. The actor and Scientologist Tom Cruise had led a lobbying campaign to block the legal action, which is the latest of five against the movement in France since the 1970s. At one point, he sought, and was granted a meeting with M Sarkozy, before he became President. The prosecution service, or parquet, denies any connection between this political lobbying and its decision to recommend an acquittal.

Judge Hullin decided to send the case for trial despite the parquet’s decision. Under French law, the investigating magistrate can, in effect, overrule the state prosecution service but the chances of a successful prosecution are inevitably dimmed.

The defendants, including the Church of Scientology itself, are formally accused of cheating the defendants “by systematic use of personality tests of no scientific value … with the sole aim of selling services and products”.

Scientology was founded in 1952 by a former science fiction writer, L Ron. Hubbard. Although the complete teachings of Scientology are available only to senior adepts, the core of its beliefs is that all humans are immortal beings who have strayed from their true nature. Human souls or “thetans” can be reincarnated. Many have already lived on other planets in the universe.

The movement “audits” the souls of members and would-be members and – in return for fees or donations – prescribes “purification” courses, including vitamins, drugs and lengthy saunas.

Scientology claims that it is a religion, like any other religion with beliefs that may seem implausible to outsiders. Its approach would, the cult argues, lead to a world without crime and war.

Religious orders defy call to pay more into child abuse compensation scheme

The leader of the Catholic Church in Ireland has clashed with the religious orders involved in child abuse over the amount they are willing to contribute towards compensating victims. Eighteen Catholic congregations defied calls from Cardinal Sean Brady to be more generous in their dealings with those who suffered abuse.

Pressure has been building on the Catholic hierarchy to do something about the grossly disproportionate burden that the Irish taxpayer has to shoulder in a controversial compensation or “redress” scheme for thousands of victims. But the religious orders said last night that they would not renegotiate the deal after Cardinal Brady, who is also bishop of Ireland’s largest diocese, asked them to revisit the terms of the compensation.

Last week the conclusions of the nine-year Commission to Inquire into Child Abuse, headed by Mr Justice Sean Ryan, were published, and Dermot Ahern, the Irish Justice Minister, said yesterday that a senior garda officer was examining the report to see whether criminal charges could be laid. The report identifies about 800 abusers, among them nuns, priests and monks, principally members of the Christian Brothers. Only a handful have been prosecuted and convicted.

Pope Benedict XVI will also be briefed on the report.

Under the 2002 compensation deal 18 religious congregations agreed to pay £127 million — most of it in the form of buildings and land — in return for indemnity against further claims against them. The Government agreed to meet the remaining costs, which have since spiralled to about €1.3 billion. (£1.1 billion).

Public anger over the deal has increased. Thousands of people have queued to sign a “solidarity” book at Mansion House, Dublin, with some signatories angrily declaring that the guilty priests, nuns and monks who raped and tortured children in their care for decades should be hunted down “like Nazis”.

Sensing the rapidly growing public mood of anger, senior members of the clergy have been urging the religious orders to do more. Those appeals appeared to have fallen on deaf ears last night, when the congregations issued a statement saying that while they “accepted the gravity” of the Ryan report they would not do what Cardinal Brady and others have urged.

A statement from the orders said: “Rather than reopening the terms of the agreement reached with Government in 2002, we reiterate our commitment to working with those who suffered enormously while in our care. We must find the best and most appropriate ways of directly assisting them.”

The Conference of the Religious in Ireland (Cori), which represents 138 religious congregations and which negotiated the 2002 redress scheme, issued a separate statement last night, saying that it supports the 18 congregations in their efforts to find “the best and most appropriate ways forward”.

“All of us accept with humility that massive mistakes were made and grave injustices were inflicted on very vulnerable children. No excuse can be offered for what has happened,” the Cori statement said.

Earlier in the day Cardinal Brady said of the 2002 deal: “It should be revisited and take into consideration the potential of people to pay and above all the needs of the victims — we have to keep coming back to that.”

Ireland is still reeling from the horrific details contained in Judge Ryan’s report, which includes testimony from victims who were forced to lick excrement from the boots of Christian Brothers.

Clearly masking his disappointment at the refusal of the religious orders to heed his call, Cardinal Brady told RTÉ, the state broadcaster, last night: “Obviously more speaking will have to be done to clarify the reasons behind the agreement and what steps can be taken to revisit that.”

Archbishop Diarmuid Martin went much farther when he issued a thinly veiled warning to the religious orders that they did not seem to appreciate the depth of public anger. “The religious congregations should look now at what has emerged and ask themselves is that the picture that we understood nine years ago?” he said.

“If the thing is much worse than they admitted to at that stage, then they have to look at the consequences. Pointing, telling them what to do, won’t be the answer. They have to, themselves, own up and do some heart searching about the horrors that were there.”

The report that sparked a scandal

• The Commission to Inquire into Child Abuse was established by the Irish Government in May 2000 after a television series revealed cases of abuse in Catholic children’s institutions across the country

• More than 30,000 children deemed to be thieves, truants or from dysfunctional families — a category including those with unmarried mothers — were sent to schools where the abuse took place

• Abuses also took place at 216 other church-run institutions for children — orphanages, hostels, non-residential schools and schools for the disabled

• The commission’s report ran to 2,500 pages and cost €10 million

• It included statements from 2,500 people who claimed to have suffered abuse. The cases dated from 1916 and only a few had a full hearing

• A government panel has paid 12,000 abuse survivors, who surrender the right to sue Church or State, an average of €65,000 each. About 2,000 claims are pending

Sources: Times Archive, The Commission to Inquire into Child Abuse

Briton faces prison in Dubai on adultery charge

A British mother faces a year in prison after she admitted committing adultery in Dubai.

