Free Download

Download 'Too Hot', an exclusive Specials track from iTunes

Navigation - link to other main sections from here

Skip Navigation

From The Times
September 13, 2007

Enough religion. Stop shoving it down my throat

Carol Sarler

Our attention was demanded yesterday by headline “news” that, thousands of miles away in Zimbabwe, Archbishop Pius Ncube has tendered his resignation to the Pope after rumours of sexual derrings-do – even though, in his case, his alleged partner was adult, female and consensual; hardly, therefore, an earth-shattering story except, possibly, to the small minority of Britons who are Roman Catholics.

The previous day, we had been similarly commanded to turn our thoughts to the pros and cons of subjecting Muslim faith schools, beloved of an even smaller minority, to state control. Last week conservative religious leaders of all stripes were handed ample airtime to condemn embryo research; for three straight months we have been daily reminded, amid all else, of the beliefs of the family McCann.

It is a peculiar reversal of social logic that the decline in the practice of religion should be met with such a rise in reference to it.

Consider: if as many as 6.3 per cent of the population attend church (hold tight; we’ll nit-pick the figures in a moment) and if it would be fair to say that easily half of those don’t give a fig whether the bloke in the robes at the front is gay or not – why is it that the remaining 97 per cent of unconcerned people are being relentlessly subjected to the quibbling about it?

Of course, it might not be exactly 6.3 per cent; this happens to come from the religious think-tank Christian Research, but religion and statistics are notoriously awkward bedfellows. Census results have been criticised for the phrasing of the question “Which religion are you?”, which produced twice as many “Christians” as another survey found believers in God. The Catholic Church, enjoying something of a boost from Polish and other migrant workers, claims more than 900,000 Mass attendances per week – which sounds healthy until you ask how many of the devout go more than once a week.

Our Muslim population is 1.6 million, but considerably more than half of those are children, while the Jewish population is believed to be alone in undercalculating its size, given an understandable reluctance – especially among older Jews of Eastern European origin – to tick boxes marked “Jewish”. Nobody, however, sensibly denies the overall decline in religious practice. Even the top-up provided by ethnic minority immigration does not help; in London, black churchgoers now outnumber whites, but declining churches are still losing more people than growing churches are gaining.

And yet, our pal from Mars, dropping by for his first visit in a generation, would be hard pressed to believe it. Last time he called, the British enjoyed a comfy relationship with their religions, whereby more people worshipped but far fewer mentioned it. Weeks would go by without religious reference in the media beyond Thought for the Day and Songs of Praise; these days, by contrast, it is routinely the stuff of front pages.

When I was a child, archbishops were kindly, benign coves, wheeled out on big occasions; they didn’t, by and large, jump into newsprint to tackle “issues” in the name of their cloth. Even half a generation ago, Ann Widdecombe’s sincerely held religious commitment, one which must have informed her work as a minister, was regarded as just part of an amiable eccentricity that elevated her to a national treasure; today, Ruth Kelly’s comparable commitment has become her defining characteristic.

This is not to say that the tenets of religion have opened to greater debate: indeed, if only. Good manners today disallow the questioning of a man’s belief as sternly as they disallow jokes about it and to offend by either means may be, at least, a sacking offence or, at most, a matter of law. It has become a sine qua non of courteous interaction that those of us without a religious bone in our bodies must defer to those who have, and even determined antitheists are to hush our mouths lest we “cause offence” (in vain might we cry of the offence that we often feel).

The more liberal the person or the institution, the more likely it is that they accommodate the illiberal – as long as it comes in religious guise. Take, for instance, schools; all progressive schools worth their label will, these days, boast of their efforts to teach children about each other’s “cultures”. In fact, they lie. What they are teaching is each other’s religions. If they really meant culture, it would involve song, dance, art, literature, dress, drink and food; all we actually get, in most cases, are religious festivals – and if food gets mentioned, it is only to explain that the reason child X cannot eat the meal as enjoyed by child Y is because child X has a god who says he must not.

It cannot be coincidence that this deference towards religion in general has paralleled the muddled, if well-meaning, response specifically to the growth of Islam. Muddled because of a confusion between ethnicity and religion; well-meaning because it was the same commendable urge to show respect for ethnicity that widened to insist upon respect for the religion that often came with it. And if endless news bulletins bowed to “From a Muslim point of view . . .”, it is hardly surprising that, in the name of all things equal, every other small minority possessed of a deity has demanded prominence too.

It does not, however, make it any less absurd. At the moment, there are in Britain more practising anglers than practising Anglicans – but it is unimaginable, is it not, that in an effort to give properly representative nods to similarly consuming passions we might afford the same attentions to the sexuality of a carp that we give to a priest’s?

Nobody should seek to deny the right to worship. Whatever gets you through the night and all that. But a sense of proportion is running overdue; the interests of a minority are, by definition, a minority interest and deserve no more, if no less, consideration than any other.

Certainly not out of fear of “causing offence”, when secular sense is there to remind us that nobody, ever, has the right not to be offended. God-given or otherwise.

Point taken. cheers

bill, towoomba,

Bill, the ability to simplify, summarize and contrast does not necessarily imply ignorance of particulars. With a title like „The Antichrist“, it seems Nietzsche gloried in dramatic dialectic, too, though in his case, it degenerated into distortion and ended in insanity. All the other people you mention are restrained by the limits of reason and humanity ; Nietzsche (apart from in his earliest writings) rejects and violates both. With the others, there is a possibility of dialogue ; with Nietzsche, there is only war or worship.
By the way, the fact that someone disagrees with you is not an automatic proof of his simple-mindedness...

Anth, Walsall,

A negligence of the laws of areodynamics would result in a rise of comments concerning them the more recently built planes began to crash!
That religion's that are but form and ritual cannot nor do not truly help or resolve any of the worlds problems A true and lively knowledge of God and a right relationship with God does primarrily at a personal level then outwardly at a social level. It would be folly indeed to ignore the rise of lawlessness and imorality with the decline in true godliness.
Biblical Christianity is not a strange religion unknown in this country.In fact any carefull look over our history will show that when this country has been at its worse.There have been men who ahve gone out about the country reminding people of not only that which they have lost but also how to return.Thus as always the call is to repent and turn back to God rather than continue in the mad headlong rush to destruction.

G Blezard, london, uk

Hello Tina - I'm sure you too are a perfectly normal, tolerant, open-minded person, with a belief in god, of course. What I wrote was not intended to be insulting. But a person who has an "unshakeable" faith is not, in the rational sense, a completely open-minded person, because there is an area (belief) in which the mind is closed to other options. Unless you have doubts about your belief, of course. -- Atheists don't have a "no-go area" in which other options are closed. In everything, the atheist has an open mind, even accepting the logical possibility of the existence of a deity. (But we don't believe their is one, any more than we believe in my five-legged spotted galactic goblin in the black hole which I invented last week.) We are, however, always ready (open-minded) to reconsider our position if we see anything to justify this. -- Are you ready to reconsider your belief, Tina?

alan, cologne,

Anth, strange choice you think it all comes down to. What happened to Hume, Spinoza, Schopenhaeur, Heidegger, Hegelian ideas, Siddhartha Gautama, and the rest of philosophy and theology? I guess it shows why there are often only 2 parties in an election. Some people can't choose between or synthesise more than 2 things.

bill, towoomba,

Point taken, Bill, but your choice of Nietzsche saves us all a lot of time. That guy pulled no punches ! In the final analysis, it all comes down to a shoot out between him and Jesus of Nazareth. We can forget all the hangers-on, and go straight to the respective fountainheads.
PS
Hope you get some rain soon

Anth, Walsall,

And I for one don't know what the point of all this discourse is. Given all the confusing and contradictory posts; we learn once again how poor a medium writing is in exchanging views and opinions. Keep up the good work.

A new-born atheist; Princeton, NJ, USA

Rip, Princeton, USA

Anth, I don't happen to like many of of Nietzsche's views, particularly the ideas about the (lack of) equal rights of the weak in society, though some of his philosophy is brilliant.
I could list the massive number of saints, still "on the books" and therefore supposedly definitely in heaven according to the churches, who supported and actively took part in the torture and murderous activities of the Inquisition and witch trials. I don't expect that you or current Christians would profess support of those former evil acts perpetrated in God's name.
Beware trial by association.

bill, towoomba,

Hi Alan,

Yes, there are many tolerant atheists out there. However I hope you will agree that you don't have to be an atheist to be "free from religious dogmatism". It is possible to be open-minded and also to believe in God. Having an open mind leads different people in different directions, and for some people their open mind happens to coincide with a spiritual path.

Not all religious people want to "shove religion down people's throats". And of course not all atheists are narrow minded, but my previous post was commenting on those who are. After all, if it is OK to write an article entitled "Enough religion. Stop shoving it down my throat" then it should also be OK to say that 1) not all religion gets shoved at people and 2) secularism is shoved at us quite often too.

Alan said:
Tina - most atheists are quite middle-of-the-road, normal people, not raving fundamentalists. We are not narrow-minded - on the contrary, free from religious dogmatism we have truly open minds.

Tina, South Wales, UK

I notice Nietzsche features prominently in your list of anti-God quotes, Bill. This was the guy who advocated the destruction of the weak and disabled, the rejection of democracy, and the glorification of war and of the will to power. His ideal was the dictatorship of a totally ruthless master race.
Now I don't want to jump to conclusions here, but I remember reading that some rather dubious Austrian fellow put a lot of these ideas into practice a while back...
Of course, you can hear truth even out of the mouth of a donkey, but forgive me for balking at this one. I'm scared that if I drink from a flask so clearly marked “Poison“, I'm likely to wake up dead.

