Jump to content

British Humanist Association need support from parents of/and kids who want to study Humanism too.


Recommended Posts

Hi everyone,

I wonder if there are any parents reading this who may be interested in the subject, and care enough to help if they can.

It's from British Humanist Association (those good folks who fight to make sure people of no faith have equal rights with those who do).


"Urgent: request for help from BHA members and supporters in legal action against QCA

Many members will know that the BHA is taking legal action against the Qualifications and Curriculum Authority (QCA) because of the QCA?s decision not to allow Humanism to be studied on the same basis as religions in the Religious Studies GCSE. You can read the BHA News item about this here:

http://www.humanism.org.uk/site/cms/newsarticleview.asp?article=2480


We now need assistance from parents and young people who would be willing to be co-claimants or witnesses in support of the BHA?s application. No court appearances will be necessary as all evidence will be paper based, and lawyers are available to assist with drafting statements.


If you are a parent of an age where your child(ren) would begin studying for GCSEs in 2009/10 or any year after that until 2014/15 and would like your children to study Humanism, then we want to hear from you. We would also like to hear from any young people who would be studying for GCSEs in any year from 2009/10 to 2014/15 and would like to study Humanism.


This case is vital to the BHA and we urgently need your help! Please telephone Andrew Copson on 07534 248596 or by email on [email protected] if you can assist us.

Contact us

The British Humanist Association

1 Gower Street

London WC1E 6HD

Tel: 020 7079 3580

[email protected]"




Just kinda feels important and I hope you don't mind my posting it here. Best wishes from PeckhamRose

(Edited to get rid of unrelated BHA stuff)

PeckhamRose Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Hi everyone,

> I wonder if there are any parents reading this who

> may be interested in the subject, and care enough

> to help if they can.

> It's from British Humanist Association (those good

> folks who fight to make sure people of no faith

> have equal rights with those who do).

>


It's never occured to me that people of no faith suffer in this way, and I count myself as one of them. You've made me think if nothing else but can you give a couple of examples?

ta

How do we suffer? We have to listen to the speakers on Radio 4's Thought for the Day stating that if only we had listened to Jesus then everything would be ok.


Seriously though, the main "suffering" is because of the privileges given to religions in schools, marriages, law etc that are not fair to people who don't hold religious or superstitious beliefs. Have a look at the list of campaigns on the Humanist's website http://www.humanism.org.uk/site/cms/contentChapterView.asp?chapter=340 it will show you some examples.

Hi

Yes, what they said!

Also today heard about how some female children who are having catholicism forced down their necks in one catholic school are not going to offered the antivirus injection to help prevent cervical cancer. I am sure that's the sort of issue the BHA will support (against, if you get what I mean).


Yes, and you can't join the scouts if you don't believe in God!


And Mark thanks you put it better than I could. I'd add (probably clumsily) that those who live without faith when in discussions with those religious folk seem always to have to explain how they can be "good" in their "godless" lives. I choose to say that I don't need the carrot of heaven or the stick of hell to know it is better to try and be good than bad.


I am planning on applying to train to be a Humanist Celebrant.

Anyone been to a humanist funeral service? To be frank, they're soooooooo much more positive and - celebratory!

I've heard this a few times.

The thing with rites is they tend to fit better in a religious or superstitious context. The Catholics have been honing their skills for a long time and consequently pretty good at that whole malarkey.


Structure and familiarity help you to feel part of something bigger, and when I said the classic marriage rites, I may not have believed any of the religious side, but those words 'to love and to hold...til death do us part, Amen' felt very powerful and made the marriage itself feel more real.


I've been to a pagan wedding too and it may have been a lot of stuff and nonsense (no offence mum) led by a 'shaman/priestess' but it worked as theatre and ceremony.


I've already stated to my poor beloved that our kids get baptised over my dead body (trade off for getting married in a catholic church), but I don't really know what to replace it with; I'm certainly not going to get a humanist celebrant to do it, I'm figuring just a big piss up is the way forward.

I went to a humanist naming ceremony recently and it was a bit poor to be honest, interesting point about the religions having had years to practice and agreed, despite belief issues the catholics do put on a good funeral ceremony.


To go back to Peckhamrose comments -


Well the school in Bury has said they don't want the injections on their premises, and this is "despite support for the injections from the Salford Diocese and the Church nationally" (Source Manchester Evening News) (I'm in Manchester today) so it's the view of a small group of governors rather than the Church from that information.


