Rise of Miliband brings prospect of atheist prime minister in UK
25 August 2008 by Stardust
Here is news in The Guardian concerning atheist UK foreign secretary David Miliband possibly becoming the next prime minister. It will take about 400 more years for the U.S. to get to this point, I am afraid.
When Labour cabinet members were asked about their religious allegiances last December, following Tony Blair’s official conversion to Roman Catholicism, it turned out that more than half of them are not believers. The least equivocal about their atheism were the health secretary, Alan Johnson, and foreign secretary David Miliband.
The fact that Miliband is an atheist is a matter of special interest given the likelihood that he may one day, and perhaps soon, occupy No 10. In our present uncomfortable climate of quarrels between pushy religionists and resisting secularists - or attack-dog secularists and defensive religionists: which side you are on determines how you see it - there are many reasons why it would be a great advantage to everyone to have an atheist prime minister.
Atheist leaders are not going to think they are getting messages from Beyond telling them to go to war. They will not cloak themselves in supernaturalistic justifications, as Blair came perilously close to doing when interviewed about the decision to invade Iraq.
Atheist leaders will be sceptical about the claims of religious groups to be more important than other civil society organisations in doing good, getting public funds, meriting special privileges and exemptions from laws, and having seats in the legislature and legal protection from criticism, satire and challenge.
Atheist leaders are going to be more sceptical about inculcating sectarian beliefs into small children ghettoised into publicly funded faith-based schools, risking social divisiveness and possible future conflict. They will be readier to learn Northern Ireland’s bleak lesson in this regard.
Atheist leaders will, by definition, be neutral between the different religious pressure groups in society, and will have no temptation not to be even-handed because of an allegiance to the outlook of just one of those groups.
*snip*
Despite appearances, the world is not seeing a resurgence of religion, only a big turning-up of the volume of religious voices. This is itself a response to increasing secularism among people tired of the disruptions, obstructions and conflicts religion so often causes. Public acknowledgement of atheism by a senior politician who might soon lead his country is just one indicator of the fact that the tide is actually running in the opposite direction: and that is a welcome and hopeful sign.
Maybe the “tide is running in the opposite direction” in the UK, but it certainly isn’t here in the U.S.
Ed note: To clarify–I did not post this to endorse Miliband as prime minister or his policies, I posted this to show that the UK is not afraid to elect an atheist and religion is not the centerpiece of politics there. We are centuries behind them in that regard.
25 August 2008, on 11:45 pm
I’m not sure if “ironic” is the right word but isn’t it funny how the country started by Europeans fleeing religious persecution is still schlepping along with it’s Bronze Age ball and chain, while those former persecutors have been much quicker to give the fuckwittery the boot? Of course, it could be that our early settlers that cried “Persecution!” are the progenitors of the ones, here, still crying it today.
Up the Miliband!
25 August 2008, on 11:46 pm
Prime minister Tony Blair has given his backing to the expended use of nuclear energy to meet the UK’s energy requirements in the future. Rosemary Atheist
26 August 2008, on 12:20 am
^ Well, the reason the Pilgrims were discriminated against in Britain was because they were radical religious nutjobs.
26 August 2008, on 12:41 am
Maybe we can have another revolution and get England to take us back now?
26 August 2008, on 3:32 am
As an Englishman I cannot think of a more devastating outcome for the UK than this “atheist.”
He is one of the most enthusiastic proponents of the Eurabia project. He has spoken openly about his desire to import Islam at full speed. He hasn’t made it clear whether he expects Islam to adapt to his atheism or whether he expects the rest of Europe to bow down to Islam. I should check that out before proclaiming yet another new Messiah.
26 August 2008, on 7:47 am
God save the Queen!
[sorry, I couldn't stop myself]
26 August 2008, on 9:25 am
Of course, it could be that our early settlers that cried “Persecution!” are the progenitors of the ones, here, still crying it today.
We got the religious fuckwits, Aussie got the criminal rejects.
26 August 2008, on 1:30 pm
The revolution thing sounds like a great idea to me, Karen. But I doubt they even want us back.
Nothing left but to move over their ourselves, I suppose.
26 August 2008, on 2:18 pm
Rob, what do you mean adapt to his atheism? Are you assuming that atheism is a religion like Islam, with tenets and dogma?
27 August 2008, on 9:13 am
Ooops! I guess I should have looked into his politics before endorsing him. Don’t want a JHBowden running things, do we?
27 August 2008, on 9:51 am
Don’t want a JHBowden running things, do we?
Atheist Republicans puzzle me. But, they say that Jesus was a leftie commie hippie scumbag, so all this Jebus worship amongst Rethuglicans is confusing.
I read that Miliband was a cronie of Blair’s and just said “d’oh!” It appears that over in England, atheism and religion follow no party lines.
27 August 2008, on 12:36 pm
It’s good that atheism follows no party lines because atheism isn’t a dogma it’s a position, an answer to a question.
If all of a sudden atheists starting following the same ideas (read: dogma), such as liberalism, the claim that atheism is a religion would suddenly have merit.
27 August 2008, on 6:44 pm
^ RAmen, AUM. Atheists can have wacky political and economic ideas, too, unfortunately (I’m not saying Miliband has them or not; I don’t know enough about him to express an opinion one way or another).
Regarding the original British colonists in the US, I thought they came to the Western Hemisphere not to escape persecution but to establish their own exclusive theocracy. They already enjoyed equality and tolerance in the Netherlands, to which they fled from the UK, but didn’t appreciate it because that same equality and tolerance was also extended to - gasp! - Not True Xians (TM) like Catholics and even - shocking! - non-xians like Jews. Thus they weren’t really seeking religious freedom; they were seeking religious isolation and domination.
Given that, the Founding Fathers’ determined secularism seems more of a gift than ever - one all too many Americans still appear willing to just toss in the trash.
27 August 2008, on 8:09 pm
Wait, you mean the economy is NOT based on the number of hair pieces in Donald Trump’s closet? How dare you?!
2 September 2008, on 1:34 am
I agree, some atheist have virtually nothing in common with eachother