BBC to Evangelise on Behalf of Christianity?

I’ve been thinking about the secular nature of the UK recently, prompted by this weeks comment on the Secular Society’s web site regarding the BBC and religious programming. As Britain becomes more secular it seems the Christian groups that are still active become increasingly stark in comparison. Their voices become shriller as they demand of the BBC that it increase its range of religious programmes in order to engage with the BBC’s audience on religious matters. At the same time, we have Parliament attempting to increase the amount of faith schools in the UK – a move supported by all three major parties. Yet, despite the Church of England’s assertion that around 70%of us are Christians, the reality is somewhat different. While most people will nominally regard themselves as being Church of England, particularly if asked when filling in a form for an application or some such, the reality is that they rarely think about it. The vast majority attend church no more regularly than the occasional wedding christening or funeral. Indeed, as with politics, religion is rarely thought about to any great depth.

We’ve been discussing this trend over at the News & Views forum. A comment made by Jonathan focuses on what I believe to be the area of most concern for me;

"according to the latest national secular society newsline, the UK is one of the most sceptical countries with regard to religion and religious belief yet we still seem to attract Christian evangelism."

Of course we do. Christianity like its younger sibling, Islam, subsumes all other religious beliefs and cultures before it. That is how it works; it is a meme that spreads like a virus. Religious tolerance is not inherent in the younger Abrahamic religions; they are by their very nature intolerant. Convert or die. That is why the extreme Christian groups are so vocal, that is why they will try to convert people on the doorstep or in the shopping mall it is their duty. There was a time when this was done at swordpoint, and those who resisted were put to death. Anyone who has any doubt about what a religious theocracy under Christianity would be like needs only to look at Europe some 500 years ago. Those who did not believe or believed in a different variation of the Christian faith were tried as heretics, usually following a period of torture, and burned alive at the stake. All of this was done for the benefit of their eternal souls, of course. The modern-day equivalent is seen in militant Islam and those theocracies that exist in the Middle East and Asia. Whatever the belief system, it is the overt control of the population that is the most worrying, eptiomised by the use of fear, oppression and ultimately violence to impose itself. The blatant misogyny and persecution of minorities such as homosexuals persists where religious groups still have influence. It is not just their ancient writings that drive this behaviour, it is the persecution of those who are different; a basic tribal instinct that exists in the dark corners of our souls. That primeval instinct to persecute those who are different is used to great effect by tyrants because it is the fear of being persecuted that enables ordinary people to become persecutors themselves and thereby controlled.

Talking of tyrants, while they call it something different these days (the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith) the inquisition still exists and it still condemns heresy just as it always did; it still condemns homosexuality, just as it always did. Shackled by secular governments, it is unable to try infidels and heretics as it always did – but you can be sure it would like to, given even half a chance. Meanwhile, the more liberal Anglican Church is tearing itself apart over the issue of gay clergy, so can hardly lay claim to being progressive.

For me the issue is paradoxical. I believe that everyone should be free to practise whatever religious beliefs they wish without fear of persecution. Unfortunately while the Abrahamic belief systems are more than happy to demand tolerance from others they are less happy to grant it. The persecuted, given the right conditions will willingly become the persecutors. They made a fine job of it in the past and their rhetoric regarding the heathens and non-believers leaves no doubt that they would again. So, while on one hand I vigorously support anyone’s right to practise whatever religion they wish, I object equally vigorously to any attempts to impose a religious belief on me. I’m content with being an infidel. I have subjected religious mythology to the scrutiny of scientific questioning and found it wanting. I don’t believe in gods and it is unlikely that I will ever change my mind; I’m too rational. So therefore, I do not want to be witnessed.

This brings me neatly back to the BBC discussing how they can engage people with religious belief against the backdrop of the decline of religion in the UK. It is not the place of the BBC to evangelise on behalf of Christianity. While I am happy that they reflect a cross-section of society in their programming, it should always be proportionate. If religion really is declining in the UK, then they should let it. I do not pay a licence fee to have the Christian message beamed into my home. While I can cheerfully use the "off" switch to censor out such propaganda, an increase in religious content means that I will be paying for more downtime as I switch off more frequently.

Mankind will only achieve enlightenment when religion is left behind and people learn to think for themselves; question the nature of what they are with an open mind unbridled by propaganda and seek their own answers rather than rely on the pat "truths" found in the Scriptures. If archaeologists were to discover these writings today, we would look upon it as interesting period literature giving us an insight into early Hebrew culture and its quaint belief system and nothing more. It is time we did just that.