Anth, Walsall,

Amon, Yes, Tina responded to Andy, who said he didn't like talking about religion, and would leave someone well alone if he/she started talking religion. He did not use the word ostracize, or say he would never talk or associate with that person again, should religion not be the topic of conversation. So it seems I read the posting, and maybe understood it better than you did, in fact.
Tina went from there to say "Next time you meet a Hindu, Christian, Sikh, Muslim or Buddhist in the pub, why not just treat them as a human being like everyone else", as if atheists don't treat those with faith as normal people. I think this is a trite platitude, hence my comment. I agree with her that believers are often nice, normal people, but it seems a lame comment when no-one is saying the opposite.
Many people, believers and atheists, do have a problem with fundamentalist religious views, for lots of reasons as outlined by many already. Some atheists are more than happy to talk about religion, and to listen to believers points of view, but expect in return to be able to say why we disagree. Some believers in fact have little or no interest in talking religion at all, and prefer to float along concentrating on more day to day matters, which is their prerogative.

mathew, brighton,

mathew -
Tina was responding to Andy from Sleaford who talked about ostracising anyone with religious views.

This message board would be a lot better if people READ THE POSTS before mouthing off.

Amon O, Colonia, Uruguay

Tina, you've got it totally backwards. Most atheists have lots of friends and acquaintances who profess a creed. We don't care so long as they don't push their barrel at us.
Atheists don't set up schools exclusively for or even aimed at non-believers, or hold church-type meetings for atheists to get together exclusively or by preference, or recommend or prefer that atheists marry only non-believers, or make their babies or children go through ceremonies proclaiming that the kids practice a certain way of life.
But lots of believers do exactly all those things!

mathew, brighton,

B.S. Gary :

Hitler said: "The heaviest blow that ever struck humanity was the coming of Christianity ... The deliberate lie in the matter of religion was introduced into the world by Christianity.

I'll make these damned parsons feel the power of the state in a way they would have never believed possible. For the moment, I am just keeping my eye upon them: if I ever have the slightest suspicion that they are getting dangerous, I will shoot the lot of them. This filthy reptile raises its head whenever there is a sign of weakness in the State, and therefore it must be stamped on. We have no sort of use for a fairy story invented by the Jews."

Barry, Dundee, UK

Hitler a Christian?

How can such an important part of recent history be so corrupted for the sake of a stupid argument?

Does this myth come from Dawkins?

Francesca, Milan, Italy

Garry -

If you tell me the sun does not exist then you are adopting a position in just the same way as I am adopting a position by saying it does exist. A lack of position would be to say you don't know and you've never thought about it.

Your semantic trickery (borrowed from Dawkins) is doublethink and bound to failure.

The majority of people in the world see this instinctively.

Also...it really is sick to suggest Hitler was a Catholic. He persecuted them in the same way, although to a much lesser extent, the Jews. The current polarized attitude promulgated by Dawkins virulent nonsense is similar to the conditions Hitler created.

Remember your humanity.

James Rubin, NYC, US

Stop shoving PC secularism down mine!

Andrew Brown, Derby, UK

We must question the story logic of having an all-knowing all-powerful God, who creates faulty Humans, and then blames them for his own mistakes. [Gene Roddenberry]
The presence of those seeking the truth is infinitely to be preferred to the presence of those who think they've found it. [Terry Pratchett]
The way to see by faith is to shut the eye of reason. [Benjamin Franklin]
The inspiration of the bible depends on the ignorance of the person who reads it. Take from the church the miraculous, the supernatural, the incomprehensible, the unreasonable, the impossible, the unknowable, the absurd, and nothing but a vacuum remains. [Robert G. Ingersoll]
Convictions are more dangerous enemies of truth than lies. [Friedrich Nietzsche]
With or without religion, you would have good people doing good things and evil people doing evil things. But for good people to do evil things, that takes religion. [Steven Weinberg]
God is like Santa Claus; A great, amazing and lovely person but sadly untrue. [Mimoun Raddahi]
The Bible has fingerprints all over it. And none of them are God-sized.

bill, towoomba,

And if there were a God, I think it very unlikely that He would have such an uneasy vanity as to be offended by those who doubt His existence. [ Bertrand Russell]
We must respect the other fellow's religion, but only in the sense and to the extent that we respect his theory that his wife is beautiful and his children smart. [H. L. Mencken]
I have examined all the known superstitions of the world, and I do not find in our particular superstition of Christianity one redeeming feature. They are all alike founded on fables and mythology.[ Thomas Jefferson]
Which is it, is man one of God's blunders or is God one of man's? [ Friedrich Nietzsche]
I contend that we are both atheists. I just believe in one fewer god than you do. When you understand why you dismiss all the other possible gods, you will understand why I dismiss yours. [ Stephen Roberts]

bill, towoomba,

Quite right, Chris - not all religioous views are deliberately false. I should have said "deliberately or unintentionally" false. Sorry. I do realise that many religious people truly and honest believe what they say. But the fact remains, I still think these views are false. -- Unfortunately many professional christians (preachers etc.) do, I'm quite sure, deliberately mislead their flock with false arguments. I've heard so many in the course of my long life.

alan, cologne,

Dave - Hitler and Stalin used exactly the same tricks as religion to further their ends. They preached a "faith" (in the mastery of the Nordic race, or in the teachings of Marxist-Leninism) and they themselves played the role of infallible leader (god). Their followers worshipped them with blind adoration. And why not, because they were told that they were on the right side of history. Just like the religious faithful, they had the comfortable feeling that they were in the right, and others were wrong. Their opponents were persecuted and often enough killed. They were prepared to fight wars for their "just cause". This shows how the belief-systems Stalinism and Nazism were in fact pseudo-religions. -- In contrast, the atheist is free from any belief-system. He has no belief in some "ultimate truth", embodied by some god or god-like dictator. An atheist's world-view is unclouded by irrational "faith". His intellect is free. He doesn't know eternal truth - but neither do "believers".

alan, cologne,

IF a divine being created the world (of which there is no evidence either for or against), why would He need to have an active role in the large and small scale physical processes throughout His cosmos? Why would he need to "drive the process" of evolution, including all the nasty or useless mutations that occur under this "guidance"? Why would he have to ever intervene in any way, once all was set in motion from the beginning, unless He stuffed up the process with a faulty, dud, incomplete plan needing major "tuning" along the way? A capable God would set up a universe that follows fundamental principles and laws of science and logic, such that it would "run itself" once begun.
Maybe He isn't there? Maybe Something is, but isn't an anthropomorphic being and just doesn't intervene, and everything DOES follow fundamental principles, and no miraculous things ever happen.
Why believe the bible was anything other than man-made stories following personal agendas and wished for moral endings? As in a love poem, it tells a biased story told by "love-smitten" authors wanting to believe in a perfect person and Messiah. The end result isn't a historical record, but an idealised myth.

frank, sydney,

If fifty million people say a foolish thing, it's still a foolish thing. [Bertrand Russell]

bill, towoomba,

The truth is not determined by a majority verdict.

Chris, Shrewsbury, uk

John Davenhall, Leicester
A million out of over 60 million constitutes a small minority in my view. Large minorities are around the 20 to 40 percentile, perhaps a medium minority would be between 10 and 20 percent. Anything under 10 percent is small.

Garry, Glasgow, UK

Tina - most atheists are quite middle-of-the-road, normal people, not raving fundamentalists. We are not narrow-minded - on the contrary, free from religious dogmatism we have truly open minds. We do not associate solely with other non-believers, and we don't ostracise anybody. We are always ready to talk openly about religion and we're eager to discuss anything and everything. (That's how we differ from religious fanatics.) I really don't know where you got your strange ideas about atheists from.
-- John McD - I have no "faith", just common sense. If my stance is "polarised", it's only because of the opposite pole - religion. I accept the findings of science for what they are - theories that continually have to be tested and perhaps modified, improved. I prefer that to the prefabricated "facts" purveyed by preachermen to the ignorant and gullible. -- Please present some counter-arguments, and our conversation will be useful.

alan, cologne,

William of Edinburgh
Yours is a strawman argument. Everyone talks of Stalin, Mao, Hitler and Pol Pot when they talk of atheism. But this is simply not a correct allusion. Hitler was a catholic and called upon god in many of his speeches. Apparently, more than 25 percent of the SS were practicing catholics. Stalin trained for the seminary and obviously learned a lot about manipulating people there. Stalin, Mao and Pol Pot did what they did not in the name of atheism but because of what they were and in the name of a devalued, dare one say religious, creed namely communism. Atheism is not a creed, it is simply a position. Bad people do bad things, but I have never heard of bad things being done in the name of a non-god.

Garry, Glasgow, UK

It's a shame that many ordinary people, who just happen to have a faith, are ostracised by narrow-minded people who only associate with other non-believers. Most Christians and people of other faiths are quite middle-of-the-road, normal people, not raving fundamentalists.

Next time you meet a Hindu, Christian, Sikh, Muslim or Buddhist in the pub, why not just treat them as a human being like everyone else? If they turn out to be an extremist then you will find out soon enough. But they could equally be a nice, normal person like anyone else.

By the same token, why not be open to talking about religion as a topic? Being willing to discuss anything and everything makes people more rounded and interesting.

Andy from Sleaford said:
"most of us in the UK don't give a fig about religion, and honestly don't want to be bothered by those that do. If anyone started talking about religion in my pub, they would be seen as a bit weird, and left well alone."

Tina, South Wales, UK

Alan,

Atheism as opposed to agnostic is irrational and generally is based on faith in science to explain everything, recognising only the gaps in our factual knowledge and not the gaps in our conceptual knowledge. Such faith in science is usually the reserve of those who aren't all that aware of what it actually is and what its very real limitations are.

Perhaps if you tried to understand that position then you wouldn't be buying in to such a polarised stance and could have a bit more of a useful conversation with those who disagree with you.

Accusing all religious people of suffering from mass delusion is smug, unproductive and says more about you than anything else.

John McD, San Francisco, ca, USA

William - how many times do I have to explain that atheism is NOT, repeat NOT, a faith. A-theism is being "without god? I am totally without any belief in god, and that makes me an atheist - WITHOUT belief. -- You say religion offers an insight into truth. You may well think so. Atheists think religion dulls the brain. Believing in the supernatural is not rational. Faith in a god means that anyone who doesn't worship your particular kind of god is wrong. In the past, such heretics or infidels were persecuted or slaughtered - for religious reasons! (Atheists may kill, but not for atheistic reasons.) Atheism offers freedom from any particular irrational belief. It frees the intellect from the dogmatic shackles of religion. Why not give it a try, William?

alan, cologne,

Carol Sarler makes the mistake of correlating the number of church attenders with the number of believers. Other research has shown believers in God to be in the majority. But the litmus test for a true believer is whether they demonstrate the love of God to the minority such as Carol Sarler and the other non-believers commenting here.

