Ep 16: Operation Christmas Child | Faith schools

(Emma Park) Hello and welcome to the National
Secular Society podcast I’m Emma Park, and this week i’ll be talking to
Alastair Lichten, the NSS’s education officer and Megan Manson, the campaign’s
officer. In the first half of this podcast we’ll be looking at Operation
Christmas Child and how a seemingly innocuous appeal to
send toys to developing countries is being exploited by Christian evangelists.
Later in the show I’ll be speaking to Alistair about why twenty thousand
primary and secondary school children are being sent to faith schools despite
their parents preferring non faith schools. Do you remember filling shoeboxes with
toys when you were at school, to be sent to children in developing countries.
I certainly do. Many schools, youth groups and others have been taking part in this
well-meaning practice for years at Christmastime. But did you know that the
organization behind Operation Christmas Child is an evangelical Christian
charity called Samaritan’s Purse? This organization seems to be using the
shoeboxes as, in effect, a bribe to persuade children to attend it’s
religious program. as their website puts it “after receiving a shoebox gift,
children have the opportunity to enroll in The Greatest Journey – 12 fun and
interactive Bible lessons where they get the chance to discover who Jesus is and
how to begin their own journey of faith. The website also states that operating
with “communities in needs” in Sub-Saharan Africa, Eastern Europe and
Central Asia. Samaritan’s Purse describes itself in
its mission statement as “a non-denominational evangelical Christian
organization that helps to meet needs of people who are victims of war, poverty,
natural disasters, disease, and famine with the purpose of sharing God’s love
through His Son, Jesus Christ. In other words, as with many
religious charities laudable motives of helping people in distress
are mingled with the more problematic aim of proselytizing and converting
people to the version of Christianity which they espouse. And in the case of
Samaritan’s Purse, this seems to be a fairly dogmatic, if
not fundamentalist, version. The statement of faith on the charity’s website
asserts among other things in the same vein that “We believe that, for the
salvation of lost and sinful man, repentance of sin and faith in Jesus
Christ result in regeneration by the Holy Spirit and that Jesus Christ is the
only way of salvation.” Under current English law
Samaritan’s Purse is entitled to have charitable status,
with the concomitant tax relief and other benefits that this brings. This is
because the “advancement of religion” is a recognized charitable purpose. In the
21st century, in a society in which around half of the population is
non-religious, is this situation justifiable? I’m joined now by Megan Manson and
Alistair Lichten to discuss these issues further. Megan and Alistair, hello.
Megan first, are the schools and other organizations who send shoeboxes
for Operation Christmas Child aware of the evangelical purpose for which
they’re being used? (Megan Manson) Not necessarily . Operation Christmas Child has grown more
transparent about what they do and their website actually explains it in quite a
lot of detail. But, of course, the thing is not everyone who participates in the
scheme reads the website or read their leaflets. In the cases of schools, parents
simply find out that they have to help their child fill a box of toys and that
box will go to children in an impoverished country. and they’ll
understandably take that at face value, as on the surface it seems like a nice
thing to do and a good way to teach children about the importance of
generosity and civil responsibility. Few of those parents are going to think
to question it. They probably wouldn’t even imagine that those toys will be used
as part of a religious missionary scheme. (EP) What are the National Secular
Society’s objections to the scheme? (MM) Well, the main objection we have is that it’s
unethical and exploitative. So primarily its exploiting children and families in
poor countries by putting them under pressure to convert to fundamentalist Christianity.
It’s hard to say no to people who come bearing gifts, especially
for one’s children. Many critics have pointed out that the scheme smacks of
colonialism. And it exploits children and families in rich countries too. It uses their
generosity as a tool for religious conversion. Once they find out how the
shoeboxes are being used, many participants are rightly horrified. They
never wished to be used as the unwitting agents in religious propaganda. And there
are other considerations, as well. We have to think about the environmental impact
of flying tons of plastic toys across the world every year. And then there’s
the potential impacts on the local economy. How are local vendors trying
to sell their own products supposed to compete with a multi-million pound
scheme with this aggressive agenda and these free handouts. And then, finally,
there’s the ineffectiveness of it all. Filling shoeboxes with plastic trinkets
to send overseas is a really inefficient way to give to charity, monetary donations are
far more effective for really helping people. (EP) You mentioned on your blog that
some religious charities are less objectionable, because they
follow third sector best practice. Could you explain what this means, and how is
it that the Samaritan’s Purse are failing to follow third sector best practice?
