By Dr James Eglinton, Meldrum Lecturer in Reformed Theology, New College, University of Edinburgh
LAST week, Police Scotland, the Scottish Government and One Scotland – a governmental initiative intended to foster a spirit of equality across Scotland – joined forces in a blunt new ad campaign against religious bigotry. One poster reads: “Dear bigots, you can’t spread your religious hate here. End of sermon. Yours, Scotland.”
Scotland is no stranger to social discord caused by a myriad of factors, religion included. Many Scottish communities are blighted by a tribalism that refuses to practice “love thy neighbour” if that neighbour has a different religious identity. In view of this real problem, the response of Police Scotland and the Scottish Government is socially irresponsible. Rather than promoting equality and peace, this particular advert will sow further division, suspicion, and inequality.
This lack of mutual trust, however, will not grow between different religious groups – Scotland’s Christians, Muslims, Hindus, Sikhs, Buddhists or Jews. Rather, it will increase between non-religious and religious Scots. In place of an older set of inter-religious tribal battles, this poster fosters a more zeitgeisty alternative: secular citizens set against their religious neighbours. Why does this poster run this risk? There are two reasons.
The first concerns the poster’s failure to define either of its key terms: bigot and religious. It would not be unreasonable for someone to read the poster’s ambiguous terms and unguarded flow of reasoning, and conclude that bigotry is produced exclusively by religion, that bigoted people are religious people, or that one social group should carry the blame for intolerance: the religious.
The poster makes no distinctions as to whether any single religious community might be particularly prone to bigotry, or whether all stand equally guilty in the eyes of our Government and Police. The poster’s message has no explicit interest in distinctions between (or within) religions. Indeed, to name and shame any specific group—itself an unhelpful alternative—would presumably go against One Scotland’s policy on religious discrimination. Because of this, the poster has ended up as a hard punch aimed at no-one in particular. This means that its vague, extremely serious implication concerns all religious Scots as those who have been tarred, for one reason or another, by the same broad brush.
Whether intentionally or not, Police Scotland and the Scottish Government’s careless generalisation has given non-religious Scots a public suggestion that they should be suspicious of their religious neighbours.
The second reason flows directly from this. In its effort to promote peaceful relations between Scotland’s religious communities, the poster implies that those religious communities are not able to solve their own problems. Practitioners of interfaith peacebuilding often emphasise that the most effective voices in combating religious bigotry are drawn from the faith communities in question. Those native voices draw on their respective traditions in demonstrating why their followers should think and live differently. In that model, the peacebuilding assumes that a community can draw on its own resources in search of peace—an act of trust that is socially empowering and inclusive for religious adherents.
In this poster at least, our Government and police have not extended that trust to Scotland’s faith communities. Rather, their approach has centred the task of identifying and solving the religious problem entirely outside of our religious communities. The poster’s implied speaker is not a Scottish Protestant, Catholic, Muslim, etc. The poster’s speaker, quite explicitly, is progressive secular Scotland. It is the voice of the non-religious, non-bigoted Scot. And as such, the poster is not a call for better dialogue between religious Scots. It is, rather, a call for non-religious Scots to pity their backward neighbours. End of sermon. Yours, a Christian Scot.
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel