DOCSLIB.ORG

Election Briefing 2019

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Election Briefing 2019 Updated Dec 3 Election Briefing 2019 AN ANALYSIS OF PARTY POLICIES ON ISSUES OF IMPORTANCE TO CHRISTIANS ELECTION 2019 christian.org.uk/election Contents 3 Introduction 8 Conservatives 14 Labour 19 Scottish National Party 22 Liberal Democrats 25 The Independent Group for Change 26 Plaid Cymru | Party of Wales 28 Green Party 30 Brexit Party 31 The Christian Party 32 Christian Peoples Alliance 33 More information about legislation and public policy 42 References Key resources Voting records of MPs Candidate QuestionCards See christian.org.uk/election – these Download at christian.org.uk/election cover a specific range of moral issues – the questions help Christians find and there may well be other matters out the views of their candidates. You you want to think about. Our voting can also get copies from our office on records database only applies to MPs request – 0191 281 5664. from the Parliament just dissolved. Some MPs are standing down.1 This Election Briefing Obviously you will want to ask the Further copies can be downloaded at views of the other candidates in your christian.org.uk/election or ordered by constituency. calling our office – 0191 281 5664. All information in this briefing is correct at time of publication | Copyright © The Christian Institute 2019 | Published by The Christian Institute, Wilberforce House, 4 Park Road, Gosforth Business Park, Newcastle upon Tyne, NE12 8DG | All rights reserved | No part of this publication may be reproduced, or stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted, in any form or by any means, mechanical, electronic, photocopying, recording or otherwise, without the prior permission of The Christian Institute. Introduction ELECTION 2019 to restrain evil and promote what is good (Romans 13 and 1 Peter 2). This benefits all As Christian citizens we should think people in this world, not just Christians. carefully about how we vote in the General As a general rule Christians follow Jesus’ Election on 12 December 2019. command to: “Render therefore unto Caesar The Christian Institute is a registered the things which are Caesar’s” (Matthew charity and we cannot tell you how to vote. 22:21, KJV).2 Christians are citizens of What we can do in this briefing is address: heaven (Philippians 3:20) and also of an earthly nation (usually where we are born). ĥ why should you vote? The Christian’s duty is to obey the governing ĥ biblical priorities authorities. The exception is where they ĥ Brexit forbid what God requires, or require what ĥ issues on the horizon God forbids (Acts 5:29). It is our earnest prayer that Christians ĥ two key factors in voting will have freedom to share the Gospel and ĥ speaking to candidates live out the Christian life (1 Timothy 2:1-4). ĥ party policies on key issues In praying “deliver us from evil” (Matthew ĥ background information on legislation 6:13) we are praying against the persecution and public policy. of the Church as well as against personal temptation. Our analysis of party policies covers many issues where important Christian Common grace and the principles are at stake. They tend to be privilege of voting issues where biblical standards, particularly Romans 13 makes clear that God has the Ten Commandments, directly apply. In ordained the governing authorities in every modern Britain they can be among the most country whether rulers are Christian or not. controversial subjects, yet in our view the Thanks to God’s common grace, there are Bible is perfectly clear about them. many non-Christians who take the right We cannot be exhaustive. There will view on a range of issues. Nobody’s thinking be other areas of concern where much is wrong at every point. Politicians who material is available or where there is honest disagree with Christians about redefining disagreement among Christians holding marriage can still be strongly against assisted to the Bible as their authority, such as the suicide or liberalising cannabis laws. Some environment. atheists will strongly defend the free speech of Christians. The Christian Institute can WHY SHOULD YOU VOTE? testify that there are men and women of integrity in parties across the political The state is a means of God’s ‘common spectrum. grace’. The Bible is very clear that the Like the prophet Daniel, God’s people governing authorities act on God’s behalf must encourage leadership which promotes 3 truth and