(MM) Reputable charities providing aid in developing countries are well
aware and they understand the sensitivities involved in such activities.
And they work to ensure that human rights and dignity is central to
their work. For example, equality is a key part of this work. Aid must be
distributed equally and fairly. But with Operation Christmas Child, children get
random boxes with different things inside. And inevitably some children get
more toys or better toys than others, which could stir up tension.
Many organizations, including international aid charities, have expressed their
concerns about Operation Christmas Child. Brendan Paddy of Save the Children has
criticized the scheme and said it is dangerous when charities mix
humanitarian work with the promotion of a particular religious or political agenda.
(EP) Does the National Secular Society think Operation Christmas Child ought to
be abandoned altogether? Wouldn’t that be a bit harsh on children
in developing countries who might be looking forward to a Christmas present?
(MM) Well, firstly it’s worth pointing out that many of the communities targeted
by Operation Christmas Child don’t even celebrate Christmas.
The charity targets majority Muslim areas, which makes sense,
because the whole idea of the program is to turn non-christians into Christians.
When we look at who’s behind the Samaritan’s Purse charity, we can
understand just why this is so insidious. The president of Samaritan’s Purse
is American missionary Franklin Graham, who is the son of the former notorious
televangelist Billy Graham. Franklin Graham has some alarming views,
including when it comes to Muslims. He is supportive of banning Muslims from
entering the US, and he has helped propagate the conspiracy theory that
Barack Obama is a secret Muslim. Bearing this in mind, his suitability as a
figurehead of aid work in Islamic countries is, well, questionable to say
the least. Samaritan’s Purse does do other work, but
its resources are dominated by this Operation Christmas Child initiative.
So let’s take a look at its finances. It’s got an income of over £15.9 million, as of 2018,
which means it’s one of the richest charities in the country. Last year it spent
under £400,000 on emergency responses, £1.4 Million on long-term development , just over £51,000 on other activities, over £230,000 on their Greatest
Journey indoctrination program, and then a whopping £13 Million
on Operation Christmas Child. In other words, Samaritan’s Purse spends
far more of its donations on Operation Christmas Child, and the related
indoctrination programs, than anything else. If Samaritan’s Purse is serious about
genuinely making a positive difference to the lives of children in developing
countries, it would make sense to ditch the Operation Christmas Child Scheme and focus
more on aid work with no religious strings attached. (EP) What does the National Secular Society
propose should be done with the money that would otherwise go to the shoeboxes?
(MM) Giving to charity is a personal choice at the end of the day.
So whether or not one should partake in a particular charitable activity is
entirely up to the individual. The same applies to Operation Christmas Child.
But we want to make sure that, before parents and schools decide to contribute to this
project, they are aware of exactly what will happen when they take part, so they
can make an informed choice. We’ve made a few suggestions on our website
about alternative appeals to Operation Christmas Child. they include Oxfam Unwrapped and
Plan UK Sponsor a Child program. We also have information for parents
and others whose school, club or other organizations are taking part
in Operation Christmas Child, and what they can do to raise objections.
(EP) Now moving on to the wider issue of charitable uses of religion, where in the
laws of England and Wales does it say that advancement of religion is a
charitable purpose? (MM) So this is all determined by the charity law.
The Charities Act 2011, which lists 13 different purposes a charity can have.
Advancement of religion is one of those. This purpose, advancement of religion,
has been part of charity law in various forms for a very long time, pretty much as
long as charities have been around. (EP) So is it time to legislate to stop
the advancement of religion being a charitable purpose?
Is it right that Christian and other religious organizations should have to
pay taxes for the work they do, even if it involves helping people in distress?
(MM) Well, we think it really is now the time to remove the advancements of religion
from the list of charitable purposes. The many religious charities out there that
do provide a genuine public benefit and do help people would have no difficulty
in registering under a different charitable purpose. So, for example, a
Christian charity that does overseas aid work could list under ‘relief of poverty’.
But organizations that exist solely to promote religious ideology with no
apparent tangible public benefit should not be entitled to all the tax breaks
and other benefits that charity status confers. So, removing the ‘advancement of religion’
as a charitable purpose would ensure all charities are treated equally,
and they’re all held to the same high standard, regardless of their particular religious ethos.