Jerry, Colorado Springs, CO

Reading all the comments its intresting to see people have thier own well defined ideas and strong opinions on other peoples faith of lack of it!

But alot of its in the form of generalisation.... and I think thats where problems start with belief!
its not what you believe thats the problem... its societys attempts to define your belief into groups aks believers and non believers and some individuals needs to justify thier believe to others of different belief.

I dont believe in a human formed god of any kind... I do believe in doing right by others that what comes around goes around, that life is short and that you only get one chance so you better make the most of it and be the best person you can be, I believe the worlds ecosystem is prescious all of life is a precarious balence... every action has a concequence ect

I'm not religious, an agnostic, pagan, hippy, atheist... ect
I simply am an individual with individual beliefs!

Gem, uk,

i think that people should be able show their views and beliefs from their own respective religion that they follow and obey.

Nevertheless I also think that clergymen of their different respective faiths should tolerate non churchgoers beliefs on the subject.

Fred, london, England

The article smacks of paranoid delusion : the truth is, religious issues get scarce attention in the media ; what make headlines are the ungodly works of ungodly men. When our media start getting passionate over such issues as the Abortion Holocaust, the triumph of Sex over Love, and the rejection of traditional morality in favour of the pleasure principle, then you can complain of religion dominating the airwaves.
You’ll know when God’s involved : something like a primeval conscience will start to stir, and you’ll sense the presence of a terrifying ecstacy. Until then, as this article bitterly demonstrates, we’ll continue to be the bland led by the bland.

Anth, Walsall,

What staggers me is the way that religious groups seem to be offended by absolutely everything, to the point where they condemn it publicly. A song released recently ends it's chorus with "Because God it just feels so good". This was deemed horrendous blasphemy and was subjected to many complaints from church leaders. Religious sensibilities still dictate much of our society, and it's time to relegate religion to the preserve of those who believe.

Jamie B, Chaldon, UK

"If liberty means anything at all, it means the right to tell people what they do not want to hear." - Orwell

John McD, San Francisco, ca, USA

The article smacks of paranoid delusion. The truth is, religious issues get scarce attention in the media ; what make headlines are the ungodly works of ungodly men. When our media start getting passionate over such issues as the Abortion Holocaust, the triumph of Sex over Love, and the rejection of traditional morality in favour of the pleasure principle, then you can complain of religion dominating the airwaves.

You’ll know when God’s involved : something like a primeval conscience will start to stir, and you’ll sense the presence of a terrifying ecstacy. Until then, as this article bitterly demonstrates, we’ll continue to be the bland led by the bland.

Anth, Walsall,

Thank you.

It needs to be said.

Unfortunately it seems that those of Faith will still take a yard for every centimeter that is ceded them, as, with some deity or other covering their back, they know they are right. It's happened too often before not to be certain that it will happen again and again. As a species one might think we should be getting past this overly gullible phase. And these days, let's face it, anyone who constructs their world view and their morality around typically bronze age wishful thinking requires attention as to their mental health. Next thing you know they'll be trying on glass slippers and trying to get to work in a pumpkin.

Kidd Garrett, Bristol, UK

Alan - our views are not 'deliberately false'. Why would we do that?

No-one is forcing you to listen to our opinions: you have chosen to read them. Tina makes a good point; even if you say you are religious, you are accused of being too forceful in your faith. Anyway, Dawkin's makes his voice heard fairly loudly doesn't he?

Chris, Epsom,

Angela, Hitler was no more a Christian than Stalin was. Their parents may have been at least nominal Christians, & Stalin even attended an Orthodox seminary, but their actions & beliefs showed them to be viscerally anti-Christian. Stalin was an atheist, Hitler was a pagan - he used the word 'god' as an expression of his pagan beliefs of blood, race and violence. Stalin probably had a more intelligent assessment of the dangers of Christianity to his regime - he sought to eliminate it totally (except when he needed it in wartime). Hitler tried to subvert the churches; he forced most protestants into a German National Church which he tried to control, but brave men like Bonhoeffer defied him. The Roman Catholic Church remained, with communists (supreme irony!), the most organized opposition to the nazis, which they knew, more clearly than many protestants, to be viciously anti-Christian. Some individual Christians of course supported the regime - which is inevitable anywhere.

Dave, Wrexham,

To quote Dawkins 'the root of all evil'. I for one am sick of religion being shoved down my throat. I have to respect my christian friends beliefs but they they do not acknowledge my belief that I cannot stand religion. I am bringing my children up to make up their own minds about religion - but at school it's rammed down there throat with not a single effort to inform the children that christianity is a choice, not something that they HAVE to believe. It was the good old christians that burnt hundreds of people in the name of witchcraft - how dare someone have there own belief, how dare they murder these poor people. Atheists need to be aknowledged a lot more than they are.

Mandy, Lincoln, UK

Re atheism or agnosticism. A-theism means "without god". I don't believe in the supernatural. Therefore I am totally, 100%, without a god. I think that entitles me to calll myself an atheist, rather that agnostic.

alan, cologne,

Eh Chris... read "On the Jews and their Lies" by Martin Luther, it's like reading the nazi party program. If you understand the new testament you are likely to feel antisemitic vibes within even if you are embarrassed about them when you put thoose bad feelings in contrast to the holocaust we all know about.

Staffan Bengtsson, Borås, Sweden

Just don't mix the state with religion. ;) All humans need to be controlled by Equality, Fraternity, Liberty!

Virtaaj, Bombay, INDIA

What's your point Angela? With Mao on your team, all the rest put together sort of pale into insignificance. The issue is surely not that religious people are any more capable of savagery than the non-religious or vice versa, it is just that humans have the innate ability to corrupt any ideal, no matter how apparently noble, especially when they perceive a way of using it to gain power or money. What religion offers that atheist teaching (particularly of the virulent Dawkins' variety) often seems to miss these days, is an insight into that truth and an exhortation to some measure of personal humility in the face of the incomprehensible enormity of the universe. You would do well to remember that wisdom is not just about what you know it is also about realising what you do not know. Atheism is a faith too and like any faith it cannot be justified on rational grounds alone. Hubristic atheists need to remember that just as much as husbristic theists.

William, Edinburgh, UK

Am I the only person who noticed the comments from Abdul Ali of Baghdad, Iraq? That seems quite ironic in an argument about who is Right and who is Wrong inspired in part by the religious and political upheaval in the world right now.
There is, of course, a simple solution to his complaint.

Anita, Sydney, Australia

Religions don't have to have a god in heaven. Bhuddism, if I am correct, has not "God". Quasi-religions are also faith-systems. Recent examples are Stalinism, Maoism, Nazism. The point is they all had faith in the ultimate and exclusive truth of their belief-system. That meant that everybody else was wrong or inferior. This was reason enough for their adherents to persecute and kill the "heathens" and "heretics". (A bit like religion, isn't it?) -- Anyone who can follow this logical explanation can see that it is the fanaticism and faith in any belief-system which contains the seeds of ignorance and violence. This applies to religions and the pseudo-religions of Nazism, Stalinism, Maoism, Polpotism etc. -- Incidentally, Jesus was most certainly a true communist, in the very best sense of the word, of course.

alan, cologne,

Chris writes:
'Enlightened, secular civic society is such an improvement .. '

But Jesus said: 'I am the light of the world.'

According then, to the Son of God - whose view, with respect, I prefer to follow rather than that of a mere created being like you Chris - secular society is actually deeply in the dark. And doesn't this just show in Britain today?

David, Bristol,

Is there anything to stop Chris (or myself- or anyone) claiming to be 'The Light of The World'? For the past 2000 years and until the much anticipated (by some) 'second coming' it's pretty much up to 'mere created beings' such as ourselves to manage our own lives and the everyday issues of evolving human societies, largely hindered by the irrational prejudice and hand- wringing of the religious.

Dan, Oxford, England

Well said, a good article, about time someone pointed out that most of us in the UK don't give a fig about religion, and honestly don't want to be bothered by those that do. If anyone started talking about religion in my pub, they would be seen as a bit weird, and left well alone. God? We are not interested one way or the other.

Andy, Sleaford, England

Dan from Oxford is absolutely right. I cannot believe you let him have his say. What right has he got to ram his views down my neck? As a liberal extremist, I will defend to the death my right to be offended - I don't care who I upset along the way.

Ming the Merciless, Godalming, UK

In the USA I am constantly offended by the omnipresence of a very obnoxious God. Even when I sneeze it is "God bless you"

robert, vancouver,

Belief should be a private matter. It should not be a kind of trump card allowing those who believe to demand special privileges as a consequence.

If a prime minister or president talks about guidance from horoscopes, tarot, tea leaves etc they will be ridiculed and quite possibly hounded from office. If they claim that god spoke to them they are somehow regarded as being better people. How does that work?

The morality of believers is not superior to those of us who do not believe in their gods. That they think their god disapproves of abortion, contraception or certain sexual practises is immaterial. That does not give them the right to tell others how to live their lives. When this liberal society finally spells this out for all to understand we will have made a breakthrough.

Paul Owen, Birmingham , Uk

To everyone.

Calm down on this religious malarky, christian, muslim, who cares!! Man created god in his own immage, and out of his own insicurities. As opposed to god creating man. Anyway, thats my train of thought. As a pagan, who beleives in just the realities of life, sun, moon, earth the seasons etc. The facts of life that run our very existence I consider rather more important than a lot of old mumbo jumbo thats been passed down over the ages and twisted no doubt at the same time.

If I have upset anyone, I don`t appologise. Just being honest.