righteousness, such as when he that we mainly focus on in this briefing – said to King Nebuchadnezzar: “Therefore, straightforward matters of right or wrong. O king, be pleased to accept my advice: For a very large proportion of political Renounce your sins by doing what is right, issues, making a Christian judgement and your wickedness by being kind to the depends on the wise assessment of oppressed” (Daniel 4:27). several biblical principles. This can result in Unlike Daniel, Christians in the UK today Christians arriving at different conclusions. get to play a part in electing their leaders. In For example, we know that the state our democracy we all have the legal right to has a right to levy taxes (Romans 13:7). vote. Billions of people around the world do But Christians who hold to biblical truth not enjoy the same freedoms we have in the can legitimately disagree on the level of UK. We elect Members of Parliament and so, individual taxes. ultimately, the Government. We help choose ‘Caesar’. So voting is a privilege and a serious BREXIT responsibility.3 The General Election provides an A proper understanding of Britain’s opportunity for Christians to speak out and membership of the EU has always involved play their part by voting. Governments can questions of nationhood and sovereignty, make it easier or harder to live freely as a economics and trade, democracy and Christian or to share the Gospel. Believers accountability, defence and international have to make a judgement about how their relations, as well as the implications for vote can be used to best effect. Christian freedom. As a registered charity, the Institute BIBLICAL PRIORITIES did not tell Christians how to vote in the 2016 EU referendum. But we did encourage When it comes to matters of public policy, Christians across the UK to prayerfully Christians have to assess biblical priorities. consider their view and to cast their vote. We can distinguish those political issues on There were biblical Christians on both sides. which the Bible is absolutely clear from those The referendum saw a majority vote to on which it is not. leave the EU and the ‘Article 50’ process For instance, the Bible is not clear on began in March 2017. The issue of Brexit how to improve access to GPs or the most has dominated our political landscape appropriate level of university tuition fees. since. Constitutionally extraordinary – even To decide on these issues involves a detailed unprecedented – events have taken place. assessment of the facts and the exercise Other issues have not received the level of of judgement based on experience. Many scrutiny that would be expected in normal situations we encounter in ordinary life are at circumstances, including the imposition of this level, and so are many political issues. abortion and same-sex marriage on Northern But at the other end of the spectrum Ireland. Irrespective of views on Brexit, the the Bible is “clear, direct, and decisive”4 lack of a resolution since the referendum has about a whole host of political issues. For resulted in damaging instability. We pray this example, a vote for abortion or euthanasia will come to an end as soon as possible. is a vote to break the sixth Commandment We encouraged Christians in 2017 (Exodus 20:13). These are the kinds of issues to remember that, although the General 4 Election had been dubbed ‘the Brexit Yet here in the UK religious liberty election’, the chosen MPs could pass laws is being increasingly challenged. Street affecting every area of life. Parliament preachers have been arrested. Christians has since considered issues including have lost their jobs for answering questions abortion, same-sex marriage, heterosexual about their faith or for taking an ethical civil partnerships, relationships and sex stand. Christians in business have come into education, assisted suicide, no-fault divorce, conflict with equality laws and faced fines pornography, gambling, cannabis and for holding to the belief that marriage is Christian persecution overseas. While Brexit between a man and a woman. is an important issue that may well dominate Many Christians are also gravely this election, Christians must consider other concerned about legislative proposals that matters as well. intrude into ordinary family life, evangelism and the running of the local church. ISSUES ON THE HORIZON Christians believe that governing authorities are established by God, but at the same The new Parliament elected on 12 December time the