Scouts - interesting, didn't know that. I guess when I was there I just lied a bit!


On the third point I don't choose to say anything, why the need? Why "have to explain?"

"How do we suffer? We have to listen to the speakers on Radio 4's Thought for the Day stating that if only we had listened to Jesus then everything would be ok"


Well yes, although if it is Lionel Blue then you can replace "listened to Jesus" with "eaten chicken soup".


I agree with Lionel.

I went to the humanist funeral of one of my best friend's father a couple of years ago and it was beautifully done. I do think though that with any kind of funeral service (religious or humanist), the 'best' involve those people who really knew the person and so can contribute fully to the celebration of the person's life.

I've also been to one or two dire religious funeral services which displayed no warmth or familiarity with the person who passed away.

Now that you mention it I went to a catholic funeral where the priest basically said that as my mate Dan hadn't been to confession or received last rites, that the best he could hope for was purgatory. I must say it was pretty upsetting and I can't say as it served them much positive propaganda as regards my feelings toward that organisation.

Cunt

I've been to a few Humanist funerals and the point is that the celebrant gets to spend a lot of time with the family beforehand to construct a sort of "This was their life" story and write a tribute around it. A bit more vigorous than a vicar talking about a heaven the deceased never believed in. The training is very hard and I hope I am up to it. I was the only person who was up to speaking at my cousin's funeral and the celebrant was absolutely brilliant but the family gave an awful lot about my cousin so she was able to write a good script. Maybe other's poorer experiences above reflected where that was not the case. I hope she can be my mentor!


Another issue the BHA is fighting for, is a better representation of people's beliefs or otherwise on the census. The leadng question "What religion are you?" (or similar wording) on the last one meant people veered towards saying Christian and according to that apparently 70% of Brits are christian and we know that's wrong, so they're fighting for different wording to get a better picture. Which is reasonable.

I'm all for anything that diminishes religion's role in state affairs but if Catholics, Jews, Musilims etc want a religious wedding and funeral that's up to them.


When I go I go - but I don't need any sort of umbrella "humanist" ceremony - I definitely wouldn't want my family to drag me back into some religious funeral, but so long as religion is out of it that's plenty. I don't see why non-religious people need to define themselves as "Humanist. You just don't believe in... well you know the arguments


Come Christmas I won't be having a Humanist Christmas or even a non-Santa Christmas (what can I as a non-Santa believer define that as?) ... but I will enjoy the time off.

I have heard that humanist celebrants have a tendency to go a bit militant atheist, which as far as I'm concerned is every bit as bad as a dogmatic priest (see above). But, like that hellfire and brimstone chap who condemned my friend's soul, it may be down to the individual celebrant's sensibilities about how far to go with the dogma at a ceremony.


The chap at my wedding was actually a pretty good guy and went some way to meeting me half way when I asked if we could keep it light-hearted and happy and try to ease up on all that god stuff. We got away with no mass or eucharist, but he did keep proffering the book cover first in a demonstrative fashion as if somehow its presence would convert all the heathen scum from Britain (and indeed Ireland, no names mentioned....sean)

I do find Catholics in Britain and Ireland seem to be a lot more, well catholic than they are back in the old country. The guy who married us actually encouraged us to have the shortest, most light-hearted ceremony he could get away with.

Problem with the catholic church of Britain is that it has yet to find it's own character. It was once upon a time renowned for a certain unique sensibility, but following the dissolution then a couple of hundred years of repression, with a dose of grim Godliness in the 1640/50s that character was extinguished and it's more or less had to rely on the Irish and other catholic immigrant communities to fuel it's rebirth following the end of recusancy, and has yet to find it's own way again.


For the record the nasty soul burner was Italian.

I did think long and hard about joining the BHA. I agree with above points about the feeling that you're joining just another group and having to abide by its rules and ethos and itself becomes another religion, as it were. But it's really not about that, and my deciding point about joining was to basically feel I was contributing to a group of like minded free-thinkers who want to put pressure on government to make sure that people who do NOT live by any ThirdPartyGod rules have as much rights in the workplace or wherever as those who do. Things like the scout movement and Thought for the Day are small matters compared to the rights to, for example, be able to criticise religion without being punished for it (by God's representatives here on earth!) to be able to have the same rights in the workplace, and to ensure that state money is spent sensibly and not spent in a discriminatory fashion on those who believe in a God. Faith schools are morally wrong, to my mind.


