Christianity under threat in UK

It seems like the worshipping of Christianity in the UK is under threat.

This morning, I was reading through an article on the front of one of the newspapers, and Christianity is under the threat due to two reasons, which I'll list in the actual article I'll post below.

Here is the article (Taken from The Daily Mail).

THE right to practice the Christian faith is under attack after two controversial legal rulings against worshippers.

Yesterday a High Court judge in London banned the custom of saying prayers at council meetings, which has taken place since the era of Queen Elizabeth I.

The decision was described as 'illiberal' by Cabinet Minister Eric Pickles.

In the second case, the Appeal Court ruled that two Christian B&B owners broke the law by refusing to allow a gay couple to stay in a double room.

Today a former Archbishop of Canterbury warns of the increasing marginalisation of Christianity in Britain

In an article for the Daily Mail, Lord Carey says those who practise the faith are being pushed into the background by the country's secular establishment.

Christians are suffering mounting intolerance as the country becomes 'enslaved to multiculturalism, political correctness and so-called equal rights', he said.

Lord Carey urged Prime Minister David Cameron to act to safeguard Britain's 'founding Christian traditions'.

This marks the end of the story on the front page of The Daily Mail. However, it is continued on page 4 of the paper. See below.

A LANDMARK legal ruling banning the tradition of saying prayers at council meetings was denounced last night as an 'assault on Britain's Christian heritage'.

The High Court controversially backed an anti-religious campaign to abolish official acts of worship.

Christians and politicians reacted with dismay after a judge overturned centuries of custom by outlawing a town hall in Devon from putting prayers on the formal agenda.

It prompted concern that it would pave the way for Parliament to abandon prayers before Commons and Lords business, mark the end of hospital and Forces chaplains, and could even lead to the abolition of the Coronation Oath, pledged by Kings and Queens taking the throne.

The ruling means prayers will not be allowed at the start of council meetings across England and Wales, though they may still be said before the official start.

Atheist former councillor Clive Bone started the case against Bideford town council in July 2010, claiming he had been 'disadvantaged and embarrassed' when religious prayers were recited at formal meetings.

Backed by the National Secular Society, he insisted that the 'inappropriate' practice breached the human right to freedom of conscience and discriminated against non-believers, making them feel 'uncomfortable'.

The society claimed council meetings should be 'equally welcoming to everyone in the local community' and should therefore be 'religiously-neutral'.

Mr Justice Ouseley, sitting in London, rejected the human rights and equality challenges. But he ruled that formal prayers at council meetings were unlawful because of a technicality in the Local Government Act 1972.

He said local authorities had no power to 'say prayers or to have any period of quiet reflection as part of the business of the council'. Acknowledging the widespread importance of the case, Mr Justice Ouseley gave Bideford council permission to appeal.

Communities Secretary Eric Pickles described the ruling as 'very illiberal'.

He said: 'The ruling is surprising and disappointing. Christianity plays an important part of the culture, heritage and fabric of our nation.'

He vowed to override the High Court ruling by bringing in the Government's Localism Act, which would give councils the power to hold prayers at the start of meetings, as early as next Friday.

Simon Calvert, of the Christian Institute, said: 'Prayers have been a part of council meetings for centuries, and mary people, either for religious reasons or cultural reasons, see them as a positive part of our national life.

'It's a shame the courts have taken sides with those whose goal is to undermine our Christian heritage. It is high time Parliament put a stop to this assault upon our national heritage.'

Harry Greenway, a former Tory MP and ex-chairman of the National Prayer Breakfast, said: 'If people do not want to attend prayers of this nature, they can stay away instead of meddling and busybodying with other people's beliefs.

'Non-believers are not harrassed in this way by believers. Why cannot the non-believers show the same kind of tolerance?' Mr Bone, who left Bideford council because of its 'refusal to adjust' its prayers policy, said: 'I'm delighted. I'm not surprised, I expected to win.

'This has got nothing to do with intolerance towards religion. Religious freedom is an absolute right and so is freedom from religion an absolute right, in my view.'

Keith Porteous Wood of the National Secular Society said: 'We're very pleased with the judgement.'

Officials at Parliament said the 1689 Bill of Rights meant the Commons and Lords decided their own business, so a legal challenge would fail.

So, is this the end of Christianity in Britain? Who knows. I'm not a religious person myself, so it wouldn't affect me in any way, but it is bad for those people who do practice Christianity. Choosing sides in the matter would be difficult. Me? I'm neutral about the whole thing.

I'm not gonna side with the Christians, or those who ruled against Christianity. They can both argue and have valid points for one thing or the other. Shouldn't it be down to personal choice though, and not an outright ban?