Government is not responsible for 2019 could vote on laws affecting religious everything. Indeed, if there is to be freedom, liberty, freedom of speech, transgender it must not be. rights, abortion, assisted suicide, divorce It is important to say that society is more liberalisation, drugs legalisation and than the state. Society is made up of families gambling. More information about legislation and many institutions and organisations and public policy on these and other issues is between the state and the citizen. In the given from page 33 onwards. UK, unlike Communist countries, we do not These are all issues of concern to equate society with the State. Government Christians. Some are ‘conscience votes’ by itself cannot solve all our problems or where MPs are free to vote without a party even come remotely close.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • The European Election Results 2009
    EUROPEAN PARLIAMENTARY ELECTION FOR THE EASTERN REGION 4TH JUNE 2009 STATEMENT UNDER RULE 56(1)(b) OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENTARY ELECTIONS RULES 2004 I, David Monks, hereby give notice that at the European Parliamentary Election in the Eastern Region held on 4th June 2009 — 1. The number of votes cast for each Party and individual Candidate was — Party or Individual Candidate No. of Votes 1. Animals Count 13,201 2. British National Party – National Party – Protecting British Jobs 97,013 3. Christian Party ―Proclaiming Christ’s Lordship‖ The Christian Party – CPA 24,646 4. Conservative Party 500,331 5. English Democrats Party – English Democrats – ―Putting England First!‖ 32,211 6. Jury Team 6,354 7. Liberal Democrats 221,235 8. NO2EU:Yes to Democracy 13,939 9 Pro Democracy: Libertas.EU 9,940 10. Social Labour Party (Leader Arthur Scargill) 13,599 11. The Green Party 141,016 12. The Labour Party 167,833 13. United Kingdom First 38,185 14. United Kingdom Independence Party – UKIP 313,921 15. Independent (Peter E Rigby) 9,916 2. The number of votes rejected was: 13,164 3. The number of votes which each Party or Candidate had after the application of subsections (4) to (9) of Section 2 of the European Parliamentary Elections Act 2002, was — Stage Party or Individual Candidate Votes Allocation 1. Conservative 500331 First Seat 2. UKIP 313921 Second Seat 3. Conservative 250165 Third Seat 4. Liberal Democrat 221235 Fourth Seat 5. Labour Party 167833 Fifth Seat 6. Conservative 166777 Sixth Seat 7. UKIP 156960 Seventh Seat 4. The seven Candidates elected for the Eastern Region are — Name Address Party 1.
    [Show full text]
  • ESS9 Appendix A3 Political Parties Ed
    APPENDIX A3 POLITICAL PARTIES, ESS9 - 2018 ed. 3.0 Austria 2 Belgium 4 Bulgaria 7 Croatia 8 Cyprus 10 Czechia 12 Denmark 14 Estonia 15 Finland 17 France 19 Germany 20 Hungary 21 Iceland 23 Ireland 25 Italy 26 Latvia 28 Lithuania 31 Montenegro 34 Netherlands 36 Norway 38 Poland 40 Portugal 44 Serbia 47 Slovakia 52 Slovenia 53 Spain 54 Sweden 57 Switzerland 58 United Kingdom 61 Version Notes, ESS9 Appendix A3 POLITICAL PARTIES ESS9 edition 3.0 (published 10.12.20): Changes from previous edition: Additional countries: Denmark, Iceland. ESS9 edition 2.0 (published 15.06.20): Changes from previous edition: Additional countries: Croatia, Latvia, Lithuania, Montenegro, Portugal, Slovakia, Spain, Sweden. Austria 1. Political parties Language used in data file: German Year of last election: 2017 Official party names, English 1. Sozialdemokratische Partei Österreichs (SPÖ) - Social Democratic Party of Austria - 26.9 % names/translation, and size in last 2. Österreichische Volkspartei (ÖVP) - Austrian People's Party - 31.5 % election: 3. Freiheitliche Partei Österreichs (FPÖ) - Freedom Party of Austria - 26.0 % 4. Liste Peter Pilz (PILZ) - PILZ - 4.4 % 5. Die Grünen – Die Grüne Alternative (Grüne) - The Greens – The Green Alternative - 3.8 % 6. Kommunistische Partei Österreichs (KPÖ) - Communist Party of Austria - 0.8 % 7. NEOS – Das Neue Österreich und Liberales Forum (NEOS) - NEOS – The New Austria and Liberal Forum - 5.3 % 8. G!LT - Verein zur Förderung der Offenen Demokratie (GILT) - My Vote Counts! - 1.0 % Description of political parties listed 1. The Social Democratic Party (Sozialdemokratische Partei Österreichs, or SPÖ) is a social above democratic/center-left political party that was founded in 1888 as the Social Democratic Worker's Party (Sozialdemokratische Arbeiterpartei, or SDAP), when Victor Adler managed to unite the various opposing factions.