Mr G Courtney, Earlswood, England

To Carl re. the old 'Hitler was an atheist' canard. Although Hitler was brought up and confirmed as a Roman Catholic, he had abandoned Christianity by the time he was in control of Germany. For example: “....The heaviest blow that ever struck humanity was the coming of Christianity………. The deliberate lie in the matter of religion was introduced into the world by Christianity......”
11-12.07.1941 "Christianity is an invention of sick brains,"
13.12.1941.
“Hitler's Table Talk” Adolf Hitler, London, Weidenfeld & Nicholson, 1953 pp.118-119 "……….. I shall never come personally to terms with the Christian lie. Our epoch in the next 200 years will certainly see the end of the disease of Christianity.... My regret will have been that I couldn't... behold”. 27.02.1942 “Hitler's Secret Conversations” 1941-1944, H.R. Trevor-Roper p.278 Was Hitler a Christian??

Barry Holroyd, Leeds, West Yorkshire, England

Brian,
Communism is not a secular ideology.
And look back at history when the 'hole' was filled by religion. Not pretty is it?
The problems arise when too many people abdicate their responsibility for their own actions to a totalitarian fruitcake (like Mao, Stalin or a pope) that shouts a lot and appeals to their more base instincts (generally racist in nature) dressed up as religious or political ideology. Just follow your own path and not somebody else's. Sounds easy, but you have to face the big questions on your own.

Bill, Glasgow,

To Brian, Woking I am a geologist and therefore, sensibly, an athiest. I have no god and no overwhelming desire to murder. The necessity for a minority to find meaning and purpose in fictional or at best fabled characters does not imply that the rest of us are susceptible to the same tendancies.

Gareth Ellery, Newcastle Upon Tyne, Tyne and Wear

carol does not want 'Religion shoved down her throat' it can also be said millions do not want secularism shoved down their throats. the real issue is, who is correct - religious values or secular values ?

ja, london,

It's not a typo. The point being made is that the possibility of one person being offended by what another person might say should not, on its own, override the second person's right to say what he wants. No one has the right to go through life without being offended by anyone else; or, in other words, 'nobody, ever, has the right not to be offended.' Of course, the right to speak freely is (or should be) accompanied by the responsibility to consider the consequences of what one says...

Gillian Beattie, Oxford,

Great article. It is time for those of us who have no religion and believe in no god to speak up. I will not kowtow to the superstitious. Sure, Christianity and Judaism are bad, but Islam is worse. Would that we could all wave a magic wand and banish the lot. We can't. So we must fight. And please, all of you, do. Religion is not a tonic. It is a poison. Fight it with all you have, and live, as a human, the best life you can. That is the ONLY thing you know you have for sure--this life. All the rest is speculation, wishful thinking, hoopla. In your collective hearts, you know that I, and the author of this superb article, are right.

Name Withheld, Santa Monica, California, USA

This is a pretty shallow article! The news about the archbishop in Zimbabwe has nothing to do with religion. It reflects our continuing concern (based on historic links and issues of human rights) about the dire political situation in that poor country. On religion in general the size of its media footprint reflects the fact that many issues are relevant not only to believers but to atheists like me. I am worried about the rise of the christian fundamentalists in the US. There are considerable implications for us all when virtually no politician in the world's most powerful state is prepare to say out loud 'I do not believe in god'. Muslim fundamentalism is even more scary. If no-one in the muslim world is willing go public and say to the extremists 'that is not what the Koran says' or 'that is not what the Koran means' or that 'on this issue the Koran is out of date' then the fundamentalists will get even more extreme with dire consequences for us all.

Kevin, Kent,

Absolutely! Religion is NOT the business of the state, or indees society. It is a personal matter, between oneself and whatever, should one choose to believe in whatever. Otherwise religion, as we see, is a majour source of conflict, bloodshed and loss of life, "with God on our side" ...

Jeremy Poynton, Fromeville, 51st State

Here's the thing Kate: the Crusades happened 800 years ago, and 20th century secularists in power all knew about them, yet still proceeded to do much worse. How is that enlightened?

Carol Sarler's measure of "influence" (media mention) needs to be calibrated by all the disproportionate attention accorded to "non-religious" lobby groups and activists of all kinds, e.g. animal rights campaigners or this or that thinktank. Taking this into account I don't think news on churches etc. is that exaggerated.

Dan Baynes, Barton Seagrave,

Angela, how does standard Christian teaching involve murdering Jews? If it was, there would be a lot more of it. And since when has Hitler represented true Christianity?

Chris, Epsom,

All my long life I've been frustrated at having to endure the absurdity of religion and the privileges it enjoys without being able to get my atheistic opinion heard. Not any longer. Now, on HYS websites, I can finally respond to the holier-than-thou verbosity of professional christians. Up to now I have been forced to listen to their deliberately false, devious and misleading arguments without a forum to counter them. Not any longer. At last I am able to put my atheistic views across, much to the chagrin of the faithful. For this, at least, I am grateful to the internet. -- (Well said, Anne of Bournemouth. I can't remain so passive, though, I have to respond to those over-exposed deluded bores.)

alan, cologne,

To Brian, Woking

There was no "secular sense" involved in the holocaust as Hitler was, as I'm sure you know, a Catholic and also strongly opposed to atheism. Never heard the phrase "Gott mitt uns" before? I suggest you check out some Nazi memorabilia.

Stalinism and Maoism are parallel to religions themselves and the purge of religions under their rule was more to remove a potential source of organised opposition to dictatorship than anything else. Countless other social networks were wiped out alongside them.

Just remember that no-one has ever (to my knowledge) been killed or torured in the name of atheism. Can you say the same of religion?

Paul A, Edinburgh,

Perfect - I appreciate what you say, including the controversial sentence. In this context, many Indians of course possess no religion. Indianism (like Europeanism) should be coined as a term to describe the Indian way of life. I don't like the term Hinduism because it has (incorrectly) acquired the label of a religion. A typical Indian house has pictures or statuettes of a few deities - including Krishna happily co-existing with Mother Teresa (particularly if the family is from Calcutta) - on the shelf, before which the parents pause with clasped hands briefly seeking blessings on their way out to work and the children on their way to their A-level examinations. I was pleased to find that many people in the UK believe in God but not many in organised religions. This is the way forward, although I fully respect the rights of the atheist.

Somnath Mukhopadhyay, Dundee, UK

Well said & me to !
It has become an absolutely ridiculous thing arguing about which is the best/true/last religion.

I firmly believe believers of all sects, denominations, should leave their faith behind closed doors , of their place of worship & their homes.
I just hate it when people start bringing God into a conversation to back up their point, aka George Bush before invasion.
That maybe an extreme example , but it works.
Church bells once in a while is quite nice, but wailing from Mosques several times a day, is a gross infringement & assassination of my ears.
As is traditional religious dress, & some religions as I walk down the street, hitting me full on with , I am a ? worshipper.
So the truth is this, we see it , hear it, read it , at every turn.
For those of us that do not believe in imaginary friends, fairies or an old man in the sky, it is an abomination, every day.
Yes I am reading Dawkins too.

Maggie Millington, Brittany , France

Offend them all, I say - Catholics, Jews, Muslims, Anglicans, Atheist. The more offence, the merrier.

In the final analysis, it's all much a do about nothing anyway and a relic of a bygone age.

Scott, Durham, NC, USA

With all due respect, Brian, your argument is confusing secularism (opposite of religion) with dictatorship (opposite of democracy).

Very good article, Carol Sarler, keep up the good work.

Mike, Sydney, Australia

Like it or not, religion does affect current affairs on a regular basis, and this will therefore be reported in the media. Carol Sarler complains that religion is a minority interest. However, nearly all stories in the papers only have a direct impact on a small minority of people somewhere in the world. This does not mean they are not news. Things which happened to everyone every day would not be newsworthy!

Most Christians these days are very conscious that they are not welcome to "shove their beliefs down anyone's throat". Even if they simply talk about their faith in a natural way, or admit to having a faith at all, they are still accused of this. It does seem that secularism can be forced upon us all the time, and no-one bats an eyelid, because it is fashionable.

Carol Sarler says there is too much religion in the media. However, the vast majority of broadcasting and news articles have a secular basis. But we are so used to secularism that we don't even notice it.

Tina, South Wales, UK

"Our Muslim population is 1.6 million" - where do these statistics come from? My estimate would be that there are more than 1.6 million Muslims in London alone.

Edwin, it is nice to see that you can so accurately dismiss the 2001 census figures over there in Bucharest. How exactly could you give a better estimate of how many Muslims live in London? According to you more than 20% of the population of Greater London follows the Islamic faith. Complete boloney.

Deepan, London, U.K

Just a bi-comment from an atheist. When I reluctantly acknowledge in Christian company that I am an atheist I have been informed that actually I am an "agnostic" (indifferent shrug of the shoulders by me) Actually the term "agnostic" was coined by atheist Thomas Huxley because as a scientist he recognised that whilst believers couldn't prove that He/She or IT existed Huxley could not prove that They did not. Actually I favour religion for others - usually excellent moral teachings,fine buildings,great music and art and lots of failings to provide me with cynical amusement.

Michael , Charlottesville, Virginia

No, Brian, no. We atheists will own Stalin and Mao but I'm afraid Hitler was a Christian. Highly conflicted but self-avowedly Christian. Although as a despot, he loathed the power wielded by religious organisations, and as an Aryan he loathed sharing his Catholicism with the southern Europeans due to dubious levels of "whiteness", he was in no doubt that he had lived and would die a Catholic and stated so. Despite the late Pope's attempts to define Nazi anti-semitism as secular, it was no more than a terrible implementation of standard Christian teaching.

Angela, Sydney, Australia

By the logic of Brian from Woking, to prevent an evil ideology like Nazism or Fascism from taking root, we should all pretend to believe in a in a sky god and be tolerant, respectful of the nonsense spouted by the religious and only elect those who believe.

This is an old, discredited argument from the religious. I'm afraid I'm going to have to repeat it: those monstrous dictators did not commit their crimes in the name of atheism. Since when have terrible crimes been committed in the name of the philosophies of David Hume, John Locke, Thomas Jefferson or Thomas Paine?

