National Secular Society threatens legal action over parking privilege for Christians

[ianb321red]

From the NSS website a couple of days ago:

"....A LEADING religious pressure group has warned that subsidised parking for Sunday worshippers is ‘almost certainly illegal’ and has called for the concession to be stopped.
More than £55,000 was saved by churchgoers parking in Woking town centre between January 2009 and June 2011, according to figures revealed under the Freedom of Information Act.
Members of the congregation at the Coign Church in Goldsworth Road, Christ Church in Town Square, and Trinity Methodist Church saved a total of £55,864 over the two-and-a-half-year period, inserting their parking tickets into a validating machine at the end of each Sunday service.
Since the news emerged, the National Secular Society (NSS), which claims to challenge ‘religious privilege’, has now contacted Woking Borough Council (WBC) to advise that giving churchgoers free parking may be against the law.
Terry Sanderson, president of the society, said: “This arrangement is almost certainly illegal under equality legislation and the NSS has written to Woking council to advise them of this...."

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I would argue that actually this is almost certainly NOT illegal!!
“Churchgoers” and “Christians” are not the same, and since it is technically possible to attend church without being a Christian (i.e. to attend a Wedding or Christening) it cannot be seen as a religious privilege.
Also, a Church doesn’t refuse ‘entry’ to people of other beliefs or disbelief, therefore it is not exclusively for Christians and thus the so called privilege is technically available to absolutely anyone!
It’s actually people that decide NOT to attend these churches which is the factor in ‘benefiting’ from the subsidised car parking, NOT religious reasons…

It just sounds like sour grapes to me, and quite frankly haven't the NSS got anything else better to do? It should also be mentioned that people who attend these Churches are actually taxpayers themselves!!!

 

[gb123]

From the NSS website a couple of days ago:

"....A LEADING religious pressure group has warned that subsidised parking for Sunday worshippers is ‘almost certainly illegal’ and has called for the concession to be stopped.
More than £55,000 was saved by churchgoers parking in Woking town centre between January 2009 and June 2011, according to figures revealed under the Freedom of Information Act.
Members of the congregation at the Coign Church in Goldsworth Road, Christ Church in Town Square, and Trinity Methodist Church saved a total of £55,864 over the two-and-a-half-year period, inserting their parking tickets into a validating machine at the end of each Sunday service.
Since the news emerged, the National Secular Society (NSS), which claims to challenge ‘religious privilege’, has now contacted Woking Borough Council (WBC) to advise that giving churchgoers free parking may be against the law.
Terry Sanderson, president of the society, said: “This arrangement is almost certainly illegal under equality legislation and the NSS has written to Woking council to advise them of this...."

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I would argue that actually this is almost certainly NOT illegal!!
“Churchgoers” and “Christians” are not the same, and since it is technically possible to attend church without being a Christian (i.e. to attend a Wedding or Christening) it cannot be seen as a religious privilege.
Also, a Church doesn’t refuse ‘entry’ to people of other beliefs or disbelief, therefore it is not exclusively for Christians and thus the so called privilege is technically available to absolutely anyone!
It’s actually people that decide NOT to attend these churches which is the factor in ‘benefiting’ from the subsidised car parking, NOT religious reasons…

It just sounds like sour grapes to me, and quite frankly haven't the NSS got anything else better to do? It should also be mentioned that people who attend these Churches are actually taxpayers themselves!!!

You counterpoint their point beautifully. As I read the beginning I was thinking exactly that but then you said it before me. And if they're talking rights and liberties, which I am very big for, then people have the right to worship whatever religion, and with that comes certain liberties.

God Bless.

 

[Bungle_Bear]

From the NSS website a couple of days ago:

"....A LEADING religious pressure group has warned that subsidised parking for Sunday worshippers is ‘almost certainly illegal’ and has called for the concession to be stopped.
More than £55,000 was saved by churchgoers parking in Woking town centre between January 2009 and June 2011, according to figures revealed under the Freedom of Information Act.
Members of the congregation at the Coign Church in Goldsworth Road, Christ Church in Town Square, and Trinity Methodist Church saved a total of £55,864 over the two-and-a-half-year period, inserting their parking tickets into a validating machine at the end of each Sunday service.
Since the news emerged, the National Secular Society (NSS), which claims to challenge ‘religious privilege’, has now contacted Woking Borough Council (WBC) to advise that giving churchgoers free parking may be against the law.
Terry Sanderson, president of the society, said: “This arrangement is almost certainly illegal under equality legislation and the NSS has written to Woking council to advise them of this...."