    [Show full text]
  • C (1003-1005) D (1006-1011)
    B Country code (1001-1002) EB81.3 B C our survey number (1003-1005) EB81.3 C D Interview number (1006-1011) EB81.3 D D11: NO "NO ANSWER" ALLOWED D11 How old are you? (1012-1013) EB81.3 D11 EB0817UKXTRA 1/44 3/06/2014 ASK THE WHOLE QUESTIONNAIRE ONLY IF LEGALLY ABLE TO VOTE (18+ EXCEPT 16+ IN AT) Q1: CODE 29 CANNOT BE THE ONLY ANSWER OTHERWISE CLOSE THE INTERVIEW Q1: CODE 30 IS EXCLUSIVE Q1: IF CODE 30 THEN CLOSE INTERVIEW Q1 What is your nationality? Please tell me the country(ies) that applies(y). (MULTIPLE ANSWERS POSSIBLE) (1034-1063) Belgium 1, Denmark 2, Germany 3, Greece 4, Spain 5, France 6, Ireland 7, Italy 8, Luxembourg 9, Netherlands 10, Portugal 11, United Kingdom (Great Britain, Northern Ireland) 12, Austria 13, Sweden 14, Finland 15, Republic of Cyprus 16, Czech Republic 17, Estonia 18, Hungary 19, Latvia 20, Lithuania 21, Malta 22, Poland 23, Slovakia 24, Slovenia 25, Bulgaria 26, Romania 27, Croatia 28, Other countries 29, DK 30, EB81.3 Q1 EB0817UKXTRA 2/44 3/06/2014 QP1 The European Parliament elections were held on the 22nd May 2014. For one reason or another, some people in the UK did not vote in these elections. Did you vote in the recent European Parliament elections? (SHOW SCREEN - SINGLE CODE) (1064) Voted 1 Did not vote 2 DK 3 EB71.3 QK1 EB0817UKXTRA 3/44 3/06/2014 ASK QP2 TO QP5a IF "VOTED", CODE 1 IN QP1 – OTHERS GO TO QP3b QP2 Which party did you vote for in the European Parliament elections? (SHOW SCREEN – READ OUT – SINGLE CODE) (1065-1066) Sinn Féin (SF) 1 Democratic Unionist Party (DUP) 2 Ulster Unionist Party
    [Show full text]
  • Ethol Aelodau Senedd Cymru Dros Ranbarth Canolbarth a Gorllewin
    DATGAN CANLYNIAD Y DECLARATION OF RESULT OF BLEIDLAIS POLL Ethol Aelodau Senedd Cymru Election of Members of Senedd dros Ranbarth Canolbarth a Cymru for the Mid and West Gorllewin Cymru Wales Region YR WYF I, Eifion Evans, sef y Swyddog Canlyniadau Rhanbarthol I, Eifion Evans, being the Regional Returning Officer at the Election ar gyfer Rhanbarth Canolbarth a Gorllewin Cymru yn Etholiad of Senedd Cymru for the Mid and West Wales Region, held on 6 Senedd Cymru, a gynhaliwyd ar 6 Mai 2021, felly’n datgan bod May 2021, hereby declare the total number of votes cast for the nifer y pleidleisiau a fwriwyd ar gyfer y Rhanbarth fel y ganlyn: Region are as follows: Enw’r Blaid Cyfanswm nifer y Pleidleisiau a Fwriwyd i’r Blaid: Name of Party Number of Votes Recorded for the Party: ABOLISH THE WELSH ASSEMBLY PARTY 8,073 Britain’s Communist Party Plaid Gomiwnyddol Prydain 589 Ceidwadwyr Cymreig / Welsh Conservatives 63,827 Freedom Alliance. No Lockdowns. No Curfews. 1,181 Gwlad – The Welsh Independence Party 1,303 Gwlad – Plaid Annibyniaeth Cymru Plaid Cymru-The Party of Wales 65,450 PROPEL CYMRU 1,428 REFORM UK 2,582 UKIP Scrap The Assembly/Senedd 3,731 WALES GREEN PARTY / PLAID WERDD CYMRU 10,545 WELSH CHRISTIAN PARTY “PROCLAIMING CHRIST’S LORDSHIP” 1,366 WELSH LABOUR/LLAFUR CYMRU 61,733 WELSH LIBERAL DEMOCRATS – PUT RECOVERY FIRST / DEMOCRATIAID 16,181 RHYDDFRYDOL CYMRU – ADFYWIO YW’R FLAENORIAETH Welsh Trade Unionist and Socialist Coalition 257 Argraffwyd a chyhoeddwyd gan / Printed and published by: Eifion Evans, Swyddog Canlyniadau Rhanbarthol / Regional Returning Officer Neuadd Cyngor Ceredigion, Penmorfa, Aberaeron SA46 0PA Yr wyf yn datgan hefyd dyraniad seddi ar gyfer y Rhanbarth fel a I further declare the allocation of seats for the Region are as follows: ganlyn: Enw’r Aelod Enw’r Blaid Wleidyddol Gofrestredig, os yw’n berthnasol Full Name of Member Name of Registered Political Party, if applicable 1.
