Chris, no need to get personal.
HO, this isn't at all personal. I think it is perfectly reasonable to put forward theories, including those based on previous discussions, as to why we seem to disagree on this. I should have been more precise than to say "I don't think you care much about secularism" though. It's not that I don't think you care at all, just that you see beating Islam and Islamism as a greater priority. As I see it, you've confirmed that in your reply...
Chris, I do care about secularism, but as I have mentioned and discussed - we are not in a world yet where this is acceptable to everyone. One day it will be, but for now it is my thinking that since there literally are people who yearn spiritualism in their nature, you might as well do what you can for the moment - dilute and reform a religion that is worse than the others.
I absolutely agree that reform of Islam is important, but ex-Muslims are not the people to do this. Why would believers care to listen to the opinions of murtads on specific theological points? The reform you rightly desire must come from within, as it did for Christianity. Now you could go double agent, and act within Islamic organisations as a liberalising voice but, the fact that this would be just a little disingenuous aside, it is not a role that can be fulfilled by an ex-Muslim organisation.
As I see it, the CEMB has two target audiences: Muslims (and closeted ex-Muslims) and, well, everyone else! To Muslims you break a taboo of apostasy, show paths to doubt and deconversion, and act as a nurturing community for apostates. To everyone else, the CEMB could be so potent as a hub for ex-Muslim conciousness raisers, educators and secularist campaigners. You can expose the conflation of religious faith, ethnicity, cultural identity, nationality, etc., you can show that Muslims are not so for life, that treating ethnic and geographic communities as if they have a homogeneous set of values and beliefs is plain wrong, you can interrupt the cosy reductionism of cultural relativism and you can highlight not only the unpleasantries and dangers of Islam and Islamism, but so too the hyperbole, falsehoods and dehumanisation of Muslims insidiously advanced by those with other agendas. By all means show wider society that there are Muslims worthy of support who commendably run the gauntlet by trying to modernise and liberalise their faith, but that gauntlet is not one I can see the CEMB running directly.
I would much rather my 19cousin go to a non-religious school, or an Anglican school where he is still taught about evolution, over a college Madrassa where he'll study the Quran for a good few more years. He got BANNED from his Madrassa near Birmingham for shaving and could ONLY go back when he has his beard again.
(As an aside, is this a state school?) We do not disagree that this is much worse than what many CofE schools do, but my argument is that you simply cannot tackle this nonsense without doing so waving the flag of secularism as you go. The problem with Islamic schools, as with many other religious schools (there are some Christian ones that teach ID as a viable theory here in the UK!), is not beard regulation, nor poor communication of scientific concepts, nor instilled suspicion of those with other beliefs. These are just unpleasant symptoms, and inevitable ones at that. It is completely unrealistic to expect pious teachers, in schools run by mosques, churches and synagogues, to ensure sufficient and consistent protection from all religious indoctrination of some kind or other. Yes it is what we seem to aspire to, but it is just unachievable, even with much needed improvements in the protocols of the inspectorate. The problem IS religious schools, and you will not get anywhere arguing that we need to get rid of Islamic schools whilst remaining silent on the others. It is a line of attack that just will not work. Claims of Muslimophobia and inequality would be abound, and I think that they would have some basis.
Now, by all means flag up specific issues at specific schools - beard regulations, psychological and emotional abuses, poor standards of scientific literacy, but when it comes to the broad objectives of the organisation I strongly believe, and hope you can see why, that they have to be non-Islam specific in this respect. Even if you don't agree ideologically, please at least see that pragmatically, anything else will likely result in the CEMB being sidelined as just another group of bitter Muslim and Islam haters. It's not true, I know, but you have to base a campaign within the context of the prevailing media rhetoric and political Zeitgeist.
It's not that I've had a shit time with Islam Chris, I think you've probably got to either be a serious Muslim or really study and know it well, then compare it to other religions because one can be realistic about what is achievable and pragmatic.
Not sure what you mean here, but if it's that I've never been a Muslim growing up in a Muslim household so don't understand how bad it is, I would retort that you've never been a Christian growing up in a Christian household. As above, I know there are problems specific to Islam, but ideologically and tactically I think it is much better to state primary objectives in wholly secular terms. Again, as above, this does no preclude a focus on those Islam-specific problems in practice.
Dude - don't use that one - I said I'd study that and get back to you. Send me the links about this.
I didn't expect you to know anything about this, that wasn't my point. It is simply a fact that there are 26 unelected Bishops sat in the House of Lords, voting on legislation. You asked, if I recall, if that was enough to have blocked any legislation and, when I said that ultimately the Parliament Act can force legislation through against the Lords' wishes, you (and my mother, who I'm sure wants to adopt you) expressed the sentiment that it didn't seem much of an issue then but you'd like more information. Do say if you feel I'm misrepresenting your position. Whilst it's not an uninteresting question, it is irrelevant in deciding whether or not it is right for 26 men to have legislative power, in a supposedly secular democracy, for nothing more than their unelected positions in a church.
The whole farce actually demonstrates the points above, about the importance of broad secularist primary objectives, quite well. Because it has now been mooted, on a number of occasions from several directions, that what is wrong with having these 26 clerics sitting unelected in parliament, is not they are unelected or that they are there simply because they belong to a religious institution, no. The problem is that they only represent the Church of England. What would be much better, the argument goes, would be to have representatives from all the major religions. So you see, just as with religious schools, what is accepted for the native church can very well be extended to others, and Islam will not be excluded. Can you imagine if there were Islamic clerics permanently sitting unelected in the British parliament? It really isn't a ridiculous idea from our current point of departure.
Billy, I've just seen your post and have to head out now but hopefully the above has at least partly responded to your comments.
Topic: Council of Ex-Muslims of Britain is Crucial