This is just a selection of web resources about community life in Preston... useful for anyone wanting to understand the local social and economic context.
Most of my own research stuff about Preston is at or linked to
http://www.arts.manchester.ac.uk/cit/preston/
or http://mysite.wanadoo-members.co.uk/bridgebuilderpreston/index.htm
PSP Quality of Life Survey
In 2005, the PSP commissioned MORI to carry out a Preston wide Quality of Life survey. This included over 1,500 face to face in home interviews with people from across all 22 wards in the City during winter 2005. http://www.prestonstrategicpartnership.org.uk/News.asp?id=SX9B6B-A77F56C9
Community Mapping Report 2003 \t http://www.avencentral.org.uk/aven_central_area.php
The Community Mapping Report identifies all community facilities that are situated in the AvenCentral area.
The report lists community facilities by neighbourhood and contains information regarding staffing, the premises and what activities are available at the centres, is available online by clicking the following link. Note that you will need Adobe Reader to view this file:
Community Mapping Report - PDF Format 323Kb
You also need to know about Neighbourhood Management
see
http://www.prestonstrategicpartnership.org.uk/Category.asp?cat=797
and the wider development context and issues around unitary authorities.. see
http://www.preston.gov.uk/news/News.asp?id=SX9452-A780A140
and the central Lancs. city consultation
http://www.centrallancscity.org.uk
a lot of the crime stuff is covered at
http://www.saferlancashire.co.uk/local_areas/preston/
For a zany idea in public art!!!!! look at
http://www.flocktothecity.com/
and for what the Vision Board is plotting
Please have a look at SAVE THE RIBBLE http://save-the-ribble.blogspot.com/
Monday, January 29, 2007
Wednesday, January 17, 2007
More on anti discrimination and sin
David Barratt wrote in response on the socrel list
I don't think anyone suggested the obvious solution to the Christian B&B owner in the Lake District: put twin beds in the bedrooms rather than double beds. That way he'd be giving the opportunity to two straight men, or two straight women, to share a twin room to save money, as probably most of us have done over the years -- or would he quiz them as to their sexual orientation as they stood on his doorstep? (I wonder whether he asks every male-and-female couple whether they are married before allowing them upstairs?) But if he provided twin beds he would be providing both homosexuals and the unmarried with the option of not sinning, surely a thoroughly blessèd thing for him to do.... :-)
To which I responded
Good point David...... you have actually highlighted the point that some evangelical theologians have often made in the past that it is not orientation or sexuality / identity that is the issue it is the behaviour and even as Jesus would have it in the sermon on the mount even the inner heart attitude that is the problem...
It's not that long ago in our culture in situations of poverty that it was commonplace for people of the same sex to share a room and/or a double bed without any suggestion that they were doing anything other than sleeping.
It should be easy enough to understand that it needs neither a double bed, or any bed for any of us to sin in the area of sexual practices... My theology (and experience) would suggest sin is all too possible even for a married couple or a celibate heterosexual. The Christian doctrine of total depravity/ original sin makes it clear that we are all "living in sin" and every aspect of life needs divine grace, redemption and transformation which is not fully achievable this side of heaven.
So if the hotel owner wants to impose morality or holiness on his guests he needs to have a much more rigourous "thought police" approach.
To be fair though I suppose what he is really objecting to is that gay couples who are "out" are acting in a way which he finds offensive to his sense of morality (and of course by denying them a room he is being offensive in return.
But there is the issue that if a hotel or a conference centre is specifically promoted as "christian" there is an implicit assumption of a set of traditional norms that customers will stick to... and the safety of those norms is actually a selling point to potential customers from within the Christian community. Such norms also often include restrictive behaviours around alcohol, drugs, gambling and what activities are permitted on Sunday. And presumably there are Muslim and Hindu conference centres which also cater for a parallel niche market and have their own norms and house rules (dietary, worship and prayer times etc.)
