by Patrick West, Spectator
In politics, there has always been an assumption held by atheists, humanists and many liberals in general that those of a modern, secular persuasion act with autonomy and reason because they are unencumbered by religious belief. They believe themselves in possession of an intellect that needs no external crutch or sanction. While this enables them to achieve objective detachment, those who cling to religion can never attain such a refined plateau of enlightenment: their convictions are indelibly shaped and clouded by religious dogma.
This assumption has been unmistakeably lurking in the assisted dying bill debate, discernible among those who have been scarcely unable to suppress their annoyance at campaigners whose opposition to euthanasia has been informed by their religious convictions. You sense their seething indignation at those who fall back on their own belief in a deity in order to halt the passing of legislation which could affect the lives of millions of people, millions who don’t share their frankly baseless belief system.
You could sense it once more yesterday, as it came to pass that the bill would most likely fail in the House of Lords. As Dame Esther Rantzen, who has led the charge for the legalisation of assisted dying, told Sky News in response to this likelihood: ‘It was always difficult because there were always lobbyists – particularly, I think, religious people who have their own beliefs.’
Sometimes just a few words say so much. The accusation levelled at ‘religious people who have their own beliefs’ appears to assume that only religious types have peculiar beliefs, implying also that ‘religious people’ are an odd, outlier sub-section of society beholden to skewered thinking.