    [Show full text]
  • Challenger Party List
    Appendix List of Challenger Parties Operationalization of Challenger Parties A party is considered a challenger party if in any given year it has not been a member of a central government after 1930. A party is considered a dominant party if in any given year it has been part of a central government after 1930. Only parties with ministers in cabinet are considered to be members of a central government. A party ceases to be a challenger party once it enters central government (in the election immediately preceding entry into office, it is classified as a challenger party). Participation in a national war/crisis cabinets and national unity governments (e.g., Communists in France’s provisional government) does not in itself qualify a party as a dominant party. A dominant party will continue to be considered a dominant party after merging with a challenger party, but a party will be considered a challenger party if it splits from a dominant party. Using this definition, the following parties were challenger parties in Western Europe in the period under investigation (1950–2017). The parties that became dominant parties during the period are indicated with an asterisk. Last election in dataset Country Party Party name (as abbreviation challenger party) Austria ALÖ Alternative List Austria 1983 DU The Independents—Lugner’s List 1999 FPÖ Freedom Party of Austria 1983 * Fritz The Citizens’ Forum Austria 2008 Grüne The Greens—The Green Alternative 2017 LiF Liberal Forum 2008 Martin Hans-Peter Martin’s List 2006 Nein No—Citizens’ Initiative against
    [Show full text]
  • Country Fact Sheet, Democratic Republic of the Congo
    Issue Papers, Extended Responses and Country Fact Sheets file:///C:/Documents and Settings/brendelt/Desktop/temp rir/Country Fact... Français Home Contact Us Help Search canada.gc.ca Issue Papers, Extended Responses and Country Fact Sheets Home Country Fact Sheet DEMOCRATIC REPUBLIC OF THE CONGO April 2007 Disclaimer This document was prepared by the Research Directorate of the Immigration and Refugee Board of Canada on the basis of publicly available information, analysis and comment. All sources are cited. This document is not, and does not purport to be, either exhaustive with regard to conditions in the country surveyed or conclusive as to the merit of any particular claim to refugee status or asylum. For further information on current developments, please contact the Research Directorate. Table of Contents 1. GENERAL INFORMATION 2. POLITICAL BACKGROUND 3. POLITICAL PARTIES 4. ARMED GROUPS AND OTHER NON-STATE ACTORS 5. FUTURE CONSIDERATIONS ENDNOTES REFERENCES 1. GENERAL INFORMATION Official name Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC) Geography The Democratic Republic of the Congo is located in Central Africa. It borders the Central African Republic and Sudan to the north; Rwanda, Burundi, Uganda and Tanzania to the east; Zambia and Angola to the south; and the Republic of the Congo to the northwest. The country has access to the 1 of 26 9/16/2013 4:16 PM Issue Papers, Extended Responses and Country Fact Sheets file:///C:/Documents and Settings/brendelt/Desktop/temp rir/Country Fact... Atlantic Ocean through the mouth of the Congo River in the west. The total area of the DRC is 2,345,410 km².
    [Show full text]
  • The Bulletin
    THE BULLETIN News and Reports from the Social issues Team Issue 34 – March 2017 CONTENTS Should sex and relationships education be made Norman Wells 2 compulsory in all schools? The mental health explosion in schools 9 One small step for marriage… The new marriage statistics Rod Badams 18 The care of refugees: Should the West prioritise Christians? Hendrik Storm 21 Dealing pastorally with the realities of divorce and cohabitation Regan King 23 The Named Persons scheme: Implications of the Sam Webster 27 Supreme Court victory Book review: The Mission of God Tim Dieppe 31 Life issues (Abortion, Gene editing, John Ling 33 Assisted reproductive technologies, Stem-cell technologies, Euthanasia and assisted suicide, USA and elsewhere) Latest news of significant individual cases 43 (The Christian Institute, Christian Legal Centre) The Bulletin is published by the Social Issues Team of Affinity Editor: Matthew Evans, [email protected]) 1 Should sex and relationships education be made compulsory in all schools? Practically everyone is in favour of compulsory sex and relationships education (SRE) – or so we are led to believe. In a recent House of Commons debate, the Green MP Caroline Lucas reeled off a long list of the great and good who backed her private member’s bill to maKe the provision of Personal, Social, Health and Economic Education (PSHE), including SRE, a statutory requirement. She declared: It is bacKed by 87 per cent of parents, 88 per cent of teachers and 85 per cent of business leaders. YouGov and the PSHE Association found that 90 per cent of parents believe that schools should teach about mental health and emotional wellbeing.