Sally Antia, 43, was arrested as she left a Dubai hotel with a man. Appearing in a court in Dubai on Sunday, she confessed to cheating on her husband and paying to fly her lover from Britain to the United Arab Emirates. The 44-year-old man denied the charge.

The pair had their passports confiscated. Mrs Antia, who had spent three weeks in police custody before the hearing, was denied bail.

It is understood that Mrs Antia’s husband, Vincent, 48, also believed to be British, informed the police of his suspicions this month. Divorce proceedings are under way between the couple.

“[Mrs Antia] is mortified,” The Sun reported a source as saying. “Her husband has wrought the ultimate revenge. She is trying to come to terms with the fact that her life and career could lie in tatters.

“No one here believes she would be able to cope with prison. She has two children and she’s desperately worried about what will happen to them.”

Adultery is illegal in the United Arab Emirates. The maximum punishment is a year in jail followed by deportation. Another British woman, Marnie Pearce, served a three-month prison sentence this year and lost residency rights with her two young sons after her Egyptian former husband accused her of cheating on him while living in Dubai.

Mrs Pearce, 40, originally from Bracknell, Berkshire, has been allowed since her release to stay in the country to try to win back her children.

She said that she had lost more than a stone while she was at al-Awir prison. “Many of the women seemed to have psychological problems and should probably have been in a hospital,” she said. “I kept muttering that I shouldn’t be there.”

She also told The Mail on Sunday that she had not been allowed to speak during a number of court appearances, which were conducted in Arabic, and that a translator had been present only at one hearing.

Mr and Mrs Antia, originally from Liverpool, have been living in Dubai for more than a decade and have been married for 14 years. Mrs Antia is believed to have worked for a corporate entertainment company.

She wrote recently on her page on the networking website Friends Reunited: “Living in Dubai for the last 12 years. Married with two girls now aged 11 and 13. Enjoying the sunshine, but often home to watch a match. Massive Red fan. Happy and healthy … what more can you ask for?”

Mrs Antia was arrested at 2.30am outside the Radisson SAS Deira Creek Hotel. Her detention will prompt criticism from those who reject the UAE’s practice of combining civil and criminal law with Sharia, which is identified in the constitution as the main source of legislation. Social laws, such as family law and succession, all fall under its direct influence.

Tim Hancock, of Amnesty International, who campaigned for the release of Mrs Pearce, said yesterday: “Sally Antia should not be sent to prison. The sex lives of consenting adults simply shouldn’t be a criminal matter. She should be released, immediately and unconditionally.”

A Foreign and Commonwealth Office spokeswoman said: “We can confirm the arrest of two British nationals in Dubai for adultery on May 2. Their cases are going through the courts in Dubai. Next of kin have been informed and we are providing consular assistance.”

The court case has been adjourned until next month.

Church bans gnomes in North Somerset graveyards

GARDEN gnomes have been banned from cemeteries in North Somerset – because church leaders say they do not exist.

Plastic flowers, gnomes and other decorations such as teddy bears, have been deemed inappropriate by the Diocese of Bath and Wells.

The church banned the rosyfaced garden accessories from Wrington and Congresbury cemeteries and will remove any found.

The rule is part of new guidelines issued by the diocese, which regulates churchyards throughout Somerset.

Hollie Richards, 24, has lived in Congresbury her whole life and has two grandparents, an uncle and an aunt buried in St Andrew’s Churchyard. She thinks people should be able to lay down whatever tributes at graves they want.

TIN.adverts.addToArray(’article-detail-impact-tile’, ‘AAMSZ=452×118′);

“People should be free to put what they want around the gravestones as it is down to personal preference,” she said.

“It helps the grieving process as you can surround the grave of the person you love with possessions that were important to them.

“I am lucky I live so near as I can take fresh flowers, but what about the people who live far away?

“They will have to leave knowing the flowers will deteriorate and will look unsightly after a few days.”

The Chancellor of the Diocese, Worshipful Timothy Briden, produced the list of regulations, which also bans items such as fake flowers, teddy bears and plastic containers.

“There is no such thing as a real gnome so why should we have such unnatural creatures in churchyards?” said a diocese spokesman.

“Things such as gnomes and plastic flowers are not permitted because they are aesthetically unattractive and they make it harder to maintain the grounds.

“The historic churchyards are part of Somerset and we want to keep them tidy and safe.

“If people want their loved ones to be buried in one of our churchyards then they have to stick to the rules which are clearly displayed at all churchyards.”

Writer shocked as Christian group forces cancellation of poetry event

A BOOKSHOP was at the centre of a freedom of expression row last night when it cancelled a poetry reading after warnings from a Christian group.

Poet Patrick Jones, brother of Manic Street Preachers bassist Nicky Wire, was due to give a reading from his new book, Darkness is Where The Stars Are, at Waterstones in Cardiff at 7pm yesterday.

But shortly before he was due to speak, he received an e-mail from the firm which read: Please be advised that to avoid potential disruption to our store, tonights planned event at Waterstones in Cardiff is cancelled.

Mr Jones, 43, from Blackwood, said he was later told over the phone that Waterstones had received hundreds of complaints from people opposed to the poems subject matter.

Im a bit shaken and shocked, said Mr Jones, a playwright who is credited as one of the earliest influences on the Manic Street Preachers.

A line from one of his poems There is eloquence in screaming appears in the booklet for their first album, Generation Terrorists, and earlier this year, Manics singer James Dean Bradfield scored a new play based on Jones book, Revelation.

Are we living in Iran? Mr Jones said yesterday.

I cant believe its happening. This is a free country.

We should welcome the viewpoints of others but maybe Waterstones feel a bit threatened.

