Culture club

by Rick Johansen

Way back when, during the times when God was a boy (I know he doesn’t really exist, but I’m making a point about how old I am), I used to run equal opportunities courses for my trade union, the CPSA (RIP). A relatively young, white man doing equal opportunities courses might seem a bit odd these days, but it felt very right at the time. And it was a time of awakening not just for the people who attended the courses I ran, but for me, too, as I learned so much about racism, discrimination, prejudice, homophobia, sexism, xenophobia and countless other ‘isms’. I embraced and then believed in a world where everyone was treated the same and had the same opportunities in life. As part of that, I embraced the world of multiculturalism because it was all part of the same thing. Wasn’t it? And yet, I still have doubts about that word: multiculturalism. How can that be?

According to the Collins dictionary, “Multiculturalism is a situation in which all the different cultural or racial groups have equal rights and opportunities, and none is ignored or regarded as unimportant.” So far, so good. Surely, no one other than a knuckle-dragging right-wing bigot would have any issues with that, but as someone who regards themself as anything but a knuckle-dragging right-wing bigot, I have one big reservation. The influence of religion.

As an atheist, I have no problem with people believing in whatever God they so choose to worship. As long as religion does not affect in any way the way in which I live my life, I believe in the live and let live philosophy. As a secularist, and here I quote from the National Secular Society website, I believe this:

Religious people have the right to express their beliefs publicly but so do those who oppose or question those beliefs. Religious beliefs, ideas and organisations must not enjoy privileged protection from the right to freedom of expression. In a democracy, all ideas and beliefs must be open to discussion. Individuals have rights; ideas do not.

And this:

Secularism fosters a society where individuals are free to practise their religions and to express their beliefs freely, but where no single religion dominates or influences the decisions and policies of the government. It is the best chance we have to create a society in which people of all religions or none can live together fairly and peacefully.”

On the face of it, that all seems very reasonable, but is it? Within a free country where everyone is deemed to be equal, should anyone get preferential treatment because of their religion? Should we allow schools that allow selection on the basis of the religion of the children (the parents of the children, really) to exist? Should we allow religions to operate their own laws, as with Sharia? Should we allow certain religions to kill animals for food in a cruel way, as with Halal and Kosher traditions? Should people of religion be allowed special privileges at work, like extra time away from their desks or not being asked to work on certain days because their religion says so?  I’d say no to all those things and ban them all, perhaps over a period of time. It’s complicated if you want it to be. But it’s surely one thing or the other?

You may think I am writing about one religion in particular but that’s only partly true. I strongly object to all religious schools, including Catholic only schools and the 2000-odd Madrassas, Islamic schools in other words. In a truly equal society, we don’t have any religious schools where, surely, the whole point is religious indoctrination. Proselytisation, as we call it. It is not a coincidence that children inevitably belong to the one their parents belong to. By all means allow children to choose a religion of their choice, when they are old enough – we don’t allow babies and toddlers to vote, so why is this any different? – but surely we are talking about brainwashing, here. Catch ’em when they are young.

And what other cultures do we find difficult? Honour killings? Circumcision (girls and boys – it’s still genital mutilation, or child abuse as I call it)? Oppressing women? Oppressing gay people? If you believe in a God who hates women and gays, for example, how does that conform with the law of the land. Spoiler alert: it doesn’t.

Am I arguing for people from different backgrounds to conform to one way of life, the British way of life? That’s too simple. The British law of the land, for sure. But within the law of the land, people can live their lives as they see fit.

While I refer generally to all religions, we know that some are more problematical than others and the elephant in the room is Islam. And we are wary, if not scared, of confronting the issue, but if we are serious about creating a fair and equal country, then we have to.

In 2021, the evolutionary biologist Richard Dawkins was accused of being islamophobic due to his criticism of the religion. “No!” he replied.  “I’m phobic about: FGM. Whipping women for being raped. Pushing gays off buildings. Honour killing. Death for apostasy. extramarital sex, etc. Teaching children anti-scientific nonsense. I’m NOT Muslimophobic. Muslims are main victims of the above.” Not all Muslims think that way but the point is none of the examples are acceptable in a free and, yes, secular, country. However, there is a culture within certain tenets of the religion that supports it all. It is not a culture I could accept on the basis of multiculturalism.

I don’t want ours to be a Muslim country, but then I don’t want it to be a Christian country, either. Or a Mormon country or a Scientology country. I’m very happy for religions to exist and thrive within a secular country and, yes, all manner of cultures can exist within it, too. Free and equal, with no special privileges for religions. That’s harder to achieve than it sounds, but that’s not a reason to dilute secularism.

Multiculturalism is a situation in which all the different cultural or racial groups have equal rights and opportunities, and none is ignored or regarded as unimportant” is where we came in. I like that definition but in Britain today, it’s not one I recognise.

 

 

 

You may also like