(EP) Alistair do you have anything to add? (Alistair Lichten) No. I think that really
covers it quite well. I just again plug Megan’s blog, which
will be linked in the show notes and the links to the other material
that we have. This is the sixth year that I’ve had inquiries
about Operation Christmas Child. I’ll just say, if this is going on in your
school, this is an area where I’ve seen schools and organizations which
have done Operation Christmas Child, do actually respond. It’s possible to be
constructive on this. If your school is committed to doing
Operation Christmas Child this year, they may not necessarily abandon it this
coming year, because they may have made the arrangements. But if you bring this
information to school’s attention and actually show the very clear
information that’s out there, I think a lot of schools will just take
a look at it and go “actually, sorry, we didn’t know enough about this.
If we want to do some sort of charitable thing around Christmas
then we’ll look into something that’s more ethical, more effective, more educational.”
(EP) Megan and Alastair thank you very much. (MM) Thank you.
(EP) Before we move on to our next topic we wanted to share with you a couple of clips from the
recent Bradlaugh Lecture 2019, delivered by Andrew Moffat and entitled ‘No Outsiders
Reclaiming Radical Ideas in Schools’. Andrew is an assistant head teacher who
encountered fierce opposition when he tried to teach about equality and
diversity in his primary school in Birmingham. Here’s Andrew.
(Andrew Moffat) So, I’d like to show you some of the books that we use. This is one of them.
You’ll be forgiven for thinking by looking at the various MPs and protesters,
that all our books are all about gay people. I’m going to show you the books that I use,
not all of them – there’s 35 books that I use. – I’ve based the whole scheme on this book.
Actually I think this book is absolutely brilliant. It starts
the whole scheme off: Red Rockets and Rainbow Jelly. I use this book with
four-year-olds. It’s about Nick and Sue. There’s Nick and there’s Sue.
Nick likes red apples and Sue likes green pears. He likes yellow socks and she likes yellow ducks.
He likes orange hair and she likes purple hair. On every page
Nick and Sue like different things. Cats and hats and cars and dinosaurs and jelly.
But last page says that Nick likes Sue and Sue likes Nick.
And that’s the end of the story. So what’s the message in that story?
The message is that you can like different things and you can still be friends.
It’s as simple as that. And as we grow through our school, we talk about
how we’re different – different skin, different abilities, different faiths,
but it all starts with apples and pears with four-year-olds. There’s a bit of
work there from a four-year-old: “We like different things. Naya likes dolls
and Samaya likes cars. We’re all friends.” Those are all the books that
I’m using with four-year-olds. Bless him, Roger Godsiff MP
talked about this book called “Why is gotcha gay?” I’ve never heard of that book.
Apparently it’s in my scheme. No, it’s not. These are all the books in my scheme.
You can buy them all in Waterstones. You’ll notice that Elmer is there.
Elmer has been around schools for 30 years. These are the books that I am using.
Now there is one book there which is, apparently, controversial, which
is a Mommy, Mama and Me. I use this one for four-year-olds because I want
children to understand that some families have different makeups.
Some families have a mum and a dad, some have just a mum, some have just a dad,
some live with their grandma or grandpa, some have two mums, some have two
dads, some live in a foster family, All families are different. We’ve been doing this for four years and
it has worked fantastically ,so what went wrong? In October last year the
government put out for consultation for new RSE guidance, relationship and sex
education, and it’s right they did that because it’s been 18 years since
the last one. Lots of rumors started spreading around about what this would
mean for sex education in schools. There’s a really interesting video on YouTube
You can look it up: Dr Kate Godfrey-Faussett. I’m sure she wont mind me
plugging her. A parent came to me in December and said
“Mr Moffat, you’ve got to watch this video. Everyone’s talking about it. It’s going
around the community like wildfire.” I watched it on Christmas Eve.
It ruined my Christmas, because on the left-hand side is what this video
is saying. It’s saying that the new RSE guidelines are going to be like this kind of stuff:
teaching four-year-olds pornography, sexualizing young children,
their innocence is going to be destroyed, it’s a war on spirituality, it’s a war on morality.
If we do nothing our children will be lost and it’s
brainwashing children. Now, suddenly, in January, the first week back, we started
having petitions for the first time ever about No Outsiders, about sexualizing
children “you’re secualising children”, and photocopies of some of the
books that I use. And very, very quickly people are linking No Outsiders
to sex education. Now there’s no sex in No Outsiders, there’s no books
about how babies are made, no naked bodies, nothing at all. But, because I
talk about LGBT people in four of the books, four out of 35, it’s a very easy
thing to pick on: “Look! Here’s an example of what’s going to be happening in all schools.”
