Andrew Copson at the BHA on Warsi’s theocratic bullshit:

…it is surreal to hear secularism being condemned as intolerant – it is not secular schools that select pupils according to their parents’ beliefs, it is not secular agencies that reserve employment opportunities for staff according to their beliefs, and it is not secular organisations which lobby to maintain privilege and have exemption from laws – like equality laws – that should affect everyone equally.

Terry Sanderson at the NSS on the same subject

…why is the British Government courting the Holy See in this way? Why should the last absolute theocracy in Europe be invited to participate in the affairs of the British Government?

Well, it might be argued, the Holy See participates — indeed in some cases, interferes — in every other Government’s affairs. Only last week it succeeded in forcing President Obama to compromise his health reforms and in Britain it is gearing up to give the Cameron plan for gay marriage a real kicking.

Lady Warsi talks of “militant secularism” with some distaste. But secularism’s militancy is as nothing compared with the aggressive tactics of the Catholic Church when it is not getting its way.

Ed Brayton at Dispatches from the Culture Wars on the same subject:

What world does she live in? The progress over the last couple hundred in creating more just, free and equal societies is largely the result of the diminishing of religious influence over governments. At nearly every turn and in every country, the most important advances in freedom and equality — ending slavery, giving women the right to vote, protecting the equal rights of racial, ethnic, sexual and, yes, religious minorities — have required overcoming the opposition of the dominant religious creeds and dogmas.

If only we had a secular pope who would help us fight the militant theocracy of Sayeeda Warsi.





  1. Desert Son, OM says

    ash at #1:

    Vilifying secularism is like vilifying sharing. How the hell do you do that? How is that possible?

    Meet religion! Long a haven for many who find repulsive the idea of sharing, no matter how much the official language may say otherwise.

    Not to mention all the official language that actually does vilify sharing: “The elect,” “the worthy,” “the true,” “the pure,” “the saved,” “the faithful.” Many different ways of saying “The exclusive club membership (women especially need not apply).”

    Still learning,


  2. stonyground says

    Baroness Warsi is such a laughable character. She denounces the evil, militant secularists but is seemingly oblivious to the fact that, without their evil influence, she would have nothing. Secularists have been campaigning for over two hundred years for the rights of people just like her. At the start of this campaign only Anglicans were allowed any place in government. At that time she would be barred from her current position for at least three reasons, she is a woman, she is the wrong colour & she believes in the wrong religion. Of course, if those militant secularists really got their way, she would have to stand for election and persuade people to vote for her in order to take part in our country’s government, rather than be appointed, without merit, by a government that is desperate to prove how secular it is without being secular in reality.

  3. Margaret says

    “Secularism” is pretty much equivalent to “freedom of religion.” Only by having strict secularism in the public arena can there be actual freedom of religion in the private arena. Those who object to secularism are objecting to being prevented from imposing their religion on everybody else, that is, they are objecting to not living in a theocracy with their own religion in charge of everything, including the ability to burn heretics at the stake (or at least jail them, beat them up, and refuse to deliver flowers to them).

  4. 'Tis Himself, OM says

    Lady Warsi talks of “militant secularism” with some distaste. But secularism’s militancy is as nothing compared with the aggressive tactics of the Catholic Church when it is not getting its way.

    Not just the Catholics. We’ve already seen Muslims get free speech redefined to include “don’t say anything we think is blasphemous, even if you’re not addressing it to us.” Many fundamentalists of various religions are working against same sex marriage because “Gawd thinks what gays do in bed is icky!” Etc., etc., etc.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *