UK secularists need to grow a pair

As the UK continues to fund sectarian institutions, some politicians are beginning to warn officials that this trend will ultimately do more harm than good. Grassroots Liberal Democrats are “pressing” (whatever the fuck that means) the government to stop funding religious organizations, lest they be used as proselytizing tools.

In east London, a new website aiming to promote sex education for young people “using a faith sensitive approach” has been launched after receiving funding from health authorities. It follows a recent controversy in south-west London over Richmond council’s awarding of a £89,000 contract to the Catholic Children’s Society, which will be involved in advising pupils on issues including contraception and teenage pregnancy.

The government spent over 100,000 dollars spent on this bullshit? That’s insane! Don’t worry though, they totally got their money’s worth: just check out their website‘s pregnancy page for proof (it’s hilariously empty). Maybe they’re still trying to figure out how to gently tell expecting young mothers wishing to terminate their pregnancies that they’ll burn in Hell for eternity. Is there even a nice way to say that?

If you dig a little deeper, you’ll also find some false facts meant to persuade individuals abstinence teaching is effective. For instance, they claim that:

  1. Teens living in two-parent homes are less likely to have sex earlier than teens living in single-parent or step-parent homes [Me: “see, you shouldn’t have divorced your abusive husband. Now your daughter is a whore!”].
  2. Perceived parental disapproval of sex has a strong delaying factor throughout adolescence.[Me: “yes, because no one likes to rebel against their parents”].
  3. Teens who are more religious are more likely to delay sex. [Me: “while the average religious person may wait longer to have sex, it usually leads to more pregnancy and STI’s than their secular counterparts].
  4. The combination of academic achievement and sports participation (for girls only) have the strongest delay effect in early and middle adolescence. [Me: “yeah, it’s pretty much the opposite for guys, so how is this helpful for half the population?”].
  5. In late adolescence, girls with high self-esteem are less likely to engage in premarital sex than girls with low self-esteem. [Me: “what better to teach a girl self-esteem than inculcating her with a faith that considers all women sinners and the ruin of mankind?”].
  6. The more religious the teen and their family, the less likely they were to start having sex early. [Me: “and the more likely she’ll have an STI or a baby on the way!”].

Isn’t it great when you can cherry pick facts to make your side sound so much better? I will admit that at the very least, this site does encourage people to use contraception (bad Catholic alert). This, however, is their “last resort” in case you happen to be a human being and love getting shagged.

Here’s the problem in a nutshell: kids are going to fuck each other whether or not you want them to. If fact, the less you want them to, the hotter it is. The last thing we need is a bunch of religious rubes confusing kids with dumb messages about sin and how their invisible friend only wants sanctioned sex. What’s worse, it also seems as though the result of their “sex education” is an adult with a less enjoyable sex life. Do religions ever get anything right?

The point is, religions are scarred by the misogynistic, ignorant, barbaric and primitive mores of the people who wrote their holy texts. Sure, some of their cults have embraced the values of the Enlightenment rather than follow their own code, but it doesn’t take away from the fact that the basis of their beliefs are still predicated on utter nonsense. In other words, foundationally, they poison the very notion of intellectual integrity and reason. This, at the very least, must bar them from sharing or overtaking secular programs.

So what’s next? I guess we’ll continue to act like pussies and complain about this while money is slowly diverted away from secular programs and into the pockets of proselytizing organizations. At a time when the government is slashing spending, do you really think putting a bit of “pressure” is going to do anything at all? Religions are going to find ways to siphon money to themselves unless you expunge them all from your government. Get rid of the House of Lords. No more faith schools. Get your fucking secularist act together, England. It’s beginning to be an embarrassment.

Comments (5)

  • avatar


    Satan has deceived the whole world Rev 12:9 until a woman delivers the true word John 1:1, Rev 12:5, Rev 12:13 that turns the hearts of the fathers to the children of God Luke 1:17 by giving the truth Acts 3:22-23 that not one child of God will be put in a hell fire no matter what their sins. It never entered the heart or mind of God to do such a thing Jer 7:31, Jer 19:5. This is proven by the word of God to the world as a witness at Prove all things.

  • avatar


    Meanwhile, back in reality.

    Technically we live in a Theocracy in the UK. As the Head of the Church of England is also the Head of State..

    One of the interesting comparisons of religion in the US and UK is because we have a state religion, and it’s state funded to some degree, they have less need to raise money in the same way the evangelists are in the US. Which makes us and them more complacent, and therefore more secular. They don’t have to work for thier money and ultimately we are probably paying less overall as a society than we would under a US donation/tithe system. I’m looking forward to seeing the new census data.

  • avatar


    Jacob, when they say they are pressing or putting pressure on the government, they mean they are lobbying. What else do you propose they do?

  • avatar

    Jacob Fortin

    If you can lobby to exclude religion from state funding, then isn’t it just as likely that others will Lobby for the opposite?

    What you need are real laws designed to ensure that religion has no business providing services that are ultimately paid for by taxpayers. you can make it fair and exclude all religions.

  • avatar


    “Teens who are more religious are more likely to delay sex.”

    So what they are saying is that atheists get sex sooner. Ladies and gentlemen, I think we have a new way to get young people to reject faith!

Leave a Comment

Scroll to top