to think we should separate church and state, if only to save atheist monarchs from having to pretend to have faith?

[MardyBraWouldDoEddieRedmayne]

DM link warning

For those who don't want to press on it, the link basically says that although Prince William has been confirmed, he isn't a regular church goer, just going for official occasions, weddings and Christmas.

The article states that "A spokesman for the prince insisted yesterday that he was a dedicated Christian despite his lack of regular attendance." But if he isn't, won't it be hypocritical to expect him at some point in the future to promise to become Defender of the Faith.

In addition, there's a whole load of other arguments in favour of a secular society.

• We're a multi-cultural society with many religions (and a growing percentage of the population who are non-believers) in the UK. Why should one religion be so dominant in our institutions?
• Why should some parents be denied access to certain state-funded schools on the basis that they are faith schools?
• Why should bishops be in the House of Lords?

N.B. This isn't intended to be a bunfight between believers and non-believers - just a discussion on whether we should or should not have church and state linked.

I feel so strongly that we ought to have a secular society. It is madness that Bishops get the right to rule on our behalf.

Never mind William, I think it'll be interesting to see what happens when we have a King Charles - he's already said that he'll be Defender of All Faiths, rather than just the one...

NB am not suggesting that KC3 is going to push for secularism, just that the CoE will poss not have such a main focus in his reign.

Looks like it's just you and me then Hazel. And nobody has said YABU! So much for my worries about a bunfight.

I totally agree with you Mardy church and state should not be linked, as a catholic I never understood how the king of my country can also be the head of a religion I do not belong to.

As a presbyterian I also think it's a nonsense that the leaders of a denomination that doesn't represent me or the vast majority of my country can have an unelected influence on legislation that affects all of us. Dh feels the same as an athiest.

I'm meh about monarch as head of the CoE, but that's just general meh about the monarchy.

Absolutely agree.

I am vehemently atheist, and I think freedom OF religion is every bit as important as freedom FROM it. The only reasonable way to support all faiths and none equally is to have a government that does not play favourites at all.

Have often wondered if William came out as an atheist (and he won't, even if he is) could he still be Head of The Church of England?

Church schools are a bit of a red herring; they do not exist because there is an established church - if that were the case there wool be only CofE schools.

How a future monarch squares personal faith with required duties is for their own conscience. As long as the duties are carried out, of course. Prince Charles' marriage to a divorcee is a greater conflict than Prince William's attendance record, but both Church and Government seems content.

Apologies for the red herring meditrina. A separate issue, maybe, but a lot of the same arguments apply.

It would be nice if being Royal didn't mean one had to be Church of England. Why should they be unable to choose their own faith when it's a right and privilege bestowed upon their subjects?

I feel very sorry for them in that respect.

I agree - not sure that's the very best reason, but I think that there is no good reason for one religion to have special privileges over another (and that includes places in the House of Lords and the ability to carry out marriages)

Sod Prince William. What do I care what he has to do (I hate monarchy more than religion, clearly)? If he doesn't like it he can, you know, step down.

I am more worried about unelected people running the country and compulsory worship in schools. YANBU, it is ridiculous to have no separation of Church and State.

No, I agree it's not the best reason Trills, but maybe a good trigger.

Yanbu, I see no reason why church and state should be hand in hand.

Since the CofE has very different views to me regarding equality I no longer think they should influence important decisions. I never thought I would ever say that to be honest.

I agree with you, Terry, completely - but is that altogether fair on William? He can step down, but what kind of life would he have if he decided he'd rather go and run a chip shop in Skegness? He would never be left alone.

This is why I think it's time for the monarchy to go. It's unacceptable that anyone should be "born to be" anything. We're all entitled to make our own choices with our own lives and, in theory, William has one - but it's not much of one.

I'm not a royalist and would like to see the end of the monarchy. And I agree that Church and state should be separate. But you can be a Christian without being a regular church goer.

He's an military officer, Ellie so would have small level of protection also, probably from his GM's millions of pounds. Maybe I should feel sorry for him, I do find it hard though. Disclaimer: I was no fan of Diana's but losing his DM young did make even cynical, anti-royalist me feel horrible for him.

Yeah - he'd be a stinking rich chip shop owner so, no, I probably wouldn't feel that sorry for him

I think the joining of church and state has everything to do with church schools. It would be much easier to remove state funding from church schools (of any denomination) if the CoE wasn't state-sanctioned. And church schools are absolutely dominant in some areas. And if you're the wrong religion (or have no religion), your kids often aren't allowed in. And if they are, they've got to put up with religious indoctrination. Pisses me off.

Here's an interesting but of trivia. THe title Defender of the Faith was given to Hnery VIII by the Pope. THat's the same Henry VIII who later broke from Rome and established the Church of England. Oh and if you look at any coin the F.D. stands for DOTF in latin (fidei defensor? something along those lines).

I am very much in favour for the seperation of Church and State. I am not happy that clergy with a very specific and conservative agenda get automatic seats in the HoL.

the one thing that I approve of about the USA is that they have separation of church and state. We don't - so compulsory religion in schools is just one of the bad effects.

I get the impression that HMQ is a believer but next-but-one isn't - I think he and her waitiness lived together long before big white dress day, indeed I would hope that they did. Apparently they also managed to get Christmas without church this year!

so let's hope he can do something useful with his turn and take the country away from compulsory religion.

The point re schools is that every single school is a church school of sorts. If not of a determined denomination, then it will have to give time to christian worship. This is, n my opinion, massively inappropriate.

I would be intrigued to see the results of a referendum on this.

Red - I thought Henry VIII gave himself the title of defender of the faith when he broke away from rome and the pope as if to say 'you used to control the faith now I do' ?

There must have been atheist monarchs in the past. I suppose they just pretended.