Council loses court battle over prayer sessions before meetings

[jakem1]

Councils across the country will have to review their practice of holding prayers during formal meetings following a court victory by the National Secular Society.

Mr Justice Ouseley ruled in a landmark judgment that Bideford council in Devon had no statutory powers to hold prayers during council meetings.

As many as half of local councils in the UK are believed to hold prayer sessions as part of their formal proceedings. In Bideford's case, the prayers were minuted.

The complaint against the practice was made by a councillor who was supported by the National Secular Society.

The Christian Institute gave financial support to Bideford town council.

Ouseley said in his judgment: "There's no statutory power permitting the practice of having prayers to continue."

But the judge ruled that there had been unlawful discrimination.

Clive Bone, the Bideford councillor who launched the action, said he was "delighted" when the Guardian broke the news of the judgment to him.

He said he was horrified when he became a councillor in 2007 to find that prayers were being said. "It was outdated, antiquated and a turn-off," he said. He twice championed motions trying to get the practice halted but they were defeated.

Bone argued that the saying of prayers was bad for local democracy. "It sends out a signal that local governments are for particular types of people and not for everyone," he said.

Tony Inch, a councillor who supported the prayers, said the ruling was a "big shock and a shame". He added: "We seem to be going from one crisis to another. It has implications for councils up and down the country. Where is it going to end? It's eroding the whole basis of Christian life in this country."

The bishop of Exeter, the Right Rev Michael Langrish, said he would encourage councils in his diocese, including Bideford, to continue to say prayers before the statutory business of the meeting began.

He said it was a "great pity" that "a tiny minority are seeking to ban the majority" of people who were for the saying of prayers.

Speaking on the BBC he said: "I've got no doubt the agenda of the National Secular Society is inch by inch to drive religion out of the public sphere. If they get their way it will have enormous implications for prayers in parliament, Remembrance Day, the jubilee celebrations, even the singing of the national anthem."

"The wider issue has got to be resisted. It strikes right at the heart of our understanding of ourself as a society. No one is compelled to participate in these activities. There is complete freedom. That freedom has to be respected."

http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/2012/feb/10/council-court-battle-prayer-meetings

[tiagosilva29]

I've got no doubt the agenda of the National Secular Society is inch by inch to drive religion out of the public sphere. If they get their way it will have enormous implications for prayers in parliament, Remembrance Day, the jubilee celebrations, even the singing of the national anthem.

The wider issue has got to be resisted. It strikes right at the heart of our understanding of ourself as a society. No one is compelled to participate in these activities. There is complete freedom. That freedom has to be respected.

I laughed.

[Sir Topham Hatt]

Why laugh?

The dude said some quite wise words.

While it is a good move to make them voluntary (and from what the guy says, taking part is anyway), quashing them out all together isn't the answer. I can understand there are many people speaking out now saying "why should we have prayers, churches blah blah" and can understand the culture of our country is changing, but for the most part we should respect what it has been and the traditions still in force.

I mean... if this continues then we really will have to call them "winter decorations" instead of "Christmas decorations". Ugh! You can't have it both ways ;)