What right do they have to do this? Its frightening.

Im proud of this book. There are poems about the state of society, poems about war.

I also exercise the right to free speech and criticise certain religious practices like female circumcision, George Bushs use of religion, as well as Christians treatment of homosexuality and the treatment of women, especially in Islam and Catholicism.

People have obviously felt threatened about this and activated a religious protest and Waterstones have bowed to it.

Waterstones spokesman John Howells said: We have cancelled the planned event involving Patrick Jones this evening at our Cardiff Hayes branch as we felt it was not appropriate to go ahead in the light of potential disruption.

However, his book remains available at the store.

The Western Mail discovered the group behind the disruption was Christian Voice, the organisation that waged a campaign against the BBC over the screening of Jerry Springer The Opera.

The organisation gained notoriety after convincing cancer charity Maggies Centres to turn down a donation from a gala performance of the opera, and for trying to prosecute BBC director-general Mark Thompson for allowing a televised screening.

The moves led to Christian Voice being described in Parliament as a bunch of fundamentalist thugs.

In 2005, its members also promised to target abortion clinics until the scourge of abortion was driven out of the UK.

Stephen Green, Christian Voices director, lives in Pen-y-Bont, near Carmarthen.

He said yesterday his organisation had not finalised plans for what they would have done had last nights reading gone ahead in the store but said they were prepared to enter Waterstones and disrupt the event.

In the past they have entered buildings en masse to voice their opposition.

“We might have leafleted those going in, or stuck some leaflets in books and engaged people in conversation, said Mr Green, who labelled parts of Mr Jones poetry referring to Jesus and Mary Magdalene as obscene and an insult to Christianity.

“We may have stood up at an appropriate point to explain how harassed we were that this was going on.”

The Monarchy – Constitutionally flawed

A hereditary head of state and a system based on sexism and religious discrimination have no place in 21st-century Britain

Geoffrey Robertson

The government’s plans to update the monarchy are welcome so far as they go, but they do not go very far. Removing the sex and religious discrimination embedded in the British constitution – the 1701 Act of Settlement – is long overdue. But the anomaly remains: why should an important public office, that of head of state, be filled, not on merit or by public election, but exclusively by the descendants of a 17th-century German princess?

Under the British constitution, it is the Act of Settlement which determines upon whom the crown shall descend. It reads today as a blood curdling anti-catholic diatribe, providing that any monarch who holds communion with the Church of Rome or marries a papist shall be unthroned immediately. It creates for the UK a white Anglo-German protestant head of state – descending from the body of the Princess Sophia of Hanover according to the feudal principle of primogeniture, which requires inheritance down the male line. This is in blatant contravention of the Sex Discrimination Act whilst the requirement that the monarch be an Anglican amounts to discrimination on grounds of religion and is contrary to the Human Rights Act. Why would Charles be unfit to be king if he became a Methodist, or a Hindu or Muslim or Rastarfarian? It is wholly unacceptable to have this primitive bigotry embodied in the rules for choosing a head of state. The laws which define and protect the royal family breach at least four articles of the European convention on human rights. They are obsolete and obnoxious.

There are many other laws relating to the royal family, most of which are merely silly (although the monarch’s immunity from any legal action may not be amusing if you are run over by a royal motorcade): I do not really object to the law which vests property in every wild white swan in the realm in the Queen, nor to the fact that every whale, sturgeon or grampus landed in the kingdom belongs to her. Actually, the law states that the heads of what it terms “the royal fish” should belong to the King and their tails to the Queen. On vital matters like these, our constitution is very explicit.

It is much less clear about trifling details such as which party gets to form the government in a hung parliament. But there you go. If you don’t write down your rules, they will be invented or manipulated by those in power at the time. We have an Alice-in-Wonderland constitution which means what the prime minister wants it to mean.

Instead of a written constitution, we have a patchwork quilt of ancient and outdated laws, supplemented by the conventions and traditions made up as we merrily and royally roll along. As a result we have no independent head of state. The monarch now accepts the advice – that’s a euphemism for obeying the directions – of the government of the day. We lack an elected and respected figurehead, whose wisdom and integrity can provide moral leadership and independent political judgment in times of crisis. One inevitable result of choosing a head of state by inheritance rather than election is that in a crisis they may lack the confidence, popularity and independence needed to make any worthwhile contribution to the governance of Britain.

That is a pity, if only because the concept of an independent elected head of state is useful in a modern constitution, as one check on the power of a government which has no other checks and balances, other than a judiciary to keep it straight at the edges and a press to yap at its more obvious blunders. It has no supreme court to pull it up short for violating the guarantees made to its citizens by a bill of rights.

The head of state should be someone who embodies the outlook that most people want to see projected onto the world stage as representative of their nation: a figure available to serve as leader in cases of government crisis or collapse. Good luck apart, the British monarchy will not provide – by sexist, racist or religiously discriminatory descent – the calibre of leadership that can be provided by elections every seven years for head of state.

The head of state is an important public office. Its occupant must be consulted by the prime minister and is required to advise and to warn the government of the day. In an emergency, the head of state’s political savvy and street wisdom might prove crucial: in Trinidad in 1990, for example, the president had to run the country for a week and deal with a crisis when the prime minister and cabinet were held as hostages in parliament by Islamic terrorists. Australians will never forget the historic misjudgement of their governor-general (and de facto head of state) in 1975, when in the name of the Queen he sacked the Whitlam government. What would the Queen do in such circumstances in Britain, or if an election resulted in a deadlock? It is demeaning to democracy to have this office filled by descent from one massively wealthy upper class family, and not by merit (eg a head of state elected by parliament) or preferably, elected by the people. It is also dangerous: no one could seriously expect the Queen herself to handle the sort of emergency that occurred in Trinidad.