So that's why I joined. But they don't tell me what to think. Nuh uh.

I was in the brownies and guides (thrown out of guides mind you for not working hard enough to get my green trefoil even though I was a patrol leader. The shame.) and I wouldn't say it affected my feelings on God or the queen, although I do still try and help other people and keep the brownie guide law* I didn't learn anything as useful as knotting though, the only badges I remeber getting were country dancing, housekeeping and agility, so maybe we should address the inherent sexism of the scouting movement before we tackle God.


I think I would also agree with what has already been said about religious and humanist ceremonies. I went to a humanist wedding and although it was very personal to the couple and very apporpriate for them, it didn't feel entirely real (and of course it wasn't they had actually been married in a registry office the day before). We didn't want a religious marriage ceremony, so had a very moving and memorable civil ceremony which felt appropriately formal, but still personal. Aside from the legal bits that have to be included we had complete control over what was included and could have written the whole thing ourselves if we'd wanted to.


The whole question of baby naming ceremonies is a very modern dilema. I've never been to a humainst one, but know people who have and found them really naff. My sister and her husband recently had a "launch party" for their twins, with a very short speech and a cake, but no ceremony, which was nice, but maybe not formal enough. The other problem is what to call the equivalent of godparents if you're not doing the whole god thing (I've recently been asked to be one so was pondering this anyway) Non-god parents? Godless parents? Special adult friends..... Maybe not.


Not sure that ramble has added anything, but thought I'd share!


*the brownie guide law is to treated others as you would like to be treated yourself and do a good turn every day.

I don?t remember anything about god (or anyone?s queen for that matter) in the Scouts. I remember making rafts, camping in the rain, sneaking smokes behind the scout hall, making really big fires, catching scorpions, being stung by scorpions (I don?t think these were officially sanctioned activities), football matches against other scout groups, fights against other scout groups, making kites, someone falling into a bee hive, a big fucking swarm of bees, being allowed to play with knives and matches and a strange obsession with Rudyard Kipling. I really don?t recall anything about god though except the bit where you said, ?To do my duty to my church and my country?.

We asked our dear and happily godless (sorry, god-free?) friend to be godmother to the Moosling; she accepted with grace and I believe wears her title with pride, although perhaps with a little irony. Our vicar also accepted her into the christening with grace and without any need for dishonesty or shystering. Compromising on technicalities while upholding principles and looking for the things that bring us together in belief rather than tear us apart is what makes situations like this work.


To put the other side of the story for religious ceremonies, two examples. Our wedding, conducted in Germany, was a blend of English and German language and our pastor, once she had been convinced that we had thought about what we wanted and why, was very understanding and flexible about making the service meaningful to us. We loved it and found it beautiful and the right balance for us between traditional and personal. A sadder example: a funeral I attended recently was conducted by a vicar who had taken the time to visit the dying man and spend time with his family speaking to them in terms that they related to (they are vaguely Christian but definitely cynical and not church goers) to help them make their goodbyes and mvoe on. The funeral itself (and this is the point of view of the widow) was comforting, moving and kind. I completely sympathise with those who've found religious ceremonies exclusive and judgemental - but they don't have to be that way.


That said, I also think it would be a huge step forward to construct beautiful and uplifting services for marriages, funerals and namings without religious connetations. One of the nicest things about traditional ceremonies is that they draw on experience and familiarity, and provide a sense on continuity at these important points in life. At weddings, you always see married couples in the pews smiling at one another during the vows. How lovely if a similar tradition could be established in people who don't want to involve religious aspects.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Latest Discussions