The end of deference to the religious is long overdue. It is now a couple of generations since the end of deference to those in authority, when craven journalists would ask a government minister whether he had "anything to tell a grateful nation". It is time to stand up to religious thugs and bullies who use people's inherent politeness to get their way by stuffing their nonsense into the media.

Stewart Ware, London, UK

Michael Burleigh's two books, "Earthly Powers" and "Sacred Causes" show how, since the French Revolution, secularists & atheists in Europe - from the Jacobins to the Bolsheviks -have tried to control, or eliminate, Christianity in order to impose their own secular religions. When they succeeded the results were appalling. The nazis equally tried to eliminate genuine Christianity in favour (as a first step) of a 'national church' totally under their control. Their ultimate aim, & ideology, was thoroughly pagan.

Dave, Wrexham,

Excellent article.

More along the same lines please until someone somewhere understands that forcing religion on people will create a backlash and have serious consequences.

Bob Green, Essex, England

"Certainly not out of fear of “causing offence”, when secular sense is there to remind us that nobody, ever, has the right not to be offended. God-given or otherwise. "

Spot on. Well said. I am offended by the misogeny of so many religions but, it seems, I am not allowed to proclaim this on the streets in case I offend them in return.

Derek Smith, Brighton, UK

Some years ego working for a Tour Operator as a Guide I pointed out a beautiful baroque monument to my group in Vienna. I said this was set up by public subscription to thank God for rescuing them from the Plague (those who survived that is). I commented that nobody asked why God sent the Black Death in the first place killing millions of good, devout, god-fearing, loyal subjects to the Emperor. (who hastily departed from his Capital, did a lot of praying, and survived). Someone suggested I should be on Radio Four at 7.45 talking about this interesting and thought provoking fact. Others complained to the Company and I was reprimanded for causing an offence.

Peter Kaldor, Woking, U.K.

I totally agree! and I'm also tired of reading about sports....I don't play sports and I don't like sports. What else don't we want to read about ? Let's make a list and ban it all.

Louise, London,

"All the anti-religion folks are nothing else than anti-christians. - Johannes, Lake Mary, Florida"

Rubbish - "all the anti-religion folks" want is to live their lives free from interference by anyone who believes regardless of the believer's religion and that means the state too.

Rusty, Bristol, UK

"Funny how some "religious communties" are a zillion times more tolerant than the "non-community" presented by atheists.

I might not be religious and/or believe in G-d - but I still respect those who do ...

.. somehow "atheism" has become the "New Inquisition" that is just as intolerant as the old.." drk, cadiz, spain

Utter piffle. Have you seen atheists across Europe torture the believers and extract confessions like the (Spanish) Inquisition? Awaits Monty Python quotes. Atheists are very tolerant people. There is no way I would ever sanction the torture of someone purely on their belief(s). Atheists are usually humanists, the last thing we would want is to use physical force. Let people reason for themselves.

Rusty, Bristol, UK

Re Brian, Woking

How naive. To start with, surely people such as Richard Dawkins are no more smug than people with religious convictions who insist that they are right. At least Dawkins has the courtesy to provide a basis to his arguments.

Next, Mao, Stalin, and Hitler didn't act according to their lack of faith. They were thoroughly despicable people. There will always be people like this who will exploit and murder others to achieve their ends. The difference with religion is that it acts as an extra inducement to persecute other people, or to follow those who incite persecution.

Huw, Guildford, UK

There's far too much tolerance in the World. There- I've said it. It's all very liberal, cuddly and non- confrontational to 'support diversity' in all it's forms, but this has simply resulted in mad, bad and downright dangerous ideas being given some sort of hushed reverence and respect. All ideas, beliefs and actions ARE NOT equal. Reinhard Heydrich's proposal of the Final Solution in 1942 was clearly a bad idea, resulting in 6 million deaths. These days he'd be 'respected' and probably given a Government grant towards developing his ideas. What many liberals don't understand is that extremists hate them BECAUSE they're liberals, and an 'ideal world' does not consist of lots of 'diverse' incompatible ideas co-existing. We're allowing our Country to be sucked back into some pre-enlightenment dark age where science and social progress are reversed due to deference to ideas that until recently seemed to be fading into irrelevance- key amongst them religion.

Dan, Oxford, England

There are 1 million church-attending Catholics in the UK. Same as Muslims. Hardly a 'small minority', don't you think?

John Davenhall, Leicester, UK

Christianity has made plenty of mistakes and it is not afraid to admit it. History is full of people using it as a means of justification for many wrongs, and is therefore easy to blame for anything and everything.

But we are a nation where the majority rules aren't we? So, what has the remaining 95.7% of people achieved? It is easy to be critical of others, but be critical of yourselves please. Bush's christianity does not resemble my views in many areas.

Show me something better in the consumer driven world of no faith unless it is in individualism?

Andrew, Bolton, Lancashire

Andrea Kemp below writes: "...don't try to watch TV or listen to anything other than pop music between 8 and 9 on a Sunday morning if you are allergic to being force-fed religion by well meaning, woolly-minded old dears..."

You can't be force-fed if you have the option of pushing away the spoon. If you don't like religion turn it off, or read something else. It's impossible to prevent people believing and worshipping God as it's as much a part of life as music. Any attempts to stifle it are, thankfully, futile.

Ned, Rome, Italy

To Graeme of Edinburgh,

WWII was not about Religion or God, It was about the absence of Religion and God. And WWI was similar in many respects. If there are structural similarities between Religion and the Dictators you referenced, that's all they are, similarities! All of these men despised Religion and God. Your desire to associate the structure of Religion with the power and destructive nature of these men is invalid. Modern Christianity is about service to God. The greatest respect that a man could show to God is to do His good works. Jesus said "for the Son of man came to serve, and not to be served, and to give his life as a ransom for many". Absolutely none of these men embraced this belief.

Pat, Chicago, USA

Well said Brian.
I was about to pen a response but your message said it so eloquently.

Martin, Benfleet, Essex

I agree with Sarler. I am getting rather irritated with the influence that religious leaders and minorities have suddenly been afforded. Last night's BBC One programme on Muslim women was a form of propaganda, and I don't like paying my license fee for such politically motivated programming.

The situation, I feel, is getting completely out of hand. Where are the influences, media exposure and concerns (political and cultural) for those that are not in a minority and are not overtly religious? I am not talking about staunch atheists per se, but those that would say they were 'maybe CofE', or a lapsed Catholic, or 'well, my mum's Orthodox, does that count?' or 'my dad was Turkish, but I've never been in a mosque'.

Can we have elected representatives influencing policy and exposure please?

Alex, Leeds, UK

Let's add a further thought - if your viewpoint is based entirely on your religion, then we can safely discard it. There will always be someone else whose deeply held but logically unjustifiable beliefs contradict yours, and no way of choosing one over the other.

So let's discard that, and go back to REASON.

Once we accept that, we can get all these religious commentators off the media and get back to discussing the problems sensibly. If they can mount a sensible argument they can be included, but then any similarity to their religious views will be irrelevant..

David in Malta: the statement is correct. No-one has the right not to be offended. If you want to stop anyone saying anything that might offend you, you want the right not to be offended. And no-one has that right.

Jon, Winchester, UK

"Chris writes:
'Enlightened, secular civic society is such an improvement .. '

But Jesus said: 'I am the light of the world.'

According then, to the Son of God - whose view, with respect, I prefer to follow rather than that of a mere created being like you Chris - secular society is actually deeply in the dark. And doesn't this just show in Britain today?

David, Bristol,

Created being? Surely you are a "created being" too. What makes your view any more valid than another "created being(s)."

Rusty, Bristol, UK

You want religion shoved down your throat? Come to Texas, you'll choke on it.

Tom, Austin, Texas U.S.A.

Always keep a hold of nurse, for fear of finding something worse.....all atheistic societies have been brutal. - Frank Upton, Solihull,

Rubbish. There has never been an athiestic society. There certainly have been doctrines that have clamped down on religious organisations, but that is to do with power and totalitarianism not disbelief in god.

The majority of our social laws in England are effectively based on the 10 Commandments - read them and please tell me what exactly is wrong with a social code that tells us to love our neighbours, maintain sexual and property boundaries

Angus Bell, Guisborough, UK

Where do you get these commandments from? A book? There are many societies that have very similar laws to ours but do not rely on the bible. Societal boundaries and laws have evolved due to the social nature of human beings and not some "divine scripture."

Rusty, Bristol, UK

Great comment piece lets have much more.

Paul Egbunike, London, England

Perhaps if GOD re-invokes the terrible punishments he used to inflict on all of us non believers we would, being the cowards we are,"return to the fold".
His friend Osma certainly thinks so does he not ?

Peter Bolt, Redditch, UK

To Carol Sarler

The Lord Jesus Christ wasn't "religious" and there's no need for you or anybody else to be. In fact, the religious men of His day hated Him so much, they had Him horribly killed. But hey, you can't keep a good man down, He didn't stay dead, as He said He would, He rose to eternal life, and is available right now to you and anybody else who will have Him, to do what only He can do, and that's not so you can be "religious," it's to do what He said He had come to do, "to give life in all its fullness" and "to give eternal life."

Jesus Who is God isn't religious, and He's gone public, following Him isn't something for consenting adults to do in private in their leisure time, life in all its fullness is a full-time job. Do you want much more than you have? if so Check Jesus Christ out, not "religion."

With kind regards and best wishes

Barry Holroyd, Leeds, West Yorkshire, England

Brian.. the Nazies were led by Hitlers idiology.. Hitler, despite what some would like to believe, was a Catholic.. Religous.. not Athiest

Katie, London,

Er - over 70% of the population in the Census claim to be Christians so even if they don't go to church very often they can claim to be interested. And I don't think it's true that church attendance in London is falling at all.

NBeale, London, England

Carol Saler says "Religion is purely a private affair and it should be kept that way!"
But it ceases to be a private affair when it calls on its followers to murder apostates or abortion clinic doctors, or to deny equality to homosexuals.