(EP) A full video of all of the Bradlaugh Lectures given so far is available now
and will be in the program notes. I’m now going to be talking to Alastair about
the latest data about faith schools which the National Secular Society has
obtained from the Department for Education, through a Freedom of
Information request. Alastair, could you explain what questions you asked in your
FOI request and what information you obtained? (AL) Thanks, Emma. So the first thing to note
is these figures are for England only. We think there are similar issues elsewhere
in the UK, but just the way the data works meant there had to be an
English-only focus. These are updated figures, so we did similar
FOI requests in 2017 and 2018. They formed a significant part of
our major report on this which was published in December, called The Choice Delusion,
which really looked at how faith schools undermine choice for many
parents in England. The basic question, which we’ve now asked for the third year in a row, is how many
children were assigned a faith school after their parents requested a non-faith
school. The figures show, for the second year in a row, a rise.
It’s just over 20,600 . That includes over 12,000 children
sent to secondary faith schools despite parental preference for a non-faith school,
and just over 8000 sent to primary faith schools, against their parents preferences.
Now, I think it’s important to note right at the beginning that these figures aren’t
definitive. But they add to the evidence showing the many problems with
the faith school choice narrative. (EP) What is that faith school choice narrative?
(AL) Well it’s the number one justification given by many people for why we have
faith-based schools. It is that they promote choice. This is
one of the things we encountered when creating the No More Faith Schools
campaign, is to say faith schools support choice does kind of make a bit
of an intrinsic sense. Actually unpacking that and showing
why that’s kind of a flawed way of looking at it. You can’t say that in
five seconds. You’ve got to bring in data. You’ve got to unpack the various
hidden assumptions in that. (EP) How many of the parents in this report
that you’re talking about put a faith school as their second choice?
(AL) We don’t actually know the exact data on how many put a faith school as their second
choice. Parents, depending on which area they live in, can make three to six choices.
I think five is a quite typical number. We know that over 4300 people in
September 2019, that’s where these figures are from, were assigned faith schools, despite
no faith schools being anywhere in their preferences. Again, it’s important
to unpack the data behind these figures, and to
consider why some people might make the choice of a faith school within
their six choices, despite not actually wanting a faith school. I’ve certainly
dealt with casework with parents who say well we really didn’t want a faith school,
we didn’t get into any of our non faith schools, we were assigned this
C of E school that was our third choice. Well, why did you put it as a third choice?
Many parents think if you have the option for six choices that you need to
put them all in. Parents might say “Oh, I really don’t want this faith school
but I definitely don’t want a school that’s five or six miles away.”
Equally, parents may put a faith school as one of their choices because they just
don’t have any other options. If you have one school in the village your
choices are pretty limited, and that’s the other side of the story that we we went through in The Choice Delusion report.
(EP) Is there any possibility that, say, parents might want to send their children to a
faith school but there there weren’t any faith schools in the area?
(AL) Yeah. Equally, we can we can look at that data, so there will
be, within within that 20,600, there’s going to be obviously
some anomalies either way. There will be many people whoput a faith school
despite not wanting one, and there will be some parents who
want a faith school but I haven’t put one as options. The difference in funding
for transports to faith schools means that if a parent absolutely positively
wants a faith school even if it’s nowhere near there near a school it’s
quite a long way away they can generally speaking put that as a preference and
you’re likely to get it if they meet the faith-based criteria and even it means
going past six suitable non fav schools the council will probably cover the
transport for that but that doesn’t apply if a parent wants a non faith
school in practice now what are the national secular societies main
objections to the fact that parents are often effectively forced to send their
children to faith schools well I think main objection is it that it is sort of
this perverse thing that you hear all the time about faith schools from our
choice face was my choice and that ignores all people who have no choice
but er faith school or are not able to choose their local school because of
religious discrimination in admissions you have the right to raise your
children in accordance with your beliefs now that doesn’t entitle you to a faith
school but it certainly should entice you to a school that doesn’t go against
your go against your religious beliefs in the choice delusional report we’ve
had around I think thirty short stories and case studies and parents are saying
things like you know we’re not a religious family so if you are religious
family and you send your child to a faith school and they’re reinforcing
that belief that belief that’s fine if you don’t share those beliefs then you
as a parent having to you know how do you actively counter how do you deal
with your child being taken you know to school and torts them which goes to a
family against your very fundamental values and that’s the experience that
just doesn’t happen for if your child is sent to a non face
or a community for school religiously non-directive school no child is sent to
a community school why shouldn’t he and taught their their beliefs that you know
that they’re raising their family wrong having that sort of ascribing for
a neutral inclusive atmosphere doesn’t disadvantage anyone in that’s in that