    • Last week we had no water for over 24 hours and very little support from Thames Water when we called - had to fight for water to be delivered, even to priority homes. Strongly suggest you contact [email protected] as she was arranging a meeting with TW to discuss the abysmal service
    • The is very low water pressure in the middle of Friern Road this morning.
    • I think mostly those are related to the same "issues". In my experience, it's difficult using the pin when reporting problems, especially if you're on a mobile... There's two obvious leaks in that stretch and has been for sometime one of them apparently being sewer flooding 😱  
    • BBC Homepage Skip to content Accessibility Help EFor you Notifications More menu Search BBC                     BBC News Menu   UK England N. Ireland Scotland Alba Wales Cymru Isle of Man Guernsey Jersey Local News Vets under corporate pressure to increase revenue, BBC told   Image source,Getty Images ByRichard Bilton, BBC Panorama and Ben Milne, BBC News Published 2 hours ago Vets have told BBC Panorama they feel under increasing pressure to make money for the big companies that employ them - and worry about the costly financial impact on pet owners. Prices charged by UK vets rose by 63% between 2016 and 2023, external, and the government's competition regulator has questioned whether the pet-care market - as it stands - is giving customers value for money. One anonymous vet, who works for the UK's largest vet care provider, IVC Evidensia, said that the company has introduced a new monitoring system that could encourage vets to offer pet owners costly tests and treatment options. A spokesperson for IVC told Panorama: "The group's vets and vet nurses never prioritise revenue or transaction value over and above the welfare of the animal in their care." More than half of all UK households are thought to own a pet, external. Over the past few months, hundreds of pet owners have contacted BBC Your Voice with concerns about vet bills. One person said they had paid £5,600 for 18 hours of vet-care for their pet: "I would have paid anything to save him but felt afterwards we had been taken advantage of." Another described how their dog had undergone numerous blood tests and scans: "At the end of the treatment we were none the wiser about her illness and we were presented with a bill of £13,000."   Image caption, UK pet owners spent £6.3bn on vet and other pet-care services in 2024, according to the CMA Mounting concerns over whether pet owners are receiving a fair deal prompted a formal investigation by government watchdog, the Competition and Markets Authority (CMA). In a provisional report, external at the end of last year, it identified several issues: Whether vet companies are being transparent about the ownership of individual practices and whether pet owners have enough information about pricing The concentration of vet practices and clinics in the hands of six companies - these now control 60% of the UK's pet-care market Whether this concentration has led to less market competition and allowed some vet care companies to make excess profits 'Hitting targets' A vet, who leads one of IVC's surgeries (and who does not want to be identified because they fear they could lose their job), has shared a new internal document with Panorama. The document uses a colour code to compare the company's UK-wide tests and treatment options and states that it is intended to help staff improve clinical care. It lists key performance indicators in categories that include average sales per patient, X-rays, ultrasound and lab tests. The vet is worried about the new policy: "We will have meetings every month, where one of the area teams will ask you how many blood tests, X-rays and ultrasounds you're doing." If a category is marked in green on the chart, the clinic would be judged to be among the company's top 25% of achievers in the UK. A red mark, on the other hand, would mean the clinic was in the bottom 25%. If this happens, the vet says, it might be asked to come up with a plan of action. The vet says this would create pressure to "upsell" services. Panorama: Why are vet bills so high? Are people being priced out of pet ownership by soaring bills? Watch on BBC iPlayer now or BBC One at 20:00 on Monday 12 January (22:40 in Northern Ireland) Watch on iPlayer For instance, the vet says, under the new model, IVC would prefer any animal with suspected osteoarthritis to potentially be X-rayed. With sedation, that could add £700 to a bill. While X-rays are sometimes necessary, the vet says, the signs of osteoarthritis - the thickening of joints, for instance - could be obvious to an experienced vet, who might prefer to prescribe a less expensive anti-inflammatory treatment. "Vets shouldn't have pressure to do an X-ray because it would play into whether they are getting green on the care framework for their clinic." IVC has told Panorama it is extremely proud of the work its clinical teams do and the data it collects is to "identify and close gaps in care for our patients". It says its vets have "clinical independence", and that prioritising revenue over care would be against the Royal College of Veterinary Surgeons' (RCVS) code and IVC policy. Vets say they are under pressure to bring in more money per pet   Published 15 April 2025 Vets should be made to publish prices, watchdog says   Published 15 October 2025 The vet says a drive to increase revenue is undermining his profession. Panorama spoke to more than 30 vets in total who are currently working, or have worked, for some of the large veterinary groups. One recalls being told that not enough blood tests were being taken: "We were pushed to do more. I hated opening emails." Another says that when their small practice was sold to a large company, "it was crazy... It was all about hitting targets". Not all the big companies set