Tom Paine pointed out that a hereditary head of state was as ridiculous as a hereditary poet or a hereditary mathematician. He overlooked the entertainment potential in a hereditary royal family – one reason why every tabloid will fight to preserve ours. No government could envisage their abolition, at least in the Queen’s lifetime, although the constitution could be rewritten to give the monarchy only a very small part of it. They could run castles, hold royal garden parties at Buckingham Palace, take overseas trips to maintain Commonwealth ties, and boost the trade in whisky, jam and boot polish that comes “by royal appointment.” The monarchy could, in other words, be stripped of its political status whilst retaining its symbolic position. The head of state would be a president, elected every seven years to advise the government, inspire the people and open (and if necessarily close) the parliament.

If the monarchy is to have a fighting chance of playing a useful part in the governments of 21st century Britain, it will permit itself to be stripped of the Act of Settlement’s sex and religious discrimination, and accept a secular and minimal role as custodians of its own history, a role which should be clearly defined in a written constitution.

Buffy the Vampire Slayer slaying church attendance among women

The report claims more than 50,000 women a year have deserted their congregations over the past two decades because they feel the church is not relevant to their lives.

It says that instead young women are becoming attracted to the pagan religion Wicca, where females play a central role, which has grown in popularity after being featured positively in films, TV shows and books.

The study comes amid ongoing controversy over the role of women in all Christian denominations. Last month its governing body voted to allow women to become bishops for the first time, having admitted them to the priesthood in 1994, but traditionalist bishops have warned that hundreds of clergy and parishes will leave if the move goes ahead as planned.

The report’s author, Dr Kristin Aune, a sociologist at the University of Derby, said: “In short, women are abandoning the church.

“Because of its focus on female empowerment, young women are attracted by Wicca, popularised by the TV series Buffy the Vampire Slayer.

“Young women tend to express egalitarian values and dislike the traditionalism and hierarchies they imagine are integral to the church.

“Women’s ordination, as priests and now bishops, has dominated debate and headlines – but while looking at women in the pulpit we have taken our eyes off the pews, where a shift with more consequences for the church’s survival is underway.”

Her research, published in a new book called Women and Religion in the West, cites an English Church Census which found more than a million women worshippers have left churches since 1989.

Over the past decade, it claims, women have been leaving churches at twice the rate of men. (Women are truly more intelligent)

In addition, the census is said to show that teenage boys now outnumber girls in the pews for the first time.

Dr Aune says the church must adapt to the needs of modern women if it is to stop them leaving in their droves.

She believes many women have been put off going to church in recent years because of the influence of feminism, which challenged the traditional Christian view of women’s roles and raised their aspirations.

Her report claims they feel forced out of the church because of its “silence” about sexual desire and activity, and because of its hostility to single-parent families and unmarried couples which are now a reality for many women.

But it also says changes in women’s working lives, with many more now pursuing careers as well as raising children, mean they have less time to attend church.

Dr Aune believes churches must now introduce services and activities that fit in better with modern’s women’s schedules, such as Saturday morning breakfast clubs.

She said: “Gone are the days when the mother was at home during the day and had time to visit the church’s coffee mornings and mother and toddler groups.

“With the pressures women face, churches must adapt to make themselves more accessible.”

Christina Rees, chairman of the pro-women bishop campaign group Watch, said the report highlighted the damaging effect that traditionalist attitudes within the Church of England are having on women.

She added that the introduction of female bishops will lead to a renewed interest in the church among young people and women in particular, despite the opposition to the historic step from Anglo-Catholics and conservative evangelicals who believe scripture and tradition teach that bishops must be male.

Ms Rees told The Daily Telegraph: “What this research reveals is that a lot of people are put off by traditional stances and attitudes. We still have a long way to go before women, particularly young women, feel as included in the church as men do.

“I’m absolutely convinced that when we have women as bishops that it will send out a very clear message that women are as valued as much as men.”

The Church of England declined to comment.

Priest flees ‘evil’ Portishead

A former Portishead priest says there is evil in the town akin to that which Sam and Frodo battled in Tolkien’s Lord of the Rings.

The Reverend Clive Laws, who resigned from his job as assistant parish priest in April and left the town in July, is urging members of his former flock to pray in an attempt to oust “spiritual forces of wickedness”.

He sent the message to his ex-parishioners in the August edition of the Portishead parish magazine.

The magazine, produced by members of St Nicholas and St Peter’s churches, has a subscription of around 700 and is read by thousands of people across the town.

In his message he refers to the Tolkien classic, Return of the King – part of the Lord of the Rings Trilogy – where characters Sam and Frodo are on their way to Mount Doom to destroy the ring and break the power of Mordor, a place of evil next to the Mountain of Shadows.

He likens the story to activities in Portishead and urges members of the church to continue doing their good work to push away evil forces.

In his message he says: “There is an immense battle going on in Tolkien’s world and it is taking place at different levels.

“I believe that there is an immense battle going on here in Portishead, indeed all through the Gordano Valley.

“I believe that there are spiritual forces of wickedness that are fighting against the coming of Christ’s Kingdom in this place.

“They are intent on breaking and destroying all that is good and lovely and true.”

Rev Laws, a 58-year-old father of three, also urges his parishioners to pray for the ‘overthrowing of darkness.’

In his message he adds: “Keep on praying – please keep on praying.

“Pray for the overthrowing of darkness and for the breaking in of Christ’s just and gentle rule.”

When contacted by the Bristol Evening Post, Rev Laws said the wickedness prevailing in the town was one of the reasons he had chosen to leave Portishead.