same way so the point you’re making is that non faith schools do not impose a
particular direction on children whereas faith schools do yes and obviously that
they very they’re very to the degree to which they impose that faith direction
but non faith schools aren’t imposing you know they’re not they’re not
imposing non faith it’s the idea of faith for non faithful opposites are
kind of a bit of a weird where actually that faith is one end of the scale
there’s no other end of the scale and you’ve got community for schools in the
middle yeah because they’re simply with no faith they’re simply nothing to be
imposed how far apparents really concerned about sending their children
to a faith school do you have any specific data or feedback on this issue
well it’s an area of growing growing concern as partly as the country becomes
much more religiously diverse and oh and increasingly non-religious and obviously
parents will tend to be towards the younger end of the population their
children obviously even younger so this is an age group that are overwhelmingly
increasingly likely to be non-religious do not have religion as part of their
life and don’t expect religion to be a central part of any other public service
which they wish they wish to access we featured dozens of fingers around 30
case studies and short stories and in the report of people in this position
it’s I know regularly comes up in comments in response to our faith
schools petition so yes it’s clear it’s clearly an issue that affects many
people and even taking at the very smallest end of the scale and these
figures this is having around 4,300 pupils who have put all of their choices
as non failed schools you know which kind of would seem to indicate that they
want at their parents want a non favor school thousands of children possibly
tens of thousands being sent to five schools against their wishes tens of
thousands more with maybe no other choice this is
serious serious issue that is just not being grappled with could you just say
very quickly a bit about the choice delusion report yes so this these these
figures should be seen I think as an update these are the 2019 figures and
the choice delusion report looked at the 2017 and 2018 figures choice news report
I think was pretty groundbreaking because we’re the government have been
asked over the years various times by different MPs you know do you have an
estimate of how many people don’t have a choice what a fair score do you have an
estimate of how many are sent to face schools against their parents wishes and
the government just haven’t made any estimate so you know the NHS analyzing
these gets you know the research went into choices what was the first of its
type of any sort of scale to SMA and you know a pretty good estimate of what the
figures are and you know Lea now the analysis we’ve done now for the third
year running on this showing it’s a problem affecting tens of thousands of
families not being done by other organizations certainly not being done
by the government so moving from the statistics to the practice how far in
practice do faith schools really impose a particular religion on students from a
non-religious background this is something that varies quite widely and I
never as antiph a school campaigner sit and pretend that all faith schools are
you know 9 to 5 indoctrination says no one pretends it’s all schools so that
that sort of level everyone acknowledges there is a wide range of practice and in
terms of how aggressively this religious ethos is promoted in schools but faith
schools all exist to promote a religious ethos and they all do it to some extent
and there’s a term indoctrination which I think can put some people often it
bill you get a scary word but I think of it as a scale you’ve got inculcation
immersion and indoctrination and inculcation is sort of that soft of
pushing guiding people towards religious religious e4 so at least a
positive view of religion and this idea of thanks was half of immersion so face
was in may not be trying to turn children into members of that faith but
they’re trying to create this idea that the world is a very religious world and
surround them immerse them in these religious ideas to make what you know is
just not normal for most family it’s not saying anything wrong with there but
just isn’t the normal experience of the vast majority of people in the country
this sort of very religious community and trying to make that seem as if
that’s normal let’s see it often COV schools in the
past were not seen as particularly faith promotional Laughton you saw Co V
schools faith schools were kind of faith schools by solving historic an accident
but there’s definitely been in recent years and increased focus on promoting
their faith within those schools do you have any particular examples yes so
we’ve got case studies and some of the testimonials are no more faceless light
from teachers governor’s @cv faith schools about you know how there’s the
pressure to promote over religious I see it a lot in the a lot in the case work
particularly examples and from collective worship etc that parents
might say oh no we went this was the only school in the village it was a CoV
fav school you know we were I went to CoV fav school when I was young that
didn’t seem very religious I was actually surprised by just how religious
it religious it is you know I’ve talked about the sons for my wife was she
attended a civvy faith school that was in some ways less religious than my
community school which were the harm of this efj was being promoted often and I
think the CV in particular they they don’t really believe that people are
non-religious there’s this sort of refusal to it to believe the majority
who say they’re not religious and so people are sort of seen as Christian by
default and so promoting and imposing a Christian ethos on people is seen as
kind of more neutral and fair do you have a
particular example of that well we’ve recently wrote up some
figures from a survey of teachers which very interesting it instantly showed you
know majority a clear majority of teachers supporting an end to new faith