Eric , London, England

Secularists, atheists and theophobes are not frightened of offending Christians. Christians tend to be meek, and more eager to please than quick to take offence, and any offence taken is unlikely to be a serious threat. The fear is surely that Muslims may take offence, because that it is known to have serious, and even fatal, consequences. Islam is a religion, but it is wrong to conflate it with, or impute its traits to, other religions.

Stu G, London,

Graeme in Edinburgh: "Brian in Woking, perhaps you should spend some time reading some of Dawkins "smug superiority" before you launch yourself on this tiresome Hilter, Stalin, Mao tirade. The systems they embraced became evil because they were *too much* like religions, not because they were without it."

This doesn't do Graeme. If you think Communism etc were evil because they shared an attribute with religion then you are exonerating religion from the claim that there is something inherently wrong with it. If you take your thought one step further you should find that the problem is with fanaticism; something which can attach itself to anything, religion included.

Stuart , London, England

.........'nobody, ever, has the right not to be offended' is quite correct.

I am perfectly entitled to believe, for example, that it is immoral, offensive and a sin against God to wear a yellow tie in public. If I see someone in the street wearing a yellow tie I am entitled to be offended by it and in fact it is a genuine deeply held belief, I would not have a choice but to be so offended.

I do not, however, have the right to impose my views on the other person and insist that they remove their tie. I have no right to insist that they act in such a way as to remove the cause of my offence.

I have the right to be offended but not the right not to be offended.

David Davies, St Albans, UK

Well Brian from Woking, if there was no "secular sense" there (whatever that may be), perhaps you could explain to use where (your ?) God was in those attrocities, and, if he was not there, why he let them rot? Stalin and his ilk didn't murder for atheism, they killed for power. And they could do so because they had succeeded in being venerated as tin-pod Gods themselves.

Ed Zuiderwijk, Cambridge, UK

And top of the times most commented section is usually an article about religion!

Brian, Wexford,

Is communism a religion? What about socialism?

John Davey, Brighton, UK

To Kate - I am saddened that you are perpetuating the misguided idea that the crusades represented a complete extermination of the indigenous population of the Holy Land on the part of European crusaders. The fact is that the crusaders merely replaced the Egyptian Muslim ruling elite (which incidently had removed a previous elite only a year or so earlier). Admittedly many vile murders were committed during the time but please do think that only the Christians were guilty, killings were carried out by both sides. The sooner we put to bed the ridiculous notion that the crusades was an era of Imperial domination and slaughter by Fundamentalist Christians the better.

Nick, Bradford, UK

'It has become a sine qua non of courteous interaction that those of us without a religious bone in our bodies must defer to those who have'.

Although members of other religions such as Islam or Buddhism may be respected by Guardian-reading 'liberals' and other leftists, this certainly is not the case with regards to the traditional Protestant religion of this country which is regularly derided as the source of most of the intolerant behaviour of our past - slavery, imperialism, homophobia etc.

Such is the ignorance of our history in the UK and Western Europe that we attribute all evil to a single cause in a ludicrously reductionist manner. Very few of the contemporary critics of Christianity can be bothered to do the difficult research that a non-facile approach to these questions demands. Protestants, at least, do not recognise the existence of the 'deference' to religions that the author talks about here. We are much more likely to be derided and marginalized by 'liberals'.

JL, Paris, France

I've noticed that liberals like to consider themselves as progressive and open-minded, but tell any of them you subscribe to a faith and they instantly become narrow-minded and intolerant. Let them go ahead and censure all this religious talk; they will soon enough see that God is still God of the entire universe.

Carol Lazarus, New York, USA

Brian, Woking

Hitler, Stalin and Mao did not murder in the name of aetheism.

But the christians and muslims did and are murdering in the name of their religion.

The difference is important.

Andrew Cramb, edinburgh,

2 Thessalonians 2 says, "Concerning the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ and our being gathered to him, we ask you, brothers, not to become easily unsettled or alarmed by some prophecy, report, or letter supposed to have come from us, saying that the day of the Lord has already come. Don't let anyone deceive you in any way, for (that day will not come) until the rebellion occurs and the man of lawlessness is revealed, the man doomed to destruction. He will oppose and will exalt himself over everything that is called God or is worshiped, so that he sets himself up in God's temple, proclaiming himself to be God."

The facts that 1) faith is viewed with such disdain by people who care to answer only to themselves, and 2) all faiths are being trumpeted as legitimate and equal, should be enough to warn us that the prophesied end times are coming, and those who care about where they will spend eternity should do something about it before it's too late.

Laurie, Chicago, IL, USA,

The article is well overdue, Faith is an important aspect of life for the many, yet the bad press it recieves from the misconceived actions of a few, thrust it into the limelight and everyone is scarred by it. To the extent that now, rarely a day goes by without reference to 'extremists 'but at the same time, not differentiating that this a minority and not the 'norm'. This country in which I have been raised has changed dramatically in the last 30 or so years, yet no one puts a finger on the possible reasons for this. Religion does have a place in each of our lives, whether we choose to follow a faith or not is the individuals perogative. The problem with any Faith lies with the minority that interpret religion to suit their misguided 'human' views. The sooner the mass media differentiate between the two, report responsibly and isolate them, the less likely it will be for 'ordinary' innocent citizens to be made to feel uncomfortable. Tolerance and understanding.

Liam si, Lancashire,

I think you've completely missed the point of the Pius Ncube story, which was actually about Robert Mugabe's efforts to destroy his opponents. If he does so by tackling them in their own backyard (be it religion or whatever) then surely it is legitimate to report that in its proper context!

I get the feeling that many people try hard to find evidence of religion where there really isn't any to suit their own prerogatives, whether they be pro- or anti- religion. This article certainly starts out a bit like that, so I'm less inclined to pay as much attention to the rest of it. Shame.

Gaz, London, UK

Thank you for this well-written and timely article. As an atheist, I find a number of religious sentiments - particularly ones pertaining to women and gays - deeply offensive. Yet somehow, my equally strongly held beliefs in these regards seem to count for less in the current well-meaning, but misguided, climate.

Student, Oxford, UK

David Morris, Attard, Malta:

Carol was saying that nobody has the innate right to never be offended by anyone; in other words, if someone says something that offends you, sometimes you just have to suck it up. It comes down to the right of people to speak their minds taking precedence over the right of the offended to stop them. And so, she is completely right.

Alex T, London,

Tom Porter hits the nail on the head, however, we still have "believers" in positions of power. None more evangelical than the previous occupant of number 10, a certain T Blair. It was his idea to increase the number of faith based schools that will not only lead to further segregation but indoctrination too.

A child should not be branded with a religion simply because they were born to religious parents. It is time that we make all schools secular like France. Religion should be a private matter and not interfere with the State or any of it's workings.

Rusty, Bristol, UK

Surely the increase in news stories is related to an increase in interest - in the days of digital media it is easy to find out which stories "sell" well, and to respond with bigger headlines. The authors views can't be very common. The fact that so many religious stories make it into the "most read" section shows that many people are interested in religious scandal. I just wish that more were interested in God!

Rachel, Birmingham, UK,

Funny how some "religious communties" are a zillion times more tolerant than the "non-community" presented by atheists.

I might not be religious and/or believe in G-d - but I still respect those who do ...

.. somehow "atheism" has become the "New Inquisition" that is just as intolerant as the old (although as yet "burning at the stake" is refined to a metaphoric-media sense) with more and more chances for acts of "auto-de-fe" for the Nu-Martyrs on television to present their point ...

Sometimes I feel like becoming a believer - just to spite those atheists who are the "New Inquisition"

drk, cadiz, spain

On the issue of church and state I will say this. No. Do you want shia law in this country? Do you want the ten commandments to be punished by the state? Because if you do then you will be stoned if you work on a sunday. (I do have to wonder if half the Christian's in this nation have read the bible because it's gruesome stuff)

Religion can be both positive and negative but when it gets into positions of authority the only interpretation of those religions that matter are the one's who run them and they tend to be the most radical, evangilical and intolerant of the lot. I look at what George Bush has done to America and shudder to think the same thing could happen here.

Don't attack religion but it cannot function as part of a democracy. Keep the church and state seperate.

On the issue of those "evil" secular societies. Political extremism has the same effect as extreme religion. Japan is a very secular nation yet has some of the lowest crime rates in the world.

Luke, Swindon, Wiltshire

Brian from Woking: Stalin, Mao and the (Christian) Nazis forced their own conception of modernity on their subjects. This left a tragic lack of freedom, not a tragic lack of god. Friendly, non-despotic atheists do not want you to conform, or to lose your morality, but only to make sense on the matter of imaginary beings. What's more, it's only the social dimension, the creepy reliance on the authority of tradition or of a group, the strutting of religious stuff in public, that makes it deserve strident criticism.

Religion has some payback coming - of a civilised kind - for its millennia-long history of receiving (and often demanding with menaces) completely pointless respect, and two or three thousand future years of atheistic smugness would even things up a little, although without really making up for the damage religion has done.

_Felix, Nottingham,

Isn't this article a fine example of the media talking about what the media itself is doing - yes - talking about religion! If the liberal and non-faith based press is content to go to print, then aim your fire towards your peers with an internal debate. You are simply perpetuating your own concerns.

I see the positive contribution faith based groups make to the fabric of our society - they are not only involved with the "faithful" - my own Anglican experience is one of seeing many folks of no faith or interest in religion using (in the good sense) the services and assets of the church - far beyond the minority you mention. Faith groups play a key part in our communities - it is therefore of no surprise to me that faith matters make the news.

Stephen Hefford, Nottingham, England

If a human is content with what they believe, why should other people be castigated for criticising those beliefs.

We live in a world where freedom of speech is a cherished right of the individual. Where critique helps to understand the people, belief systems and cultures that surround us.

I also think that religion should be locked within the belief system of the individual. It has no place in mainstream society. We don't need religion to tell us how to treat each other. Common sense and logic is key to furthering the human cause. I don't think that stories which have been put together centuries ago that refer to a supreme being, without any tangible evidence should be allowed to pull the strings of our society anymore.