    [Show full text]
  • Race and Elections
    Runnymede Perspectives Race and Elections Edited by Omar Khan and Kjartan Sveinsson Runnymede: Disclaimer This publication is part of the Runnymede Perspectives Intelligence for a series, the aim of which is to foment free and exploratory thinking on race, ethnicity and equality. The facts presented Multi-ethnic Britain and views expressed in this publication are, however, those of the individual authors and not necessariliy those of the Runnymede Trust. Runnymede is the UK’s leading independent thinktank on race equality ISBN: 978-1-909546-08-0 and race relations. Through high-quality research and thought leadership, we: Published by Runnymede in April 2015, this document is copyright © Runnymede 2015. Some rights reserved. • Identify barriers to race equality and good race Open access. Some rights reserved. relations; The Runnymede Trust wants to encourage the circulation of • Provide evidence to its work as widely as possible while retaining the copyright. support action for social The trust has an open access policy which enables anyone change; to access its content online without charge. Anyone can • Influence policy at all download, save, perform or distribute this work in any levels. format, including translation, without written permission. This is subject to the terms of the Creative Commons Licence Deed: Attribution-Non-Commercial-No Derivative Works 2.0 UK: England & Wales. Its main conditions are: • You are free to copy, distribute, display and perform the work; • You must give the original author credit; • You may not use this work for commercial purposes; • You may not alter, transform, or build upon this work. You are welcome to ask Runnymede for permission to use this work for purposes other than those covered by the licence.
    [Show full text]
  • Daily Report Thursday, 20 May 2021 CONTENTS
    Daily Report Thursday, 20 May 2021 This report shows written answers and statements provided on 20 May 2021 and the information is correct at the time of publication (06:30 P.M., 20 May 2021). For the latest information on written questions and answers, ministerial corrections, and written statements, please visit: http://www.parliament.uk/writtenanswers/ CONTENTS ANSWERS 5 Government Departments: ATTORNEY GENERAL 5 Cost Effectiveness 12 [Subject Heading to be India: Visits Abroad 12 Assigned] 5 Regional Planning and BUSINESS, ENERGY AND Development: Civil Servants 13 INDUSTRIAL STRATEGY 5 Third Sector 13 Amazon: Delivery Services 5 CHURCH COMMISSIONERS 14 Animal Experiments 6 St Paul's Cathedral 14 Hospitality Industry: DEFENCE 15 Recruitment 7 Armoured Fighting Vehicles: Nuclear Power: Finance 7 Procurement 15 Post Office Horizon IT Inquiry 8 Challenger Tanks: Depleted Post Office Horizon IT Inquiry: Uranium 15 Witnesses 8 Cybercrime 15 CABINET OFFICE 9 HMS Queen Elizabeth: Joint 11 Downing Street: Repairs Strike Fighter Aircraft 16 and Maintenance 9 RAF Valley 16 Animal Products: UK Trade Terrorism: Weapons of Mass with EU 9 Destruction 17 Census: Gender Recognition 9 DIGITAL, CULTURE, MEDIA AND Constitution, Democracy and SPORT 18 Rights Commission 10 Arts Council: Music 18 Coronavirus: Vaccination 10 Culture, Practices and Ethics Drugs: Northern Ireland 11 of the Press Inquiry 18 Elections: Fraud 11 Digital Markets Unit: Staff 19 Electronic Warfare: Public Sector 12 Dormant Assets Scheme: FOREIGN, COMMONWEALTH National Lottery Community
    [Show full text]
  • Blasphemy and the Negotiation of Religious Pluralism in Britain
    Laura Tomes1 Прегледни рад Theology and Religious Studies department, Georgetown University, USA UDK 342.727(420) 299.5(420) BLASPHEMY AND THE NEGOTIATION OF RELIGIOUS PLURALISM IN BRITAIN Abstract This paper examines the May 2008 abolition of the British law against blasphemy. The blasphemy law had been the subject of debate since the 1970’s, which began a series of high profile attempts to invoke the law against perceived offenders. No action was taken until after September 11th, when the Labour government sought to institute a law criminalising Incitement to Religious Hatred. It was not until that law came into statute (2006), that the Houses of Commons and Lords seriously debated abolishing the blasphemy law. Against those who argued that changing the legislation amounted to ‘the death of Christian Britain’, I argue that this case offers evidence that the meta-narrative