scores if this secondary primary this is a quite across secondary and primary
we’ll link it in the show notes but one of those the the less headline figures
in that actually I found really interesting and it was this was again a
survey of T of school teachers in England and it showed that twenty three
percent would find it acceptable for a child for a non-religious family to be
allocated a place against their will a Catholic school but only seventeen
percent would find acceptable for a Christian family to be allocated a place
against their will at seek school so there’s clearly sort of religious
hierarchy if you’re if you’re a different religion obviously having
having certain religious imposed on you so we we result we helped a case where
there were twenty families were signed a place at a Sikh School against their
wishes and people sort of see all that so you know clearly that’s wrong you
know with examples with an Islamic family assigned placed at Jewish or flat
school and people see clearly that’s wrong but then we had an example a few
years ago with I think was six families they were signed to see a V faith school
against their wishes and the attitude we then once saw there was that really know
who’s Christian country should have to just put up with that in fact this leads
on to my next question which was going to be what about parents of one religion
being forced to send their children to a faith school of another religion is this
is this an issue but it’s it seems that there is a difference between the the
move from one religion to another as opposed to from non religion to a
religion yeah and it should be said that because there is many many families if
they’re not religious perceive and in some cases accurately that Christian
faith schools were less aggressive being promote me for say summer think oh you
know I’ll be willing to put up with that that doesn’t seem as bad but it’s
certainly a growing issue and that’s because well not minority faith schools
by which I mean see Hindu zamak Jewish and smaller Christian sects
there are even less popular among people who don’t share the faith than other
sort of the larger larger faith schools which means they’re very often likely to
be undersubscribed so if you’ve got an area where there’s
lots of where lots of schools are stretched for places and you’ve got one
minority faith school that’s there like fence ride you know it’s much more
likely that you might be yes that might be end up being assigned there so for
example if you’re a non religious person in an area where the other schools were
over subscribed you might end up being assigned to a Sikh school yeah and I
think that’s in terms of numerical and in single cases I think Sikhs cause one
of the one of the biggest examples and so you have these schools that just
really are not attractive to people who don’t in any way who don’t share their
faith so you have either people traveling from a long way away which you
know disrupts the balance of in other schools around the area so people and
other schools don’t get to have Sikh friends in the program because there’s a
pressure for mercy kids to go you know to this one faith school what is the
National Secular society doing to campaign against the insufficient
provision of non faith schools I think research like this is is really
important continuing to you know publish this quite groundbreaking report and
then working every year to keep it up to date then with the new organization
that’s actually publishing such a Testaments you know we’re the only ones
doing this particular research or no more faith schools campaign and the idea
that we were to challenge any new faith school proposal is important there the
report contained a series of recommendations for the DfE and for
local authorities and we’ve continued to raise these issues with local
authorities and Department of Education we encourage them to monitor monitor
these issues and to plan new schools to address them this is a set up a
methodology through this report it’s a methodology which allows us to
provide some data one respondent consultations saying that the
proposed new face school is not necessary we’ve made recommendations
which require in a bit of policy change but a change in thinking and we’ve made
other recommendations which do require legal changes which we need to campaign
for and work for overtime make it easier for a school community to downgrade or
to remove religious e-force to make the school more inclusive we’d like there to
be a secular entitlement of some sort in at the minimum to have every child has
the the option of a community for school and finally what can people do if
they’re affected by this issue if you’re affected by this issue let us know if
you be linked in the show notes to our choice delusion page where there’s a
forum to get in contact whether you have just you want to share your story of
this experience or you’re actively looking for some help with that
I’ll encourage you to share the report with your MP all MPs receive received a
copy of the report but we have a template letter so it’s sending an email
to them saying here this report is important take a look at it connect it
helps raise that back up their agenda support the no more face sores campaign
particularly if there’s a new faith school proposal in your area and less
gammarus but donate and become a member of the National Secular society so
because research like this does take a lot of time and effort and the ability
to focus on issues so if you can support the NSS that’s really great and helps us
to continue doing this into the future Alice Lipton thank you very much yes that was episode 16 of the National
Secular society podcast hosted by Emma Park if you would like to help us
challenge religious privilege and support freedom of and from religion in
Britain today why not become a member of the NSS full details are on our website
at secularism org dot UK forward slash podcast if you like this podcast you can
find further episodes on the website along with more information about the
topics discussed thanks for listening you

Leave a Reply

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