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I would argue that actually this is almost certainly NOT illegal!!
“Churchgoers” and “Christians” are not the same, and since it is technically possible to attend church without being a Christian (i.e. to attend a Wedding or Christening) it cannot be seen as a religious privilege.
Also, a Church doesn’t refuse ‘entry’ to people of other beliefs or disbelief, therefore it is not exclusively for Christians and thus the so called privilege is technically available to absolutely anyone!
It’s actually people that decide NOT to attend these churches which is the factor in ‘benefiting’ from the subsidised car parking, NOT religious reasons…

It just sounds like sour grapes to me, and quite frankly haven't the NSS got anything else better to do? It should also be mentioned that people who attend these Churches are actually taxpayers themselves!!!

Actually the benefit is only available to people who enter the church and process their parking ticket in a machine within the church. So I think it is pushing it to say "the so called privilege is technically available to absolutely anyone!" I think the churches and council would have something to say about anyone who walked into the church, processed the ticket then just walked out again to go shopping. That makes this a discriminatory privilege and so may well be illegal. But you are quite right, the discrimination is not based on religious belief - it is based on attendance of 3 specific churches.

 

[ianb321red]

It doesn’t change the fact that technically anyone can attend these churches if they wanted to? There are no entry requirements or conditions to gain “entry” to a church – anyone is welcome, therefore anyone can take advantage of the parking subsidy. It is their choice not to!

Clearly it would be discrimination if free parking (subsidised by taxpayers) was provided exclusively to a club or organisation and which was available only to its members. This is not the case here, so it cannot be seen as discrimination for the simple fact that no one is actually being discriminated against

I live in Woking and I pay for car parking each week to attend my choice of church (which isn’t in Woking) – so does this mean that my wife and I (as taxpayers living in Woking) are being discriminated against? Clearly not, because if I wanted to I could still in theory attend one of these 3 churches in Woking. It is my choice not to do so.

So in the same way, if people who live in Woking chose not to attend either of these 3 churches, then that is their choice

The only issue here is the issue of choice

 

[Celtic D]

Just as anyone is free to attend these churches (don't know if I totally agree with that, but we'll go along with it), so is anyone free to choose to go shopping on a Sunday - why should the church goers (and yes you are right they are definately not all Christians) get free parking but not the shoppers.

Sorry but it is discrimination - it discriminates against those who don't go to church!

Is the church paying for these parking tickets - if it is then that puts a different angle to the story, but if it isn't then it is discrimination pure and simple!

 

[ianb321red]

You say it discriminates against people who don’t go to church? But as I said, I am a Woking resident and taxpayer – I simply to attend another church a short distance away from Woking. Therefore, using your argument I would be discriminated against. Correct? But you’re saying that it discriminates against people who don’t go to church – and I go to church, therefore this is a false accusation!

Or are you saying that this doesn’t count because I’ve chosen to go to a different church? Using that logic I refer back to my original point about making a choice to attend or not attend church.

Or are you saying it discriminates against people who don’t go to these 3 churches? If so, this means it discriminates against all other tax paying church goers in Woking?

But the basis of the alleged discrimination though is church attendance and/ or faith – but clearly none of these accusations hold any water…

And, finally (and very pedantically) it’s not free parking – it’s subsidised parking. Also, most parking restrictions are lifted in Woking town centre every Sunday (subsidised by the taxpayer?) – for everyone whether they’re shoppers, Christians or Eskimos!!

 

[ianb321red]

But more importantly than any of this, is it not completely petty for the NSS to jump all over this issue? Can it not be seen as simply an act of kindness and generosity – something which should be embraced and encouraged in this day and age?

If the NSS seeks to promote the positive side of human nature, then have a very strange way of showing it.

Furthermore, let’s not also forget that by starting legal action, Woking Council have now got to seek legal advice. Which will cost the tax payer money!

I think we need to get a sense of proportion to be honest…..

 

[Celtic D]

Sorry, but it is your arguements that don't stack up. We are discussing parking in Woking. If you choose to go to church outside Woking you abide by their parking rules. Parking consessions need to be applied consistantly or it is discrimination. If I decide to go to Woking to shop on a Sunday rather than my local shopping area I would expect the same parking rights as everyone else including church goers. Why should I have to pay full rate for not going to church (and no I don't go to church)

your point about it being discounted, not free is a moot point - a particular group is still getting a discount.

Wonder what you would be saying if it was a secular group who got the discount and not the Christians - you seem to be very against secular people going by all the posts you have made so far!