Rev Laws cited examples of evilness including the case of Clevedon vicar Revd David Smith who was jailed for five years after being found guilty of sexually abusing young boys over a 30-year period.

He also said drugs and violence, like many towns across the UK, were problems being faced in Portishead.

Rev Law said “We’ve left Portishead earlier than we would have done and the wickedness is one of the factors which made me leave the town.

“We’d been in the town for 12 years and felt that our work here had come to an end.

“This was a message of farewell to the church family and not aimed at anyone individual.

“I want people to be aware that in this world there is a battle and not to lose heart whatever the struggles are and that good will overcome evil.

“This is a message of concern and love for the people that we loved in Portishead to urge them to stand up for what is good, lovely and true.

“Evil only prevails if good people do nothing. (or move away?)

“I want to encourage God’s people in Portishead to stand for and do what is good and lovely and true and to push back evil.”

Rev Laws, who worked at both St Nicholas and St Peter’s Church in Portishead, is now working for the Diocese of Chelmsford as priest in charge of Matching and the Lavers in Chelmsford, Essex.
A spokesman for the Diocese of Bath and Wells, said: “There is always a struggle between good and evil and the Christian church shines as a bright beacon in this world which is often dark.

“Portishead is no different from any other town in this regard. There are a lot of good people in Portishead working to service the community and their neighbours.

“Portishead is a fine town with many fine people and is served faithfully by an active and attractive church.”

Archbishop blames liberals for church rift

Consecration of gay clergy must stop to end Anglican crisis, says Williams

The Archbishop of Canterbury blamed liberal North American churches yesterday for causing turmoil in the Anglican communion by blessing same-sex unions and consecrating gay clergy as he attempted to chart a way out of the crisis that has been engulfing the church.

On the final day of the Lambeth conference, a 10-yearly gathering of the world’s Anglican bishops, Rowan Williams said practices in certain US and Canadian dioceses were threatening the unity of the Anglican communion.

“If North American churches do not accept the need for a moratoria [on same sex blessings and the consecration of gay clergy] we are no further forward. We continue to be in grave peril,” he said.

He was speaking as 670 bishops prepared to leave the University of Kent campus after 18 days of reflection, prayers, conversations and efforts to hold a divided communion together.

Making his third and final presidential address Williams said the “pieces are on the board” to resolve the wrangling over homosexuality. He put forward the idea of a “covenanted future” involving a “global church of interdependent communities”. But even as he was speaking disaffected primates from developing countries expressed regrets about the conference. A statement signed by more than a quarter of the world’s Anglican archbishops said theological voices outside the west had been missing from some key sessions. “We are concerned with the continuing patronising attitude of the west towards the rest of the churches,” they said.

Williams also faced disenchantment at home, with some English bishops questioning the nature of the conference. Michael Scott-Joynt, the bishop of Winchester and the fifth most senior churchman in England, said: “The Lambeth Conference is required to do something rather than live down to the worst expectations of the bishops who stayed away.”

The bishop of Exeter, Michael Langrish, also said there was an “inexorable logic” that there should be one core communion with the more liberal churches at the margins. Conflicting views over homosexuality have pushed liberals and conservatives apart, with 230 boycotting Lambeth and realigning themselves with a breakaway movement, the Global Anglican Future Conference (Gafcon).

Throughout the conference there have been pleas for churches in the US and Canada to refrain from progressive agendas.

One statement earlier in the conference, from the Episcopal Church of Sudan, said the actions of the American and Canadian churches had “seriously harmed the Church” in Africa and elsewhere, opening it up to ridicule.

The African primate Daniel Deng was the first church leader to issue a position statement on homosexuality. He was followed by the presiding bishop of Egypt and Jerusalem, Mouneer Anis, and several primates from south Asia, all voicing their pain at the fractures caused by the issue.

Williams announced that he would convene a meeting with all the Anglican primates, to take place early next year, and that the objectives and composition of the pastoral forum would be unveiled within three months. In addition, he said, the Gafcon bishops absent from Lambeth would be involved in policy shaping.

Jon Bruno, bishop of Los Angles, was clear that calls to stop blessing same-sex relationships would be received with “fear and trepidation” in his diocese. “I can only say that inclusion is a reality,” he said. “For people who think that this is going to lead us to disenfranchise any gay or lesbian person, they are sadly mistaken.”

Susan Russell, president of the US campaign group Integrity, was angry with Williams’ remarks, which she called an “11th-hour sucker punch”. She said: “It sends the wrong message – that gays and lesbians are still strangers at the gate. It’s not going to change anything on the ground.”

The forgotten fat cats

Britain’s royal family is the costliest monarchy in Europe by more than £100m – but it is seldom criticised for its excess

Recessions provoke criticism absent during the good times. Almost everyone tends to be more forgiving in a boom. Gordon Gecko’s “greed is good” 1980s philosophy was recycled by New Labour’s Peter Mandelson in 1997, announcing that the party was “intensely relaxed about people getting very rich” – the early 1990s recession had been forgotten.

Now, as we enter what may be merely the early stages of a more serious downturn, criticism may return with a vengeance.

Discontent is rising over Britain’s “boardroom bonanza” as executive pay soars while employees are expected to show restraint. Even a senior EU official labelled such high pay “a scourge” and in Germany, legislation now penalises companies with excessive pay differentials.

As inequality increases, some top UK executives now earn £10m-25m a year, but shareholders can check such excess if they wish, and there are signs of this happening. MPs have been criticised for profiting at public expense, financing and equipping second homes with taxpayers’ money, and the system now faces reform. However, this pales in comparison with senior business figures, and MPs’ pay falls well short of that of senior local authority executives and civil servants.

