I am an atheist. I diligently tick “no religion” on my census form, and I have a lot of time for large chunks of the British Humanist Association’s work, particularly when it comes to issues such as faith schools, bishops in the House of Lords, and assisted dying.
Where I have been struggling recently, though, is with the BHA’s attempts to get recognition for Humanist weddings into the Marriage (Same Sex Couples) Bill. I already struggle with the fact that certain (but by far not all) religions have the privilege of having their wedding ceremonies recognised by the state. I come from a culture of far stricter separation of church and state, where you’re welcome to have a religious wedding ceremony, but you have to have a civil one too for it to be legal.
It bothers me somewhat that my friends of most Christian denominations can have one, religious, ceremony while my Pagan friends have to go to the registry office as well as have their handfasting. There is a clear inequality here which we should probably look to resolve one way or another (and to be honest I don’t hugely mind which way). What bothers me slightly more, though, is that Humanism is suddenly trying to walk and quack like a duck.
Abolishing religious privilege is one thing, but it’s not like non-religious people can’t marry in this country – that horse bolted when we allowed the Catholics to marry. In fact, by virtue of having an established church, pretty much anyone has the option to have a civil ceremony or get married in the Church of England. So given that marriage is a legal contract which is already open to people from any and no religion through civil marriage, what exactly is the BHA trying to achieve by demanding the same privileged status for Humanism as some other religions already have?
Of course atheists, agnostics and Humanists have a desire to mark important life events – births, deaths, marriages – with some kind of ceremony. I love the BHA’s idea of Humanist baby naming ceremonies, and I would certainly consider having a Humanist celebrant conduct my funeral. As there is no legal contract involved, neither of these occasions are served in any way by the state. With marriages though, we have a reasonably good existing system in place that’s administered by the state. I would much rather see the BHA’s energy aimed at securing proper separation of church and state than trying to jostle with other religions for a privileged position.