We should be moving towards a secular country.

I'm not a lawyer, but if they tried it I guess we'd find out

The larger point though is that it's all very well to say that the churches own the sites and they'd have to be bought, but it's not quite as simple as that considering the relatives spends by different parties over the decades

I do think religious clothing, symbols, and practices should be treated neutrally. They should not be protected or favored any more than any other personal choices. That means people should be allowed to wear what they want. If head coverings are allowed for some, then head coverings are allowed for all. If jewelry is allowed for some, then jewelry is allowed for all. Sometimes restrictions should be allowed for safety or hygiene and religion should not be a reason for an exception.

Adjust the value of the buildings for advertising? What on earth do you think the legal framework is for that?

I used to work in one.

You sound like you’d fit in in North Korea OP.

No free thinking allowed there.

You're holding up a country that has in parts banned abortions to victims of rape in the name of Christian values?

No, I'm making no value judgement. I'm pointing out that collectively our human brains seem to need some sort of belief system. As Western societies have moved away from more traditional religious beliefs they have embraced new ideologies rather than science and rationality.

I work in one.

I've noticed that non-religious folk always want non-faith schools. Even although they have no idea about them 😅

I am an atheist but respect people’s right to worship or be religious. However, I do agree about faith schools. It’s the equivalent of Apple buying schools and forcing people to have an I-Phone to gain entry there. I don’t think any private institution should have a say in schools- including academy chains.

You will never do anything much about people wanting to congregate and celebrate or recognize their religious belief. It's one of those man made ideas which never goes away entirely.

That's not to say that schools or institutions which receive public money should be accommodating religious belief. Really they should not, and whether children should receive religious teaching is for the parents. It's pretty clear that unless you do bother to do this at a young age, people don't adopt religion very often as adults.

I think religions become problematic when they get too much power. So do other institutions and a lot of individuals. There are good and bad people in all religions and institutions, but the people who are attracted to power are usually unfit to make decisions for the good of others. Power corrupts.

I don't know how to get round this. I don't think points 3 to 5 will help but points 1 and 2 might.

You are entitled to your opinion. Thankfully so is everyone else. To equate churches with ‘other forms of entertainment’ is frankly insulting and shows how ignorant you are. Churches fund-raise for a lot of charities, collect for food banks, provide free transport to hospitals for those in need, provide pastoral care after a bereavement and the majority of vicars in villages do it voluntarily. They do not receive a stipend.

We may be moving in that direction, but I don't see any of these as a priority. The issue with any institution or organisation is what they have the power and incentive to do and what balances they have to challenge violence and corruption, not whether they believe in any divine forces. There are plenty of secular organisations with people convinced they're doing things for the greater good or just through power can get away with hurting people and I don't see much benefit in just focusing on the religious ones.

I can see removing specific seats in the House of Lords for religious positions, though not removing people just because they are religious leaders. Personally, I'd prioritise strongly reducing and capping the number of MPs who are only there as MP retirement, how can we trust them to be impartial in challenging the government?

I can see removing automatic charity status and putting them on the same level as other venues, but there are many, many entertainment venues - especially ones aimed at families and communities - that have charity status. Many of the art venues in my area are also charities. Many religious organisations do charity work - literally every food bank in my area is connected to religious institutions whether churches or temples and my local Cathedral and art venues gives more support for adult education than the council which has stripped it to dust.

I can see removing the legal requirement for schools to include Collective Worship, plenty of schools already push that law enough and I think it would be great for parents to have the option to have a secular school for their children rather than having to home educate for that. I can also see removing ability for state schools to have family's religion as part of the admissions criteria - this is already Church of England policy to not have that in CoE schools though not all such schools follow that. I don't think we can remove schools being connected to churches, literally. I don't think the UK could afford to either buy the schools where the land and/or building is owned by a religious group or accomodate the schools elsewhere. We have to acknowledge in the UK that many early schools were established by religious groups and we have the legacy from that. I also don't think it would have much benefits nor that it should be a priority in education that is struggling enough.

Distinguishing between organised worship and cultural activities is a lot messier than I think you realise. Even more with religious symbols and dress with cultural symbols and dress and personal symbols and dress. How would you distinguish between my wearing long skirts for personal reasons and another who wears them for religious reasons? How would you address attire for festivals that people celebrate for religious, cultural, and personal reasons? Or clothes with words on them refering to religions, in seriousness or jest? In your regime, would people be allowed to wear Dark Souls shirts?

When people compare all religions to cults or gangs, I can only imagine they've little experience with any of it to try to go for such cheap shock value, ignoring how dismissive it feels to put the vicar down the street who said about Easter "I hope you have a good holiday, if you celebrate..." in the same box as the group who threatened and attempted to kidnap my kids because I'd left as a teenager.

some religions are able to completely disregard laws on equality

The Equality Act and similar legislation all have excemptions in them, and religious organisations are far from the only ones.

Yet some countries have this, at least in part.

This, and I am not religious.

I recommend Dominion by Tom Holland to start with

I've read it, BluntPoet ... some interesting hypotheses, but wholly blinkered around the teachings of some of the much older religions which came before Christianity and continue to this day

No, not joking at all.

Perhaps you’re the one who should look into this more.

I recommend Dominion by Tom Holland to start with.

Christianity is pretty much the only religion that says turn the other cheek and that it’s better to be oppressed than be the oppressor

Please say you're joking, BluntPoet?

If not you might want to look a little further into that one ...

Nobody's advocating some sort of "coup"

I'm not sure about that- OP's views seem fairly extreme! ...

It's a fair point, Whatifthehokeycokey, and your own preference is nearer my own except that I wouldn't want my DS anywhere near a private religious school

Even in OP's scenario, though, within current law we couldn't have "the state" barrelling in to seize and shut things down wholesale, so at least we have the comfort of knowing any measures would have to be done by due process

It's just a pity to some of us that these processes are so open to abuse by special interest pleading

but that would mean that I am forced to follow your “faith” so isn’t that also wrong if you follow your own logic? The intrinsic
moral values of this country stem from the original Ten Commandments (amongst others); society is unravelling because they are no longer drummed into people from a young age which means more and
more people are living in the “me, me, me world where you can do what you want and take what you want. Your plan will end in anarchy IMHO. What we should have is free and open debate and members of ALL faiths in the House of Lords alongside non-believers but only those with the country at the heart of what they do. Would you get rid of those rewarded with their seat by political leaders as well?

People need religion, if you remove the traditional Judeo-Christian ones something else just comes along to fill the void. See current US-originated leftwing progressive thinking for an example.

Amen.

Many people are enraged when told that ideas like compassion for the weak and siding with the victims are of Christian origin and don’t really exist anywhere else apart from the West. Christianity is pretty much the only religion that says turn the other cheek and that it’s better to be oppressed than be the oppressor.

And yet those who see themselves as secular and rational (and therefore superior) pursue other agendas with ferocity worthy of religious neophytes.