Tag: MP

“I have noted your views which I do not share.”

“I am a member of the Church of England and on the ‘moral’ issues like abortion, euthanasia, etc., I vote my conscience and on the political policy areas I vote in keeping with the manifesto commitments that my Party made at the previous general election.”

“I have my own belief system.”

“Do you believe that religions should have protection from abuse as is currently the case?”

Subsequent to the last general election you were contacted by an organisation, Atheism (www.AtheismUK.com), of which I am a member, but a response was not received.

The communication concerned a survey of the religious attitudes of Members of Parliament. As beliefs, religious or otherwise, inform the actions of all of us, including policymakers, it is important that the voting public are aware of the beliefs of those who are in a position of power.

Therefore, as a constituent I would be most grateful if you would complete and return the questionnaire, which I have enclosed.

Here’s the first, dismissive, response, from his office manager.

I followed up with a direct request for his beliefs.

I think there was some misunderstanding about my request. Surveys aside, it was a personal request from a constituent regarding the nature of your religious beliefs.

As mentioned before beliefs, religious or otherwise, inform the actions of all of us, including policymakers. It is, therefore, important that the voting public are aware of the beliefs of those who are in a position of power.

I would be most grateful, then, if you would let me know what your religious beliefs are, in terms of the brand of Faith, if any, and whether practising or lapsed.

Here is the next, personal, reply where he declines to answer the question, but his response would indicate that he has definite Christian sympathies.

My last letter was very much longer and made it clear that my thoughts were that religion and power should not be mixed.

I find it somewhat disturbing that you support a religion that not only has a heritage of prejudice and persecution, but also currently actively oppresses and victimises people in parts of the world, as well basing their world view on source texts which call for the subjugation of women (Timothy 2:11-14), homophobia (Leviticus 20:13), discrimination of the disabled (Leviticus 21:16-23) and murder (Deuteronomy 21:20-21).

Rather than Christianity having a beneficial influence in democracy and our way of life I think it is more accurate to say that rationality and reason that arose out of the Enlightenment has led Christianity (kicking and screaming) out of the Dark Ages.

I agree with you that the State has no place in freedom when it comes to personal worship. I hope you also agree the converse, that the Church should not interfere with the State, and that you will campaign to have the (unelected) Bishops ejected from the House of Lords.

You made the point that faith underpins charitable giving and voluntary assistance. It is always good that this happens (provided there is no hidden agenda), though it could be inferred from you statement that you think that those without Faith are less charitable. I hope this is not the case as it may indicate a prejudice against non-believers. Of course, if it is the case that the religious and non-religious are equally charitable then religion is actually irrelevant on this point.

However, back to the main point, it is admirable that you do not discriminate against your constituents based upon their beliefs, but there is a much wider and important point of relevance here. And that is, is someone of Faith fit to govern?

Faith is belief without knowledge, or evidence, or reason, and leads to an environment whereby people can believe anything. This may not matter in someone’s personal life, but when mixed with politics the results can be disastrous, no matter how hard that person tries to keep their faith out of their public life. If someone believes that faith is a valid way of understanding or interpreting the world then it is, perhaps, inevitable that that way of thinking seeps into their life generally.

We have seen this in very recent times with Tony Blair taking us in to the Iraq War based upon faith; with the obvious tragic consequences. It seems clear that there was little, if any, evidence or rationale for this country going to war in Iraq, and the decision was faith-based; as he himself said many times, “I believed it was the right thing to do”. Such faith should have no place in the decision making process within government. Important decisions should be based upon reason and hard evidence.

Someone who bases their world view on mythology, superstition and ignorance is unlikely to be able to apply an objective and impartial perspective to policies, and, as such, would not be fit to govern. It is, therefore, important that the public are aware of the religious beliefs of those in positions of powers, so I hope you will be disposed to answer the question about the nature of your religious beliefs.

His last response was again dismissive and he clearly had no desire to continue the conversation.

“If you know of anyone with a North Shropshire address who would be willing to write to me about this issue I would be happy to correspond with them.”

“I am an atheist, but I respect all those that do have a religious faith and I find that there is something you can learn from each of them.”

“I am a Christian…” “The details of my personal faith are, I believe, a matter which should remain private to me.”