Include the atheists

Re: “Religion S44 order ‘clears confusion’”, ( BP, Aug 24).

Last week there was a further Section 44 order to set up a religion committee, but what it does exactly is not clear to me. There were mutterings of keeping up morals and respect for religions and what they consider sacrosanct. And it is supposed to avoid conflicts between Buddhists and Muslims.

I am a conscious non-believer, or you can call me an atheist. I am aware there are people in this world who think similarly to me: religions are full of contradictions, illogical statements, weird etiologies, absurd worldviews and outright nonsense.

Historically they have done a lot of unspeakable harm.

On a side note, you can have ethics and be a good person without clinging to a religion — sometimes it seems conscious non-believers do have more ethics, after all they think and do not just follow without thinking.

So if there is a committee dealing with religious matters then there should also be a representative of this group of people among them.

If you let only religious representatives rule the scene, sooner or later you will be at risk of going to jail for daring to criticise them — in parts of the world this happens already.

If we don’t include a non-believer, we risk excluding many people from critical decision-making, as we do in many other cases.

KARL REICHSTETTER