Comments on: MCB Ofcom complaint – a lawyer writes

By: Monitor

Monitor — Tue, 06 Sep 2005 08:22:40 +0000

Not to mention the unelected Lords Spiritual in our second legislative chamber – 26 Church of England bishops and archbishops who are there solely by virtue of their being Church of England bishops and archbishops.

Or government-funded “faith” (ie religiously-segregated) schools, or chaplains in prison, hospitals and the armed forces.

By: Andrew Nixon

Andrew Nixon — Tue, 06 Sep 2005 05:46:12 +0000

The UK is clearly not a secular state, as we have religion enshrined in our laws: eg. Public Holidays on Good Friday and Christmas Day, blasphemy laws and Sunday trading restrictions. We also allow religous propoganda in schools, (in fact it is pratically compulsory) and some TV stations are legally required to show it.

Just because our politicians do not speak in religous terminology (as in the USA) does not mean we are a secular state. (Irony is of course that the USA is technically a secular state)

We may be a largely secular society, in that most people in the country couldn’t give a toss about religion, but we are certainly not a secular state.

By: Tracy Cordon

Tracy Cordon — Mon, 05 Sep 2005 23:05:15 +0000

I notice that the MCB say, “in September 2004, the MCB printed 500,000 copies of a Pocket Guide on Rights and Responsibilities.”. What they don’t say is where and when these have been distributed, if at all.

By: jamal

jamal — Mon, 05 Sep 2005 21:52:05 +0000

As i have said. If their point is based upon coverage of Israel/Palistine, then they have a point. Obviously, how much of a point would depend on the differing interpretations of what is “superficial”.

How is Britain not a secular country when religion has been long since far removed from the state. The Queen is not much more than a mascot, therefore being both head of state and the church has no bearing on the matter, or prove that Britian is not secularist.

By: G. Tingey

G. Tingey — Mon, 05 Sep 2005 17:28:01 +0000

“On occasion they sound like petulant children. ”
But petulant chidren with access to threats and blackmail – just like all the religions …..

By: Andy Gilmour

Andy Gilmour — Mon, 05 Sep 2005 09:52:11 +0000

Jamal, er….no. If the programme was NOT specifically about the enormously complex and difficult issues surrounding Israel & Palestine, then “superficial” coverage may have been, in fact, relatively balanced without claiming to be complete analysis; which would be appropriate for the context. MCB’s complaint would seem to be that such coverage wasn’t sufficiently slanted towards their point of view. I didn’t see the show, so I have no way of knowing whether the MCB are justified in that criticism. One small point, however, out of a litany of silliness doth not contradict their status as clowns…

On another bit of the article,r.e. claims of a secular Britain, well just to be horribly pedantic, ENGLAND is a religious state, because the Head of State (ridiculous monarchy) is also the head of the established church (ridiculous supernaturalists). Up here in sconny Botland, however, established church & HoS are seperate entities. It’s a pathetically weak, technical difference, but we Hume-lovers up here cling to it in secular desperation. I know, most of the residents of Glasgow/state funding for religious schools make a mockery of any idea of a properly secular Scotland, but at least we’re one tiny step further down the road… 🙂

By: jamal

jamal — Mon, 05 Sep 2005 00:03:38 +0000

I was agreeing with the perspective of this article and remembering the MCB’s exploits for publicity in the Ken Bigley affair compared to their stance on HUB. But that was until I read the line;

“It is also true that that Israel/Palestine conflict was superficially covered”

Where you have confirmed the nature of their complaint and therefore contradicted your arguement of why the MCB are clowns!

By: Marc

Marc — Sun, 04 Sep 2005 22:39:13 +0000

Cue the picture of Sir Icbal with a red nose…. 😉