So the difficult question remains as to whether the law should allow a religious community to run institutions of hospitality which are not genuinely open to the public as hotels?
I don't think anyone suggested the obvious solution to the Christian B&B owner in the Lake District: put twin beds in the bedrooms rather than double beds. That way he'd be giving the opportunity to two straight men, or two straight women, to share a twin room to save money, as probably most of us have done over the years -- or would he quiz them as to their sexual orientation as they stood on his doorstep? (I wonder whether he asks every male-and-female couple whether they are married before allowing them upstairs?) But if he provided twin beds he would be providing both homosexuals and the unmarried with the option of not sinning, surely a thoroughly blessèd thing for him to do.... :-)
To which I responded
Good point David...... you have actually highlighted the point that some evangelical theologians have often made in the past that it is not orientation or sexuality / identity that is the issue it is the behaviour and even as Jesus would have it in the sermon on the mount even the inner heart attitude that is the problem...
It's not that long ago in our culture in situations of poverty that it was commonplace for people of the same sex to share a room and/or a double bed without any suggestion that they were doing anything other than sleeping.
It should be easy enough to understand that it needs neither a double bed, or any bed for any of us to sin in the area of sexual practices... My theology (and experience) would suggest sin is all too possible even for a married couple or a celibate heterosexual. The Christian doctrine of total depravity/ original sin makes it clear that we are all "living in sin" and every aspect of life needs divine grace, redemption and transformation which is not fully achievable this side of heaven.
So if the hotel owner wants to impose morality or holiness on his guests he needs to have a much more rigourous "thought police" approach.
To be fair though I suppose what he is really objecting to is that gay couples who are "out" are acting in a way which he finds offensive to his sense of morality (and of course by denying them a room he is being offensive in return.
But there is the issue that if a hotel or a conference centre is specifically promoted as "christian" there is an implicit assumption of a set of traditional norms that customers will stick to... and the safety of those norms is actually a selling point to potential customers from within the Christian community. Such norms also often include restrictive behaviours around alcohol, drugs, gambling and what activities are permitted on Sunday. And presumably there are Muslim and Hindu conference centres which also cater for a parallel niche market and have their own norms and house rules (dietary, worship and prayer times etc.)
So the difficult question remains as to whether the law should allow a religious community to run institutions of hospitality which are not genuinely open to the public as hotels?
Tuesday, January 16, 2007
Are You a Humanist?
A Recent Email I received said this
Subject: BHA Job Opportunity: Campaigns Officer
Campaigns Officer
British Humanist Association, London WC1
Permanent full time post, salary in the range £21,000 - £23,000
The British Humanist Association (BHA) is the national organisation supporting and representing the non-religious. Our campaigning work is based on our commitment to human rights, democracy, equality, and mutual respect and we work for an open and inclusive society with freedom of belief and speech, and for an end to the privileged position of religion in law, education, broadcasting and wherever else it occurs. In recent years the profile of issues to do with religion and belief, equality and human rights has increased and so has the volume of campaigning work we take on. The BHA is now seeking to employ an additional member of staff to work in this area.
You will need to have excellent oral and written communication skills excellent communication, administration and IT skills, and be able to produce press releases, research papers, briefings, and submissions to Government or other external political audiences.
I couldn't resist a comment so I wrote and posted to various lists thus
Interesting job advertised here
But does the title / subject line mean that as a Christian I am not encouraged to apply for this post.. Does the law on religious discrimination allow Muslims, Christians and Hindus to be excluded from consideration? Should it?
It would be really ironic if indeed the BHA campaigning work is based on our commitment to human rights, democracy, equality, and mutual respect and we work for an open and inclusive society with freedom of belief and speech,
And there were several responses which I distilled and recirculated
No-one is barred. But I imagine that the BHA would assume that applicants had read the job description and would show in their application that they had read it.....If you do subscribe to these values, you have until 5 February to get in an application for this modestly paid job.
