We don't think religious worship should play any part in the formal business of the state.
We want to see parliamentary and local government meetings conducted in a manner equally welcoming to all attendees, whatever their personal beliefs.
Parliamentary prayers
Sittings in both the House of Commons and the House of Lords begin with Anglican prayers. MPs and peers stand for prayers facing the wall behind them – a practice thought to have developed due to the difficulty members would historically have faced of kneeling to pray while wearing a sword.
When the chamber is at its busiest, parliamentary prayers act as a bizarre and antiquated seat reservation system. Even MPs and peers who are slated to speak have no option but to attend prayers in order to reserve a seat.
Whilst they may be viewed by some as an important tradition, parliamentary prayers serve to assert the superiority of Christianity (and the Church of England in particular) at Westminster. This 'tradition' is inimical to a modern, pluralistic, secular democracy.
In the Scottish Parliament, Tuesday afternoon sessions begin with 'Time for Reflection', with faith and belief representatives invited to addresses members for up to four minutes. The Northern Ireland Assembly begins formal business with a period of two minutes of silent prayer or contemplation. The Welsh Assembly has adopted no such rituals.
Parliamentarians who wish to pray are free to do so. But prayers should not form part of the official business of Parliament.
Council prayers
Many local authorities in Britain also begin their meetings with prayer.
Local democracy should be equally welcoming to all sections of society, regardless of their religion or belief. Council meetings should be conducted without anyone feeling excluded, or compelled to either participate in prayers or absent themselves from part of the meeting.
Council prayers open the door to wholly unnecessary conflict and sectarian squabbles within local authorities. There is a history of local councillors being bullied and marginalised for challenging council prayers.
The absence of prayers from the formal business of meetings in no way impedes religious freedoms or denies anybody the right to pray. Conversely, organised worship in secular settings imposes worship on those who do not share the faith. A genuine commitment to freedom of religion or belief is incompatible with including acts of worship in the formal business of council meetings.
If local authorities wish to hold a moment of silent reflection at the beginning of a meeting, or if councillors wish to meet for prayers prior to the meeting, they are at liberty to do so.
Take action!
1. Write to your MP
Please enter your postcode and urge your MP to support an alternative to parliamentary prayers, to make parliament more welcoming to people of all faiths and none.
2. Share your story
Tell us why you support this campaign, and how you are personally affected by the issue. You can also let us know if you would like assistance with a particular issue - for example, if you would like to challenge prayers at your own council.
3. Join the National Secular Society
Become a member of the National Secular Society today! Together, we can separate religion and state for greater freedom and fairness.
Latest updates
US Supreme Court backs prayers during government meetings
Posted: Tue, 6 May 2014 12:55
The U.S. Supreme Court has ruled that opening public meetings with prayer does not automatically violate the Constitution's ban on government endorsement of religion.
On a 5-4 vote the Supreme Court upheld the right of the town of Greece, New York, to open its meetings with mostly Christian prayers. The court found that sectarian prayer doesn't violate the Establishment Clause, as long as no religion is advanced or disparaged, and residents aren't coerced.
The court's decision was criticised by Rev. Barry W. Lynn, executive director of Americans United, which sponsored the lawsuit, and campaigns for the preservation of the principle of church-state separation. He said the decision "relegated millions of Americans – both believers and nonbelievers – to second-class citizenship".
"This ruling is out of step with the realities of modern-day America," Said Rev Lynn. "In a country where pluralism and diversity are expanding every day, a Supreme Court decision that gives the green light to 'majority-rules' prayer at local government is exactly what we don't need."
An opinion piece for the New York Times described the decision as "lamentable" and called the Supreme Court's ruling "a defeat for religious neutrality".
The Courts closely divided decision was split along ideological lines, with the conservative wing saying the prayers were acceptable, while the liberal justices said the prayers in question violated the First Amendment. The five justices in the majority were Roman Catholic. Of the four dissenters, three were Jewish and one was Catholic.
Justice Anthony Kennedy, the court's swing vote, wrote the majority opinion. He said the town's prayers were consistent with the high court's 1983 precedent in Marsh v. Chambers. That case made it clear that the long-standing practice of having prayers before State legislative sessions was lawful, based in large part on its historic nature.