What's food for the goose is food for the gander - people have a free choice to be Christian or not, and should not be discriminated against for not being a Christian.

Perhaps you should try reading the Equalities Act.

And for the avoidance of any doubt I am a Christian.

 

[Catherineanne]

It just sounds like sour grapes to me, and quite frankly haven't the NSS got anything else better to do? It should also be mentioned that people who attend these Churches are actually taxpayers themselves!!!

We are all taxpayers, so that means nothing.

Unless there is a similar machine inside the local mosque for Moslems worshipping on a Friday, and in the synagogue for Saturday, etc, this subsidy may well be illegal.

However, I suspect there is a reason for this exemption, such as that the council originally bought the land for the car park from the church, on the understanding that churchgoers would not have to pay on Sundays, in which case the council is not acting illegally in following that agreement.

 

[ianb321red]

Ok, I can see your point now, but I still think using the word discrimination is completely overstating the issue...

Essentially it isn't about "car parking rights" (whatever that is?) - it's about one group of people looking at another group of people and saying "they've got something I don't have, and now I want it".

Therefore, people are getting upset because they're not getting the same treatment that another group of people are getting. There's quite literally nothing more to it than this, and you get it in school playgrounds very day!

Why can't people just say - that's a nice gesture, well done Woking council for doing this? Why does someone's benefit have to be treated so negatively by others? I think it's a very dissapointing attitude to say the least...

I personally wouldn't have a problem if a secular group benefited in some other way. I simply not that way inclined, so if someone else has got a nice little perk then good for them?

As I said before, the thinking behind the Secular Humanist movement is to be "kind, loving moral beings" (to quote from the BHA website) so I really fail to see how this particular incident lives up to this claim?

And just to clarify, I am not against secular people, but I do recognise the implications for Christians from the Secular Humanist movement, therefore any Christian living in this country needs to be on their guard as far as I'm concerned....Do you not agree?

 

[Celtic D]

Butter it up how you like, but at the end of the day it is discrimination pure and simple!

Definition of DESCRIMINATION

 

[Celtic D]

And just to clarify, I am not against secular people, but I do recognise the implications for Christians from the Secular Humanist movement, therefore any Christian living in this country needs to be on their guard as far as I'm concerned....Do you not agree?

And vice versa the implications for Humanists from Christian groups!

 

[ianb321red]

Ok, but from a Christian point of view where do your loyalties lie? Christianity or Humanism?

 

[Catherineanne]

Ok, I can see your point now, but I still think using the word discrimination is completely overstating the issue...

Essentially it isn't about "car parking rights" (whatever that is?) - it's about one group of people looking at another group of people and saying "they've got something I don't have, and now I want it".

And just to clarify, I am not against secular people, but I do recognise the implications for Christians from the Secular Humanist movement, therefore any Christian living in this country needs to be on their guard as far as I'm concerned....Do you not agree?

No, the secular humanists don't bother me. I think they are more concerned with equality than with being anti Christian, so there is no reason for me to disagree with them. I am concerned with equality as well, and as such I am pretty sure they will let me believe whatever I like.

Under UK law it is illegal to treat one group of people more favourably than another, on the grounds of age, race, religion, sexual orientation, sex or disability. Such favourable treatment is, in legal terms, discrimination in favour of one group and against those who do not fall into that group.

Therefore, under UK law (and EU law, and the Human Rights Act, for that matter), allowing churchgoers discounted car parking when it is not offered to any other group of people does look discriminatory. As I said above, unless there is an agreement which went with the sale of this land, this particular discount would seem to be unlawful.

Without such a prior arrangement tied to the land, or something similar, either the council can discount parking for everyone on a Sunday, which would be sensible, or else it must charge everyone the same.

The UK is a Christian country, and as such does not discriminate against those of other faiths. Other faiths can do what they like in their countries, but we ought to follow Christian values, which means loving our neighbour as ourselves.

 

[Catherineanne]

Ok, but from a Christian point of view where do your loyalties lie? Christianity or Humanism?

There is no conflict. The commandment is to love God and our neighbour.

We don't get to choose one over the other; it has to be both, for the simple reason that when we love our neighbour, we are expressing our love for God.

In other words, the church which allows its worshippers to accept discounted parking, unless by prior agreement to do with the use of the land, is in danger of showing contempt for God, by showing contempt for those who have to pay for this subsidised parking. This is not really religious discrimination, because most of those who subsidise this parking will be Christian, at least nominally if not actually.