Nilesh Lad, West Yorks, United Kingdom

The only other group I can think of who command so much more media attention then their numbers would suggest are terrorists.
Makes you think.

aubrey Laret, london,

All the anti-religion folks are nothing else than anti-christians.

Johannes, Lake Mary, Florida

My goodness! This is the first sensible and (dare I say it, after being accused of believing in 'rationality', as if it were a form of religion, by a Christian friend recently) realistic article on belief I have read in any paper for the last few, paranoid years.

Thank you for speaking out for logic and level-headedness, and asking for a reality check about the relevance of religion to the vast majority of the British population.

Victoria, London, UK

Brian, Woking; the article is referring to a secular state with liberal democratic principles, and a plural culture. The examples you provide were secular states with fascist or communist ideologies. Those are quite different things.

Moreover, counter examples of violent religious states are Talib Afganistan 7 years ago, Anglican England 400 years ago, Catholic Languedoc 800 years ago, Wahhabi Saudi Arabia now, and so on.

You've picked up on the wrong attribute; it's the dominant ideology that's important, whether that's a religious absolute monarchy, a secular dictatorship, a theocratic oligarchy, or a secular liberal democracy.

David Jones, Loughborough, UK

Trevor, unicorns exist even if the "majority" now do not recognise that fact.

Nick, London, UK

"Enough religion. Stop shoving it down my throat"

Enough democracy. Stop shoving it down my throat

Abdul ali, Baghdad, Iraq

Well said. Plus, as a rebuttal to Brian from Woking, what does Stalinism or the Holocaust have to do with rational thought and the huge benefits that a working scientific framework have brought us? Religion has never stopped evil, it's just produced an easier definition of 'us' and 'them' and lead to greater demonisation.

Matt, Brighton, UK

Carol Sarler's examples are not so much about religion. Rather, they typify how power is wielded through proponents of religion. Ncube made the front page because he is a leading opponent of the appalling Mugabe in Zimbabwe. State control of Muslim schools is being mooted as a bulwark against suicide bombing and other forms of political extremism. The media repetition of the McCanns' beliefs is simply a way of presenting them to their readers in a particular light.

So - maybe she needs to write new article? About religion as a weapon of strategic value?

Richard Flynn, Huntingdon, UK/Cambs.

Ah, Brian, the old 'Hitler was an atheist' canard, somehow religionistas never get tired of trotting that old, worn, valueless and just plain wrong fallacy out.

Shall we have a look at what the old tyrant himself had to say? "Therefore, I am convinced that I am acting as the agent of our Creator. By fighting off the Jews, I am doing the Lord's Work." (Mein Kampf & Reichstag speech of 1938),
"I am now as before a Catholic and will always remain so," (Told to Gerhard Engel, 1941)

But why let the facts get in the way of a good whine, eh?

As for Stalin et al, I agree that they were probably atheists, but 'secular sense' gave way to personality cults, unquestioning dogma and ideology, rather like what religious conservatives deem most desirable.

Carl, Princes Risborough, Bucks, UK

How very true. Radio 4 has a daily "Thought for the Day" at just before 8 a.m. which is a poorly disguised daily sermon and don't try to watch TV or listen to anything other than pop music between 8 and 9 on a Sunday morning if you are allergic to being force-fed religion by well meaning, woolly-minded old dears who are sure we all really ought to believe in God, and will appreciate being told so over and over again.

Andrea Kemp, London,

Oh dear another one of those intolerant rants in favour of tolerance and liberalism. Don`t read about it then if it so offensive.
Frankly I see plenty of evidence for increasing intolerance of any passionately held belief whatsoever - and the level of ignorant bigotry in some of the comments is only marginally less scary than the personal bias in the article.
The majority of our social laws in England are effectively based on the 10 Commandments - read them and please tell me what exactly is wrong with a social code that tells us to love our neighbours, maintain sexual and property boundaries, take regular rest (millenia before we had the working time directive) etc etc Oh of course there was the first commandment to Love the Lord our God with all our heart soul mind and strength - yes that is truly offensive to the self worshipping intolerant soul - so let us throw everything out.
Yours intolerantly AND IRONICALLY
I

Angus Bell, Guisborough, UK

Stop shoving multi-culturalism down my throat.
Stop shoving your climate change agenda down my throat.
Stop shoving sport down my throat.
Stop shoving metropolitan prejudices down my throat.
Stop shoving..............
The fact is that every day we are treated to the views of journalists and commentators on a whole range of issues. Being members of a liberal pluralist society in which people are allowed to express their views on anything they wish means that we just have to suck it up and ignore what we aren't interested in. Why should religion be subject to any less tolerance than any other issues? I have no interest in football so I don't comment on it. Carol Sarler and her followers obviously know very lttle about religion or religious people yet they feel quaified to pronounce on it. Why is that?

Tal Earl-Aine, Cheltenham,

Always keep a hold of nurse, for fear of finding something worse.....all atheistic societies have been brutal.

Frank Upton, Solihull,

I quite agree that people should not attempt to 'shove their religion' down your throat, but only Islam will cut your throat for being a non-Moslem or for trying to leave Islam --- all according to the teachings of Mohammed! There are NO passages in the New Testament that condone forced conversion or death, not in the words and life of Jesus Christ, nor in the words and actions of the Apostles. There's an enormous attempt by both Moslems and wrongly-termed 'secularists' to establish a moral equivalence between Christianity and Islam. There is none. Islam is a totalitarian, political ideology, more akin to Nazism and Communism (both of which drew on it) than to any religious belief. Its contention of being a 'great Abrahamic faith' is false, historically and theologically. Socialists who allowed unlimited immigration and borderless countries in the EU) now realise the danger of Islam and hope to distance themselves from responsbility for it by smearing Christianity.

KT, London,

...'nobody, ever, has the right not to be offended'.

Not a typo, David Morris - the writer is correct. If I claim 'I have the right not to be offended' I am saying that nobody may do anything that offends me. Carol says ' No, you do not have that right and nobody else has it either' .

David Hope Robertson, Oxford,

Surely you newspeople are to blame for the increasing amount of religiously related articles in your publications?
Cheap sensationalism works on all fronts, one could also lament the multitude of completely unimportant stories about "celebrities" and their personal problems.

Then there's a discourse going on in society, probably much more widespread than a generation ago, about the dangers and benefits of religion, not least because of the real danger of Islamist aggression and comcomitant political exploitation of that threat. This discourse is of course reflected in the media aswell.

Matt, Wuerzburg, Germany

Expanding empires characteristically depict the resistance they provoke as aggressive and reactionary. As secularism advances deeper and deeper into our lives, it is natural that some "people of faith" feel increasingly threatened by its less attractive aspects and wish to speak out against it. Believers feel more and more attacked on all sides, so that things that they have taken for granted in the past, such as "faith schools", are now being challenged, and many people are less tolerant of a government minister being a Catholic then a couple of decades ago: it's not Ruth Kelly who made an issue of her religion, but her critics. For "believers", it is secular society that is doing most of the "shoving down throats", relentlessly bombarding them with its shallow consumerism and amorality. It is much easier to ignore organised religion than to ignore secularism today.

And Ncube's downfall is important for Southern African politics, whatever Carol Sarler in her ignorance says.

DP, North,

I'd like the same courtesy shown to my world view - atheistic - as I show to expressions of religious belief by others - in fact, just silence would be okay. But it won't happen. Courtesy appears to be misplaced here as it's taken by 'believers' for uncertainty or a propensity to conversion. I have sat politely through what is to my ears unadulterated claptrap and wishful thinking, knowing full well that any expression of doubt would only unleash a further torrent of gobbledegook. An all-time low was listening patiently to a Creationist's absurd explanation of the 'true age' of the universe, happily trashing science as he went, stopping only to use his mobile. These people are impervious to irony, let alone the demands of critical thought. Put simply, they are over-exposed, deluded bores.

anne, bournemouth,

God exists even if the "majority" now do not recognise that fact. Pandering to popular views has legalised homsexuality, given "rights" to anyone who shouts loud enought and brought us down to where we are today where children carry and use knives just for kicks and because no-one points out its wrong. Yet when things get really difficult most people turn to God for help.
lets get back to basics before this country gets any worse.

Trevor Jones, Twickenham, England

I agree with the points made in the article. For example, it's puzzling to me that 'faith' schools (i.e. taxpayer funded religious indoctrination) are on the agenda with the political ruling class. Self created religious segregation is already causing serious social problems in England without the stupidity of paying for more of it against the wishes of most taxpayers.

paul newbold, sheffield, uk

My response is in the title of this piece. I spent near enough 30 years actively seeking the answer to the issue of what it was that other people seemed to be 'believing' in. It was a waste of my time. There are no gods or a god...people hide behind 'religious' doctrines because they are either too lazy or too spineless to stand up for something else - or it is a convenient hook on which to accomplish their own selfish objectives. (By the way Brian from Woking - you cleary have not read Mr Dawkins' latest book - the God Delusion. Perhaps you should)

Nora, Essex, UK

Enough Football, Rugby, sport in general! Stop pushing it down our throats!!

J O'Neill, Doncaster,

Perhaps journalists need to find something else to write about then, as it's their articles that get published in the media. You might even want to take a look around the press office and discuss the content, (or lack of), of articles with your colleagues - rather than write yet another article on a subject you seem to be so fed up with. Just a thought.

Tarni, London, UK

Carol Saler: Thanks for one of the nicest articles after a long time.

"religion and statistics are notoriously awkward bedfellows"

Very true. When we mix up religion with anything including science, we get strange results!

Religion is purely a private affair and it should be kept that way! Also, state should not have any role in religious affairs. In addition, it is better to keep religion out of politics another "opium" for the masses!