In a dissenting opinion, Justice Elena Kagan said the decision will foster majority rule on public prayer.
"I respectfully dissent from the Court's opinion because I think the Town of Greece's prayer practices violate that norm of religious equality – the breathtakingly generous constitutional idea that our public institutions belong no less to the Buddhist or Hindu than to the Methodist or Episcopalian," she wrote.
Americans United sponsored the legal action on behalf of two Greece residents, Susan Galloway, who is Jewish, and Linda Stephens, an atheist. They objected to the town board's practice of inviting clergy to open meetings with predominantly Christian prayers that left them feeling unwelcome and alienated.
Town officials had claimed members of all faiths and atheists were welcome to give the opening prayer, but official records show that two-thirds of the prayers delivered between 1999 and June 2010 contained references to "Jesus Christ", "Your Son", "the Holy Spirit" or "Jesus".
In the UK, a landmark ruling at the High Court in 2012 found there was no lawful place for prayer during formal proceedings of council meetings in England and Wales, following a case brought by the National Secular Society.
Read the Supreme Court ruling in Greece v Galloway in full
Also see:
A New Low At The High Court: Justices Approve 'Majority-Rules' Government Prayer Scheme
US Supreme Court to hear council prayers case
Posted: Tue, 5 Nov 2013 12:04
Tomorrow (6 November) the United States Supreme Court will consider whether opening council meetings with prayers is legal. A previous ruling of the Supreme Court thirty years ago, in a case called Marsh vs. Chambers, said that clergy can deliver non-sectarian prayers before state legislative meetings – but they must not teach religious dogma or be "denominational".
This new case revolves around the council in Greece, a suburb of Rochester, NY.
Traditionally the council there had started its meetings with a moment of silence, but in 1999 the Town Supervisor John Auberger began inviting exclusively Christian clergy to open the meeting with specifically Christian prayers. The prayers were far from non-denominational and included such discussions as "the sacrifice of Jesus on the cross".
The public that had come to the meetings either as onlookers or as invitees were expected to stand and bow their heads during these prayers. People who had simply come to request planning permission or speak on some other local issue were expected to participate in specifically Christian prayers – even if they weren't Christian.
The two complainants in the case, a Jewish man and an atheist, managed to get the council to invite some non-Christians to give the prayers, but that didn't last long and soon the Christian monopoly resumed.
The council was deaf to further protest so the case was taken to court and eventually a federal appeals court ruled that the policy was unconstitutional as it affiliated the town too closely with Christianity. It said that those giving the prayers were prone to "convey their views of religious truth".
The Obama administration has briefed the Supreme Court and has argued in favour of the council's right to offer prayers at its meetings, but says they should be limited to an appeal for 'divine guidance' and not be about proselytising for a particular religion.
Some have argued that because prayers are banned in schools they should also be banned in public meetings – both are emanations of the state and coercing a particular religion in either setting must be seen as a step towards establishment, which is forbidden by the Constitution. Courts have responded by saying that children are forced to be in school and have no option but to listen if a prayer is recited in their presence but adults are not forced to be in a council chamber.
The lower court mulled the question of whether the prayers in Greece used "generically theistic terms" or referred to a deity as male. The lower court found most of the prayers to be too Christian and thus imposed one faith on the citizenry. However, it is likely the Supreme Court will disregard this argument, even though what the council is doing appears to be a clear breach of the constitution, and instead consider whether it is any court's business to analyse prayers to decide what is acceptable and what is not.
Legal experts predict that the Supreme Court will rule in the council's favour, saying justice is better served if courts are silent about the nature of prayer.
But one lawyer points the words of Justice Sandra Day O'Connor, who shortly before she stepped down from the Supreme Court wrote in a decision: "At a time when we see around the world the violent consequences of the assumption of religious authority by government, Americans may count themselves fortunate... Why would we trade a system that has served us so well for one that has served others so poorly?"
Find out more about the case of Greece v Galloway from Americans United.
Read the National Secular Society's briefing on council prayers.
See also: Praying for true religious freedom at the Supreme Court