There is a very valid point that those who worship regularly at a particular place where parking is chargeable, ought to be able to do so without significant ongoing cost. But that point ought to apply equally to all worshippers in an area, not just those who attend church. I suspect at this point the humanists might disagree, and claim that a humanist meeting, or a political meeting, or even a theatre trip, ought to be treated the same way.

In my view worshipping God, in whatever form, on a regular basis does call for financial protection of some kind, simply because it is done far more regularly than other meetings, and for a different reason. But this is equally true for Hinduism, Sikhism and other faiths as well as ours.

 

[ianb321red]

I think it is a bit naive there is no conflict between them! I was at the Secular Europe march last Saturday in London (as an observer, not a participant), and I can tell you that some of the content of the banners, t-shirts and placards was extremely blasphemous and offensive (to Christians). That isn’t my idea of equality….

Superficially they say they’re interested in tolerance and equality (and that may be true on some levels I’m sure), but on some issues this blatantly isn’t the case..

Take for example one conversation I had regarding creationism being taught in schools. They were protesting that creationism should not be taught under any circumstances – just evolution. They were not open to the idea of teaching both. This isn’t equality – it is intolerance towards all theistic religions! Do you not agree?

Secular Humanism is a threat to Christianity in this country - I would say there's no debate on this but there is because Patrick Sookhdeo debated whether Islam or Secular Humanism was the great threat to Christianity in the UK (he proposed that Islam was)....What do you think of this?

 

[Catherineanne]

I think it is a bit naive there is no conflict between them! I was at the Secular Europe march last Saturday in London (as an observer, not a participant), and I can tell you that some of the content of the banners, t-shirts and placards was extremely blasphemous and offensive (to Christians). That isn’t my idea of equality….

Thanks for suggesting my opinions are naive. Just what I love to hear.

I think, however, you mistook my meaning. I did not say that there are no Humanists and Christians who regard one another as opponents. I said I don't regard humanists this way. I happen not to think that Christians are above the law, so there is no reason to be afraid of the law being upheld.

Superficially they say they’re interested in tolerance and equality (and that may be true on some levels I’m sure), but on some issues this blatantly isn’t the case..

Take for example one conversation I had regarding creationism being taught in schools. They were protesting that creationism should not be taught under any circumstances – just evolution. They were not open to the idea of teaching both. This isn’t equality – it is intolerance towards all theistic religions! Do you not agree?

No, I don't agree. Creationism belongs in RE lessons, as part of the foundational mythologies of the Judeo Christian faith, and not really anywhere else. There is already provision for RE in UK schools, and I am happy with that.

Creationism is not science, or anything like it. The very idea is absurd in the extreme.

Secular Humanism is a threat to Christianity in this country - I would say there's no debate on this but there is because Patrick Sookhdeo debated whether Islam or Secular Humanism was the great threat to Christianity in the UK (he proposed that Islam was)....What do you think of this?

I think the kind of Christianity that can be threatened by anything at all, least of all humanism, is not really worth having.

Radical Islam is a threat, but then so is radical nationalism, but neither can affect my faith in any way whatever. Humanism doesn't bother me one jot.

 

[Celtic D]

Ok, but from a Christian point of view where do your loyalties lie? Christianity or Humanism?

My "loyalties" don't lie anywhere, people are free to live and believe as they please (within the laws of the country) that is their right!

As for the demo you were at the same argument could be made about Christian demos - there are militant Christians out there too!

 

[ianb321red]

Catherineanne - Sorry, but you made statement “there is no conflict” which is an absolute statement. You didn’t say originally that you personally don’t regard Humanists as opponents. Therefore, when I say it is naïve I’m referring to the belief that no conflict exists – which is clearly false. I wasn’t saying that you were naïve in your own opinion…

You refer to Creationism as "part of the foundational mythologies of the Judeo Christian faith".... are you saying that Creationism is a myth?

I never said Creationism was science - but what are your views on evolution being taught in science lessons then?

And you last point – I’m talking about a threat from evangelistic point of view so you need to think outside of your own immediate faith. If it doesn’t affect your faith then good for you! But what about other people who have not yet heard the gospel message in this country?

 

[StormHawk]

You say it discriminates against people who don’t go to church? But as I said, I am a Woking resident and taxpayer – I simply to attend another church a short distance away from Woking. Therefore, using your argument I would be discriminated against. Correct?

No, you are now comparing chalk & cheese.
Why should users of certain churches get the benefit of free parking while others who wish to use the same parking facilities at that time don't?