The National Secular Society – which seems to be a small group of angry people we would fit into Liverpool Cathedral in one sitting – has just awarded the excellent Southall Black Sisters the Secularist of the Year prize. Unfortunately, I can’t work out what the Sisters actually won. Was it money, a trophy, a bunch of flowers? I think we should be told (or, at least, I should be told where to look for the answer).
Apparently…
Southall Black Sisters was set up to meet the needs of Black and Asian women who are the victims of domestic violence or injustices in the legal system. The main aim of the organisation is to empower women in gaining more control over their lives, to be able to live without fear of violence and be able to assert their human rights to justice, equality and freedom. It is right on the forefront of the feminist struggle in this country. It celebrated its thirtieth anniversary last year, being founded in 1979 during the Southall race riots.
They were awarded the prize for the following reason:
… because they provide a secular space where women fleeing violence or injustice – often resulting from religious attitudes – can find a safe haven… The Government’s ‘cohesion’ agenda has put an enormous amount of power into the hands of religious leaders in minority Asian communities. These are almost always very conservative in their outlook and some consider women’s rights to be unimportant. The Southall Black Sisters can provide women with some time away from this all-powerful religious patriarchy for them to sort out their problems in their own way.
This raises two intriguing questions:
1. What has any of that to do with ‘secularism’? I’d love to know the view of the Southall Black Sisters on this. But to set this against some silly prejudice about ‘religion’ just pushes the NSS into the ‘we’ve stopped thinking’ corner. Since when has defending women against injustice and violence been the sole preserve of ‘secularists’?
2. Did the NSS not check out who actually funds the Sisters? Here’s the list (as discovered by someone else):
The Bromley Trust, John Lyon’s Charity, Department of Health Section 64 Funding, The Sigrid Rausing Trust, City Parochial Foundation, Bridge House Trust, Comic Relief, London Borough of Ealing, Network for Social Change, Princess Diana Memorial Fund, Oak Foundation, Wates Foundation, Henry Smith Charity, London Rape Crisis Centre, Atlantic Philanthropies, Bloomberg.
At least three of those are Christian charities and there may be more.
So, how much financial support is the NSS providing to their award winners? Just asking.
Nick Baines's Blog 
February 18, 2010 at 6:35 pm
Nick
The prize is £5,000. All the best to the Southall Black Sisters, but I have to agree that this seems to have absolutely nothing to do with secularism.
Mouse
February 18, 2010 at 6:49 pm
I think it is great that Christian money is being used for such a worthy cause. Domestic violence is a crucial issue. I also think it’s great that the NSS are recognising good work. Two things perhaps as Christians we could be positive about?
It’s important to ask probing questions. But also important to listen to what perhaps they are trying to say? Perhaps you are right that it’s just a “silly prejudice about religion”. But for me, the stakes are a bit high to reach that conclusion.
I am sure you know though that there have been significant numbers of women in abusive relationships who have in the past (and present) been advised to stay in abusive relationships, on the basis of (of course wrong) ‘biblical’ teaching re ‘submission’ to husbands.
There’s been some good Christian feminist theology/critique on this. It’s a significant problem, which I don’t think we should just dismiss. Even in the last week we have had the chair of Reform Trustees in the national press because he was peddling a theology which isn’t a million miles away from this kind of stuff.
Presumably you do feel we should openly acknowledge that this happens?
Just asking…
February 18, 2010 at 7:09 pm
Jonathan, my whole point is that this is an excellent group and great that they get funded and rewarded. I just don’t get the link between the NSS and the apparent basis of their award.
Why do you seem to think I wouldn’t ‘openly acknowledge’ that even Christians do cruel things?
February 18, 2010 at 7:49 pm
I wonder how the NSS would respond to the work of, say, Inclusive Church, or Women@theWell. The former is surely working to change the same prejudices and injustices that the NSS so despise, and the latter do very practical and valuable work with women in extremely vulnerable positions. Neither can be said to be secular organisations, but both are trying to provide a safe haven.
Of course, the fact that some Christians do good things does not absolve us of the burden of those who behave abominably. But then, I think that about humanity, too. Just because someone doesn’t share my religious beliefs does not mean I can wash my hands of my part in a society that sustains tyranny and cruelty instead of encouraging lovingkindness.
February 19, 2010 at 9:34 am
Nick – I don’t get how you interpret my statement: “Presumably you do feel we should openly acknowledge…” as “Why do you seem to think I wouldn’t ‘openly acknowledge’”
My presumption is, as I said, that you would indeed openly acknowledge that! (but you haven’t mentioned it in your post as being linked, and I am suggesting it may be)
My overall point is twofold (i) How can we be loving in our response to those who appear to hate us/ what we stand for and (ii) In doing that how can we listen to them, seeking to understand their point of view.
February 19, 2010 at 10:21 am
“Nothing to do with secularism”? What on earth do you think secularism *is*? Resisting the claims of religion to power is central to the work of SBS, as they themselves have always made clear. Apparently you are unaware of the nature of their critique.
I don’t know why the fact that SBS get funding from some Christian charities should be of any concern to the NSS.
It seems to me that the NSS’s critics really haven’t got a grip of what the organisation is all about, but are trying to keep it firmly in an “angry atheist” box. That’s called stereotyping. I thought you were against stereotyping?
Dan
February 19, 2010 at 11:31 am
Dan, I do understand what the NSS is about and what ‘secularism’ is. Furthermore, I wouldn’t have called the SBS ‘excellent’ if I wasn’t aware of the nature of its critique. I also have to listen to the NSS’s blind critiques (usually expressed in angry language) of anything Christian – constantly surprised at the stereotyping, ignorance and irrationality. I have far more respect for the British Humanist Association.
February 19, 2010 at 12:04 pm
Jonathan Bartley Says:
“My overall point is twofold (i) How can we be loving in our response to those who appear to hate us/ what we stand for and (ii) In doing that how can we listen to them, seeking to understand their point of view.”
Love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you?
So,
i) By the Grace of God
ii) By not pointing out how wrong they are?
February 19, 2010 at 9:23 pm
Heaven forbid that anybody should be angry about anything!
Dan
February 20, 2010 at 8:12 am
Dan – that’s a ridiculous statement and I’m assuming you blogged it in jest.
Naturally there are many things in life that arouse the emotion of anger within us!
Anne.
February 20, 2010 at 1:03 pm
“(ii) In doing that how can we listen to them, seeking to understand their point of view.”
By recognising that some of their criticisms may have some (although not all of the) truth in them. By pointing out where those faults have been overcome and recognising there may be others that have not come to light?
I know from personla experience that the Church isn’t what most of the secular/atheist world perceive it to be, most of the assertions are based on a medieval understanding of Christianity etc.
Arguing and getting defensive makes people think we must ‘have something to hide’ and reinforces their point of view…
Aren’t we supposed to be the healers and peace makers?