But haven’t we forgotten another tiny minority? A small group employed and subsidised at public expense, which owes its privileged public positions only to their birth; the Windsor family. In particular, the Queen and the Prince of Wales, who enjoy financial returns – official state incomes and accompanying benefits – that positively dwarf even those of the most expense-hungry MP.

Yet, curiously, we seem to overlook this privileged elite, often misunderstanding that their riches derive from the public purse. Elsewhere, it is a maxim that that those in public life should not benefit excessively from their positions. Yet the Queen grossed over £12.5m this year (£11.6m last year) from the Duchy of Lancaster. Few will have noticed the financial report published quietly on the Duchy’s site.

In June this year the Prince of Walesreceived over £16m from the Duchy of Cornwall, up £1m from 2007. These returns and other related perks have already generated parliamentary criticism.

Official expenses are met, and their wealth, helped by past tax exemptions, puts the majority of top corporate earners to shame. Many still believe such wealth is somehow necessary for the “honour” and “dignity” of their role.

It isn’t. Take £100m off their annual cost to the taxpayer and we’d still have the costliest monarchy in Europe. Ruritanian language used in connection with the royal family complicates and confuses. Official incomes for the monarch and the heir to the throne – the latter a position with no constitutionally defined role – derive from the Duchies, yet most people would be forgiven for not realising that these giant estates are in reality public properties. The income may be “private”, but that’s all, they are not personal fiefdoms.

As repossessions rise, banks quake and inflation bites, a sense of unfairness arises as it did in the early 1990s. MPs are forced to trim their privileges to retain public support. What of the Windsors? How much longer before their own fat-cat lifestyles face scrutiny?

Girls raped by Catholic priest told to stop ‘dwelling on old wounds’

A father who wants to confront the Pope about the rape of his daughters by a Catholic priest has reacted angrily to claims by a senior Australian bishop that he was dwelling crankily on old wounds.

Anthony Foster, who is flying from Britain to Sydney, is demanding that Benedict XVI and Australia’s senior Catholic, Cardinal George Pell, beg for forgiveness over the repeated rape of his daughters by the priest at a Melbourne primary school between 1988 and 1993.

Mr Foster said that his daughters had been devastated by the attacks. The elder, Emma, committed suicide this year, aged 26. Her younger sister, Katie, who became a heavy drinker, was hit by a car, aged 15, and now needs 24-hour care.

The Pope, who begins his official duties today at World Youth Day celebrations attended by an estimated 225,000 people, has promised to issue an apology this week to young people sexually abused by priests.

But when asked yesterday about an Australian Broadcasting Commission report on the Fosters’ complaints, the Church’s World Youth Day spokesman, Bishop Anthony Fisher, sounded dismissive. He said that he had not seen the report because he had been at the celebrations. “Happily, I think most of Australia was enjoying, delighting in the beauty and goodness of these young people,” he said, “rather than dwelling crankily, as a few people are doing, on old wounds.”

In an interview with an Australian website at Tokyo airport, Mr Foster rejected the comments and said that they showed “a complete lack of understanding of the victims, that there are so many people out there that really do have open wounds”. His wife, Christine, said that she was also deeply hurt: “There are no old wounds for victims. It is always current.”

The bishop’s comments forced Cardinal Pell — who was Archbishop of Melbourne at the time of the attacks — to try to repair the damage by making a public statement in which he said that he had been “very saddened” by Emma’s story.

She had endured “one of the worst things that can happen to a young woman”, he said. Cardinal Pell repeated his earlier apology to the family.

He did not say that he would meet Mr Foster, who insists that he will only accept the pontiff’s planned apology “if the Pope will embrace the notion of begging forgiveness from victims, and supporting them in every way possible and putting the resources of the Church behind that support”.

In his case Mr Foster said that it had taken eight years to win a financial settlement. He said that Cardinal Pell had introduced a system that imposed a A$50,000 (£24,000) cap on compensation. “It wasn’t just,” he said. Others had been offered as little as A$2,000. Emma and Katie’s attacker, Father Kevin O’Donnell, was convicted in 1996 of the abuse of 11 boys and a girl, aged 8 to 14, between 1946 and 1977.

Faith Schools in Wales get a FREE RIDE

CHILDREN should be given free transport to faith schools – but pupils travelling for Welsh-language education should be denied the same service, an Assembly committee decided yesterday.

A cross-party body voted to close a loophole denying those attending faith schools access to free transport, but refused to back similar proposals to strengthen the right to free travel to Welsh-medium schools.

The faith school vote in a cross-party committee was won with the backing of Labour AM Ann Jones, who said it put her in the “dreadful” position of having to choose between her conscience and party policy.

Her decision was applauded by Archbishop of Wales Barry Morgan.

A final vote on the Assembly Government’s plans for school travel is expected in the autumn. It could put the Labour-Plaid Cymru coalition in the uncomfortable position of opposing amendments in support of Welsh-language rights put forward by the Conservatives and the Liberal Democrats.

The amendment securing transport to faith schools was championed by Lib-Dem AM Kirsty Williams and Conservative AM Alun Cairns. They argued free travel should not be left to the discretion of local authorities.

Mr Cairns warned that at a time of tightening local government budgets councils may seek to make cutbacks.

Shortly before the vote, Labour’s Ms Jones said: “I’ve thought long and hard about this one and I think this is a matter of conscience. I’m quite upset that the Government can’t accept this amendment…

“You are right. It is a matter of social justice; it is a matter of equality. And this amendment, and the Government’s stance on this amendment has placed me in a dreadful situation.”