Half of worlds problems’ will be solved, if we don't stress too much on religion outside our homes and learn to tolerate others for what they are!
Regards,

Krishna R. Kumar, Udupi, India

I did not see any command to say that anyone had to read the articles. Maybe there was less of a need to mention religous matters in the media in years past as these matters were discussed with the congregation when they attended

Clive, West Midlands,

totally agree with the main thrust of the article.
If Barack Obama will permit the paraphrased quote, "Faith is not something you have, or talk endlessly about...it is something you do".
The truly religious just get quietly on with practising the art of unconditional lovingness.It's their practical expression that speaks for them, about them.
Those who need to talk endlessly about doctrine, tradition,religious laws... are really trying to convince themselves. They talk so much because they never listen :) They never listen because they are afraid of what they will hear.
Pushing religion/s at society is not a statement of faith - but a statement of the lack of it!!!

Keith, Dalsland, Sweden

The Nazis were not atheistic rationalists - they were neo-pagans. Fascism in Spain, Portugal, Ireland, Italy and Croatia was strongly associated with Catholicism. The Japanese Emperor was believed to be a God. Joseph Stalin trained for the priesthood

Georges, London, UK

"Our Muslim population is 1.6 million" - where do these statistics come from? My estimate would be that there are more than 1.6 million Muslims in London alone.

It is obviously in the government's interests to underestimate the number of immigrants, no matter what the religion, race or origin. I think the population would be astounded by the true figures. No wonder the government refuses to carry out any in depth counts or surveys. It would much rather claim the figures are impossible quantify.

Edwin Thornber, Bucharest,

Chris writes:
'Enlightened, secular civic society is such an improvement .. '

But Jesus said: 'I am the light of the world.'

According then, to the Son of God - whose view, with respect, I prefer to follow rather than that of a mere created being like you Chris - secular society is actually deeply in the dark. And doesn't this just show in Britain today?

David, Bristol,

Kate- The crusades were a very long time ago and basically were about the same things that major conflicts have always been about eg: money, land and power. Regretably they were fought under the banners of Christianity and Islam. God is not the problem, man is. As I said in my previous post, it is mankinds misuse of religion that has a lot to answer for.
Please take into account the billions of people of faith in the world who go about their day quietly and with respect for others. Yes Church of England figures appear to be falling but how about Baptist, non conformist and house churches?

Brian, Woking, UK

This inverse proportion of religious practice versus religious interest is the fear of the rational versus the irrational.

Robert, London,

Brian in Woking, perhaps you should spend some time reading some of Dawkins "smug superiority" before you launch yourself on this tiresome Hilter, Stalin, Mao tirade. The systems they embraced became evil because they were *too much* like religions, not because they were without it.

Graeme, Edinburgh, UK

Secularisation is a very long-term trend. By the 1980s religion had become so marginalised that films such as the "Life of Brian" didn't even become cause celebres. However ultimately there are consequences, and as a result religious stories start popping up in the media again.

Malcolm McLean, Bradford, UK

To David: I think "nobody, ever, has the right to not be offended", i.e. "a person is not entitled to have others act in such a way at all times that the former person will not be offended".

Thomas Ralph, Dublin , Ireland

.........'nobody, ever, has the right not to be offended'.

Isn't there one negative too many there? Don't you mean 'nobody ever has the right to be offended'? As it stands, you're telling us that we must all, always, be offended.
But to be offended is a choice, not a right or a duty. What you have written undermines your argument. Let's put it down to a typo.

David Morris, Attard, Malta

The answer, I believe, is that organised religion, despite its minority, views remains frighteningly powerful because we have never truly made the break to a genuinely secular society. Michel Onfray's book 'The Athiest Manifesto' admirably deals with the numerous arbitrary social norms that are still rooted in religious experience in France (relevant to UK too) despite attempts at secularisation there. Until we stand back and make a concerted effort to remove from the statute books all laws that are rooted in iron-age religious prejudice, we will continue to have the vocal and misguided religious minority forcing their idiotic opinions on us. Religion-based morality has proven itself bankrupt over the long term and until we adopt, across the board, principals of natural justice to govern our society, we will have to endure the vocal insistence of fairy loving fantasists about what is the right and wrong way to lead one's life and engage with broader society.

Tom Porter, Singapore, Singapore

Brian - there's never been such a thing as a PURELY secular society. People will always believe what they want to believe. Everyone needs their own comfort zone - if only they wouldn't foist theirs on others

Enlightened, secular civic society is such an improvement on the thousands of years of corrupt and abusive theocracies of the past we've simply forgotten how appalling life under the priests was. It's taken untold generations to diminish religion's role in public life - please let's keep it that way!

Chris Thomas, Oxford, England

Yes, those Crusades did a lot to advance your idea that only secular societies must answer for the murder and the extermination of entire populations.

Kate, New York, USA

I am a Christian, but I think the problem you are refering to is a result of a wrong view of tolerance. Tolerance is tolerating a belief you dont agree with and you should be allowed to vocally disagree with it. This should be the founding block of democracy. I am reminded of the quote often attributed to Voltaire; 'I disagree with what you say, but I but I will fight to the death for your right to say it'. The problem is now in this 'super-tolerant society' all minorities are well over represented, with the majority not having any say in issues, for fear of being branded racist, homophobic etc etc and the government won't touch controversial issues for fear of the same things being said about them.

Jonathan Morgan, Preston, Britian

An excellent article. It needed to be said. For thirty years I have
said that England - not the UK - is a pagan country. It is time to be proud of it. The only non - Christian festival that seems to be cited by the opinion formers and officials in England is Diwali. It is as if they can't be bothered to remember any more.
I suspect that it is because it carries no disturbing historical overtones, since, mainly, we don't really know what it is.
How often is the Passover or Hannakah quoted as an example?

John Carty, Medellin, Colombia

More Dawkinesque smug superiority I'm afraid. Where was the " secular sense" in the extermination of 6 million Jews by the Nazi's, Stalin's great terror of the 30's that purged the Soviet Union of miliions of "enemies of the state" or Mao's great leap foreward that resulted in the deaths of 10s of miliions of rural Chinese for the sake of secular communist ideology.
Yes, mankinds misuse of religion has a lot to answer for but purely secular societies leave a God shaped hole that is all too easily filled by evil intent( unfashionable as it might be to use the E word).

Brian, Woking, UK

Have your say

* Required

Print
Email
Bookmark and Share

Also in Guest contributors

Also in Columnists

Camilla Cavendish

Camilla Cavendish wins award for family justice campaign

Columns urging greater openness in family courts win Paul Foot Award

Cartoon

Peter Brookes cartoon

More cartoons

columnist peter stothard

Peter Stothard

The Editor of the TLS writes on books, people and politics

mary beard

A Don's Life

Mary Beard of Cambridge and the TLS on culture ancient and modern

Two Conservative voters in top hats

The death of the toff?

Has the word lost its meaning in modern times?

Byline the Times Baghdad correspondent Deborah Haynes

Award-winning Iraq coverage from Deborah Haynes

A series on the plight of Iraqi interpreters took the Tony Bevins Prize for investigative journalism

Most Read

Skip Most Read

Today

MOST COMMENTED

Skip Editor's Pick

Today

MOST CURIOUS

Skip Most Curious

Today

Focus Zone

Angel of the north

Northern Lights:

Win a luxury weekend to Newcastle and its neighbour Gateshead, find out more here

BT

Business Solutions:

Risk, resilience and embracing new technology

accenture

Need to Know:

Industry sectors news at a glance. Interactive heatmap, video and podcast

Cisco

Business Wisdom:

Discover the power of collective thinking. Submit a solution and be in with a chance to win a Media Hub Home Entertainment System

Social Entrepreneur

Social Entrepreneurs:

The inside track on current trends in the charity, not for profit and social enterprise sectors

ba business travel clouds

Business Travel:

Everything the Business Traveller needs to know to make a better trip

rowing boats

Great British Summer :

Make the most of the summer and enter our fabulous photographic competition, you could win a £5000 holiday

Corsica

Corsica Travel:

Corsica is an island of beauty and contrast, an ideal holiday destination

More Reports

More reports:

Enjoy further reading from Travel to Fashion, Business to Sport, discover more

previous next
Births, Deaths, Marriages puff graphic

Births, deaths, marriages

Place your announcement

Laptop computer showig a picture of a telephone on screen

Simplify Digital

Save a bundle

Deals on digital TV, broadband & phone

births, marriages and deaths

Announcements

Search The Times Births, Marriages & Deaths

A lawyer with gown and wig

Find a Lawyer

Cut your legal costs

Sudoku

Online Sudoku with daily prizes

Free credit report

Online credit history with CreditExpert from Experian

Popular Searches on Times Online

bollywood news | britain's got talent | chess | dating | fashion | Michael Jackson | mortgages | movie trailers | music | podcasts | recipes | redundancy | savings | slumdog millionaire | star trek | sudoku | twilight | university guide | wine

Shortcuts to help you find sections and articles

Classifieds 

Cars

Skip Cars of the Week

Car leasing


The clever way to lease a new car is with Car leasing made simple™

New Audi A5 Coupe from £399.99 inc VAT

2009
per month on 36-month
Personal Contract Hire (PCH)

Jobs

Skip Jobs of the Week
Intelligence Analyst

£24,250 - £30,346
MI5
London

Finance & Corporate Services Manager

£60,000
The Environment Agency
Bristol

Programme Manager

Up to £90K
Boots
Midlands

Sales Professionals

OTE £85k
Credit Protection Association
Nationwide Opportunities

Properties

Rushmore Condo's

Luxury Condo's in Manhattan with NYC views

Diadem Homes

The best new homes in Wimbledon?

Holidays

Skip Travel of the Week

Virgin Atlantic 2009 Cruise Deals

Fabulous Cruise And Cruise & Stay Offers Including Virgin Atlantic Flights Prices Start From Only £699pp!


Amazing Cruise Deals With Virgin Holidays Cruises

Last Minute Cruise And Cruise & Stay Offers. Med From £499pp, Caribbean From £699pp!


5 * Moscow break from £499 pp inc flights

5 star quality at a 3 star price.


Canada for Less.. fly from £129 one way inc taxes

8 fabulous Canadian cities ...you won’t find cheaper


Place your advert now