of secularization is neither helpful nor accurate; it fails to account for the reasons why the law was eliminated, or for its relation to ongoing efforts to accommodate religious diversity. The elimination of the blasphemy law and enactment of the Incitement to Religious Hatred legislation should be situated as part of ongoing efforts to negotiate diversity in Britain, and serves as an illustration that a more thoughtful analysis of religion should be a major part of the debate on cultural pluralism. Key words: Blasphemy, Christianity, Church of England, Secularization, Religious Pluralism. Introduction The House of Lords voted to abolish the British common law offence of blasphe- mous libel in March 2008, culminating three decades of critical discussion surround- ing its meaning and utility.2 The fulcrum of these debates was arguably the infamous 1 [email protected] 2 Note, we refer here to a law which was binding only upon Britain, i.e.
    [Show full text]
  • Section 28 Page 1 Section 28
    Section 28 Page 1 Section 28 Section 28 of the Local Government Act 1988 was a controversial amendment to the UK's Local Government Act 1986, enacted on 24 May 1988 and repealed on 21 June 2000 in Scotland, and on 18 November 2003 in the rest of the UK by section 122 of the Local Government Act 2003. The amendment stated that a local authority "shall not intentionally promote homosexuality or publish material with the intention of promoting homosexuality" or "promote the teaching in any maintained school of the acceptability of homosexuality as a pretended family relationship". Some people believed that Section 28 prohibited local councils from distributing any material, whether plays, leaflets, books, etc, that portrayed gay relationships as anything other than abnormal. Teachers and educational staff in some cases were afraid of discussing gay issues with students for fear of losing state funding. Because it did not create a criminal offence, no prosecution was ever brought under this provision, but its existence caused many groups to close or limit their activities or self- censor. For example, a number of lesbian, gay, transgender, and bisexual student support groups in schools and colleges across Britain were closed due to fears by council legal staff that they could breach the Act. While going through Parliament, the amendment was constantly relabelled with a variety of clause numbers as other amendments were added to or deleted from the Bill, but by the final version of the Bill, which received Royal Assent, it had become Section 28. Section 28 is sometimes referred to as Clause 28.
    [Show full text]
  • Religious Right
    Is there a ‘Religious Right’ Emerging in Britain? Is there a ‘Religious Right’ Emerging in Britian? Andy Walton in Britian? Andy Emerging Right’ ‘Religious a Is there Recent years have seen an increasing number of This report gives a reliable overview of evidence claims that a US-style Religious Right either exists or concerning the purported rise of the Christian is rapidly emerging in Britain. This report examines Right in Britian. Drawing on new research, it profiles Is there a ‘Religious Right’ whether or not the claims are accurate. several new Christian groups. By placing them in context, it shows why rumours that an American- Superficially, it argues, the case looks quite strong: style movement is crossing the Atlantic are greatly there is evidence of greater co-ordination among exaggerated. Christian groups with a strong socially-conservative Emerging in Britain? commitment, in particular relating to human Linda Woodhead, Professor of Sociology of sexuality, marriage, family life, and religious freedom, Religion, Lancaster University about which they are vocal and often willing to resort to legal action. This is a familiar picture within US This is a measured and thoughtful piece of research, politics. contributing to a topic where there is too much heat Andy Walton and too little light in contemporary debate. It assesses However, on closer inspection, research and analysis the presence – or, rather, the current absence – of a suggest that it is highly misleading to describe this coherent ‘Religious Right’ in British politics through with phenomenon as a US-style Religious Right. For a a detailed comparison with the characteristics of the number of reasons – economic, social, ecclesiastical movement in the US.
    [Show full text]