The Archbishop of Wales said: “I am delighted with the decision. It will enshrine in legislation the same privilege to learners in the faith sector without fear of discrimination. It will reassure parents that the Assembly values the contribution of faith communities in Wales to maintain education. I am pleased that Ann Jones recognises it for what it is: a matter of conscience and social justice and not a budgetary option.”

Deputy First Minister Ieuan Wyn Jones had opposed the amendment, saying: “There is actually nothing in the Measure that reduces the powers of local authorities to support transport to schools on the basis of religious preference.”

He added: “If we were to legislate on the basis of an entitlement to have transport provided to a school that provides religious education which accords with the parental wish, we would also have to provide the same entitlement to those who did not want a faith-related education. And the problem is, once you have provided a duty, then the duty must be available to everybody.”

After the vote, Ms Williams said: “He was unable to adequately defend his reasoning and so the vote went against him – it’s as simple as that.” She added: “I am greatly disappointed that the amendment seeking to strengthen the travel provisions to Welsh-medium schools was voted down by the Government.”She said the obligation on local authorities to “promote access” to Welsh-medium education was too vague and did not guarantee safe, free transport.

Mr Cairns added: “We are not playing any more. We are writing laws and if we can’t offer absolute equal access to Welsh-medium parents as we are to English-medium pupils then I think we would have abdicated our responsibilities. The Assembly Government now faces two clear choices. Either they support our demand for those in Welsh- medium education to be given the same rights as those at English medium or faith schools, or they vote to reverse today’s decision on faith schools.”

A Welsh Assembly Government spokesman said: “We will now reflect on this matter before it returns to a debate during a full plenary session. To a greater or lesser extent, councils across Wales do provide such transport and we recently issued guidance encouraging them to continue using their discretion to provide transport to denominational schools.”

Cartoons didn’t insult Muslims, rules Danish court

A Danish appeals court yesterday rejected a suit filed by seven Muslim organisations against newspaper editors who in 2005 first published a dozen controversial cartoons of the Prophet Mohammed.

The appeals court judges ruled that the caricatures, which have since sparked angry and in some cases deadly protests across the Muslim world, did not aim to insult followers of Islam, as the plaintiffs had charged. One of the cartoonists is still in hiding under police protection following death threats. The seven Muslim organisations, all based in Denmark, had accused the Jyllands-Posten daily’s chief editor and culture editor of wilfully offending believers by printing the “offensive and degrading” drawings. Yesterday’s ruling confirmed a verdict handed down in October 2006 by a lower court in the central Danish town of Aarhus, where Jyllands-Posten is based.

Appeals court president Peter Lilholt stressed that the Danish judiciary, in accordance with the European Convention on Human Rights, could not “restrict freedom of expression” unless it clearly affected national or public security.

Church not ready for sexual abuse apology

Cardinal Marc Ouellet said the Roman Catholic Church is not prepared to apologize publicly for sexual abuse committed by priests because it’s not the right time.

The archbishop of Quebec City made the statement Thursday at the International Eucharistic Congress in Quebec City after a small group of people protested outside the gathering, demanding the church acknowledge past abuses toward aboriginal and non-aboriginal peoples.

The week-long congress is not the proper venue for such discussions, Ouellet said at a news conference. “We are in spiritual reflection and renewal. I think that from what we are living, there will be concrete actions afterwards with other people, with other initiatives,” he said.

The group of protestors demanded Ouellet apologize to all aboriginal people abused at residential schools, and other people who suffered abuse from priests.

France Bédard, who was among the protesters, said she feels a moral obligation to speak up for others.

She said she was assaulted by a priest as a young woman and became pregnant, but never saw justice because he died before his trial.

“I have to do something for these poor people who don’t have the capacity” to fight back, because they are lost in a world of alcoholism, drug abuse or self-destructive behaviour, she said in French. The protesters would like to see the church set up a commission to recognize people who have been abused.

Ouellet said the church will be present at the federal Aboriginal Truth and Reconciliation Commission, but any other discussions are inappropriate.

Christianity ‘could die out within a century’

The Telegraph says that Christianity could die out in the UK within a century

More than half of Britons think Christianity is likely to have disappeared from the country within a century, according to a survey.

Research by the Orthodox Jewish organisation Aish found that just over a third of people thought religions like Christianity and Judaism would still be practiced in Britain in 100 years’ time.

Although four in 10 people said they would choose to be a member of the Christian religion, almost the same number said they would rather practice no religion at all.

Buddhism however, proved more attractive than both Islam and Judaism, and was chosen by nine per cent of those questioned.

Aish UK’s executive director Rabbi Naftali Schiff said the results of the YouGov poll of 2,000 people were alarming.

“It clearly demonstrates that religion, including Judaism, is becoming unattractive to the British public.

“At Aish we know that Judaism provides real meaning and enrichment to one’s life. Whilst we have attracted many disinterested Jews back to Jewish identity it is clear there is much work to be done.”

Research published earlier this year suggested that church attendance is declining so fast that the number of regular churchgoers will be fewer than those attending mosques within a generation.

According to Religious Trends, an analysis of religious practice in Britain, the huge drop off in attendance means that the Church of England, Catholicism and other denominations will become financially non-viable.

In contrast, the number of actively religious Muslims is predicted to increase from about one million today to 1.96 million in 2035.

UK Monarchy costs us at least £150M says REPUBLIC

BBC NEWS reports the royals cost us £37M a year

Republic has today challenged Buckingham Palace to come clean on its
finances, due to be reported at the end of this month. For the past few
years the palace has attempted to distract people from the full cost of the
monarchy by talking in terms of ‘pence per person’.

Spokesperson Graham Smith said:

“The palace spin is that the monarchy costs a little over 61p per person.
This is a shameful piece of propaganda – no government department would get
away with justifying waste by dividing the cost by the entire British
population. By that logic MPs salaries and expenses can equally be
justified as costing us just £3 per person per year.”