targets or monitor staff in this way. The high cost of treatment UK pet owners spent £6.3bn on vet and other pet-care services in 2024 - equal to just over £365 per pet-owning household, according to the CMA. However, most pet owners in the UK do not have insurance, and bills can leave less-well-off families feeling helpless when treatment is needed. Many vets used not to display prices and pet owners often had no clear idea of what treatment would cost, but in the past two years that has improved, according to the CMA. Rob Jones has told Panorama that when his family dog, Betty, fell ill during the autumn of 2024 they took her to an emergency treatment centre, Vets Now, and she underwent an operation that cost almost £5,000. Twelve days later, Betty was still unwell, and Rob says he was advised that she could have a serious infection. He was told a diagnosis - and another operation - would cost between £5,000-£8,000.   Image caption, Betty's owners were told an operation on her would cost £12,000 However, on the morning of the operation, Rob was told this price had risen to £12,000. When he complained, he was quoted a new figure - £10,000. "That was the absolute point where I lost faith in them," he says. "It was like, I don't believe that you've got our interests or Betty's interests at heart." The family decided to put Betty to sleep. Rob did not know at the time that both his local vet, and the emergency centre, branded Vets Now, where Betty was treated, were both owned by the same company - IVC. He was happy with the treatment but complained about the sudden price increase and later received an apology from Vets Now. It offered him £3,755.59 as a "goodwill gesture".   Image caption, Rob Jones says he lost faith in the vets treating his pet dog Betty Vets Now told us its staff care passionately for the animals they treat: "In complex cases, prices can vary depending on what the vet discovers during a consultation, during the treatment, and depending on how the patient responds. "We have reviewed our processes and implemented a number of changes to ensure that conversations about pricing are as clear as possible." Value for money? Independent vet practices have been a popular acquisition for corporate investors in recent years, according to Dr David Reader from the University of Glasgow. He has made a detailed study of the industry. Pet care has been seen as attractive, he says, because of the opportunities "to find efficiencies, to consolidate, set up regional hubs, but also to maximise profits". Six large veterinary groups (sometimes referred to as LVGs) now control 60% of the UK pet care market - up from 10% a decade ago, according to the CMA, external. They are: Linnaeus, which owns 180 practices Medivet, which has 363 Vet Partners with 375 practices CVS Group, which has 387 practices Pets at Home, which has 445 practices under the name Vets for Pets IVC Evidensia, which has 900 practices When the CMA announced its provisional findings last autumn, it said there was not enough competition or informed choice in the market. It estimated the combined cost of this to UK pet owners amounted to £900m between 2020-2024. Corporate vets dispute the £900m figure. They say their prices are competitive and made freely available, and reflect their huge investment in the industry, not to mention rising costs, particularly of drugs. The corporate vets also say customers value their services highly and that they comply with the RCVS guidelines.   Image caption, A CMA survey suggests pet owners are happy with the service they receive from vets A CMA survey suggests pet owners are happy with their vets - both corporate and independent - when it comes to quality of service. But, with the exception of Pets at Home, customer satisfaction on cost is much lower for the big companies. "I think that large veterinary corporations, particularly where they're owned by private equity companies, are more concerned about profits than professionals who own veterinary businesses," says Suzy Hudson-Cooke from the British Veterinary Union, which is part of Unite. Proposals for change The CMA's final report on the vet industry is expected by the spring but no date has been set for publication. In its provisional report, it proposed improved transparency on pricing and vet ownership. Companies would have to reveal if vet practices were part of a chain, and whether they had business connections with hospitals, out-of-hours surgeries, online pharmacies and even crematoria. IVC, CVS and Vet Partners all have connected businesses and would have to be more transparent about their services in the future. Pets at Home does not buy practices - it works in partnership with individual vets, as does Medivet. These companies have consistently made clear in their branding who owns their practices. The big companies say they support moves to make the industry more transparent so long as they don't put too high a burden on vets. David Reader says the CMA proposals could have gone further. "There's good reason to think that once this investigation is concluded, some of the larger veterinary groups will continue with their acquisition strategies." The CMA says its proposals would "improve competition by helping pet owners choose the right vet, the right treatment, and the right way to buy medicine - without confusion or unnecessary cost". For Rob Jones, however, it is probably too late. "I honestly wouldn't get another pet," he says. "I think it's so expensive now and the risk financially is so great.             Food Terms of Use About the BBC Privacy Policy Cookies Accessibility Help Parental Guidance Contact the BBC Make an editorial complaint BBC emails for you Copyright © 2026 BBC. The BBC is not responsible for the content of external sites. Read about our approach to external linking.
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...