“The palace will tell us that they cost around £37m a year, but this
ignores security costs, unpaid taxes and costs to local councils for royal
visits. The real figure is at least £150m a year.”

“The big question we need to ask the palace is ‘what’s not included?’
Royal security – much of it unnecessary – is estimated to cost over £100m
a year, royal visits around the UK can cost local councils as much as £60k
a trip.”

“Comparable European presidents cost as little as £1.5m a year.”

NOTES

Full details of our calculations can be found at
http://www.republic.org.uk/royalcosts

A visit to Romsey by the Queen last year cost the Romsey Town Council more
than £58,000, including £5000 spent on a new toilet for the Queen.

Total salary and expenses bill for 646 MPs is £155m a year, compared to
£150m a year for 15 working royals.

The Crown Estates do not offset the cost of the monarchy as the Crown
Estates would remain state property if the monarchy were abolished. It is
not the property of the Windsor family – see
http://www.republic.org.uk/royalcosts for details.

Religion (for entertainment purposes only)

NEW consumer protection laws that came into force last week covering stuff like clairvoyancy and fortune-telling has set the internet buzzing with speculation as to whether religions ought to be covered by the new regulations.

According to a Times report:

Fortune-tellers and astrologists will be bracketed with double-glazing salesman under the new Consumer Protection Regulations. Fortune-tellers will have to tell customers that what they offer is ‘for entertainment only’ and not ‘experimentally proven’. This means that a fortune-teller who sets up a tent at a funfair will have to put up a disclaimer on a board outside.

Similar disclaimers will need to be posted on the websites of faith healers, spiritualists or mediums where appropriate, as well as on invoices and at the top of any printed terms and conditions.

Andy Millmore, a partner at the law firm Harbottle & Lewis in London, is quoted as saying:

What is significant is the sweeping nature of the regulations. They will effectively criminalise actions that might in the past have escaped legal censure, even if they may perhaps have been covered by industry voluntary codes. Personalised services may also come under scrutiny. A tarot pack reader, for instance, cannot just pick one of several templates – it would have to be a proper reading designed for that person.

Claims to secure good fortune, contact the dead or heal through the laying-on of hands are all services that will also have to carry disclaimers, other lawyers say.

Said one:

You could argue that this is no different from promises given by the Church of Eternal Life, which people pay for, in the sense that they feel obliged to give to the collection. It’s no more proven.

The Spiritualist Workers’ Association attacked the changes, saying on its website:

We do not believe we are conducting a scientific experiment. To have to stand up and say so is a denial of our beliefs. It is also sending out a message that we do not believe what we are saying and doing.

Lyn Guest de Swarte, a clairvoyant, said:

It’s like trying to regulate God.

Commenting on the new regulations, Times columnist and atheist Matthew Parris said:

Another example of careless jurisprudence this week: on Monday a new law came into force requiring fortune-tellers, clairvoyants, astrologers and mediums to stipulate explicitly that their services are for ‘entertainment only’.

Well, trades descriptions legislation is anciently established; but in the realms of the spirit, prophecy, invisible worlds, ghosts and human souls, it has generally been felt that the whole thing is too cloudy for law … By deeming in law – for that is what this measure does – that claims about worlds undreamt of in your philosophy, Horatio, are false, Parliament has taken a serious step in principle, even if the measure itself is trivial and most clairvoyants are only jokers anyway.

What, for instance, about the “faith” community? Perhaps it’s there in the legislative small print already. There will have to be an exception in law for ‘religions’. Whereupon clairvoyants will presumably rename themselves spiritualists. And spiritualists will presumably claim the status of a religion. Whereupon lawmakers will stipulate that a ‘religion’ has to centre around a deity. Whereupon Buddhism will cease to be a ‘religion’; and …

Here is a selection of amusing readers’ comments that followed the original Times report:

• Does this mean that placards should be placed at the entrance to all places of worship saying, ‘all who enter here don’t believe all you see and hear.

• I trust that every Bible and other such book will carry an appropriate disclaimer regarding the reliability of its content and promises. And that preachers will similarly preface every sermon with ‘for entertainment only’.

• Coming soon to a church near you….. A huge great ‘not experimentally proven’sign. If you’re going to discriminate against one form of spiritual activity (be it questionable or not) at least discriminate against them all.

• Will this stop religions obtaining money from the Government, particularly in education, on the basis of their predictions of life after death, the claimed existence of God and the validity of their doctrine which they may believe, but cannot prove?

• Does this mean that people who promise salvation or 42 virgins if you do what they tell you can be done under the new regulations ? This looks like a good way to get rid of religions

• We should also get Trading Standards to target religious establishments. After all they too invoke the supernatural and superstition, in order to give their customers some sort of reassurance about the future. Despite holding huge financial assets they also continually ask the public for money.

• The difference is that religion doesn’t charge you for the service they provide, any money they receive is purely voluntary. Astrologers, psychic healers, mediums etc charge you for a service that is claimed to do a lot of things that are scientifically unproven. I agree with the change.

• Religion not charging? Islam makes a big deal about the faithful paying the “religious tax” and even imposes punitive taxes on non-muslims to permit them to follow their own faith. Look up zakat and jizyah. These are not voluntary, though perhaps they cannot be enforced in the courts here.

• Hmm, religion doesn’t charge … money from the government, collections at the church/mosque/synagogue/temple, purchase of the Qu’ran, Bible, Torah, Vedas, etc, ‘donations’ to the church to obtain that date for your special day. We all pay for religion even if it’s just through taxes. It’s a farce.