If I were resolutely committed to blocking off the Ribble and turning it into a 6 lane motorway would you accept my application for a post as Publicity Officer for 'Save The Ribble'?
It's an interesting point to debate whether Save the Ribble could employ an anti-environementalist but the whole profession of the law is based on the idea you can employ a barrister who doesn't believe in your case...to say nothing of the case of the PR person or professional spin doctor..
In short my view is that, while I understand that many Christians have a conscientious objection to personally promoting or condoning homosexual activity I don't think they have a right or duty or responsibility to demand these standards of others, let alone to discriminate in the provision of services (or the offer of jobs). I sympathise with their dilemma but believe they should spend their time doing more constructive things that reflect and faithfully follow their beliefs and values, such as living in loving, faithful, monogamous marriage, graciously promoting the faith, and following Christ's teaching and example of caring for the poor, healing the sick and liberating the oppressed.
Subject: BHA Job Opportunity: Campaigns Officer
Campaigns Officer
British Humanist Association, London WC1
Permanent full time post, salary in the range £21,000 - £23,000
The British Humanist Association (BHA) is the national organisation supporting and representing the non-religious. Our campaigning work is based on our commitment to human rights, democracy, equality, and mutual respect and we work for an open and inclusive society with freedom of belief and speech, and for an end to the privileged position of religion in law, education, broadcasting and wherever else it occurs. In recent years the profile of issues to do with religion and belief, equality and human rights has increased and so has the volume of campaigning work we take on. The BHA is now seeking to employ an additional member of staff to work in this area.
You will need to have excellent oral and written communication skills excellent communication, administration and IT skills, and be able to produce press releases, research papers, briefings, and submissions to Government or other external political audiences.
I couldn't resist a comment so I wrote and posted to various lists thus
Interesting job advertised here
But does the title / subject line mean that as a Christian I am not encouraged to apply for this post.. Does the law on religious discrimination allow Muslims, Christians and Hindus to be excluded from consideration? Should it?
It would be really ironic if indeed the BHA campaigning work is based on our commitment to human rights, democracy, equality, and mutual respect and we work for an open and inclusive society with freedom of belief and speech,
And there were several responses which I distilled and recirculated
Readers of these lists probably realised I wanted to stir a debate... and of course I wouldn't really want to apply for the job with the BHA. I've had several responses from various quarters and the whole issue demands a more considered response.
My question I believe raises an interesting policy issue... both in terms of the law and the practice of Voluntary and Religious organisations.
The reply that came from Ray Thomas who had posted the ad was clear and fair enough
My question I believe raises an interesting policy issue... both in terms of the law and the practice of Voluntary and Religious organisations.
The reply that came from Ray Thomas who had posted the ad was clear and fair enough
No-one is barred. But I imagine that the BHA would assume that applicants had read the job description and would show in their application that they had read it.....If you do subscribe to these values, you have until 5 February to get in an application for this modestly paid job.
Mike Reddin then asked me
If I were resolutely committed to blocking off the Ribble and turning it into a 6 lane motorway would you accept my application for a post as Publicity Officer for 'Save The Ribble'?
It's an interesting point to debate whether Save the Ribble could employ an anti-environementalist but the whole profession of the law is based on the idea you can employ a barrister who doesn't believe in your case...to say nothing of the case of the PR person or professional spin doctor..
Both comments raise a philosophical issue for any value driven organisation (be it religious, anti-religious, political or charitable. Does a person need to be a "Believer" in order to work (in a paid or unpaid capacity) to promote the cause? The short answer of course is "not necessarily" although it sure helps in terms of extra commitment, job satisfaction and integrity of conscience and public perception.
The problem with the original ad is the subject line of the email which implicitly excludes this possibility... and in some ways is to be lauded for its up front honesty..which I know is not always the case for religious organisations advertising posts or seeking funding...
There is a policy issue at stake in terms of the current law.
As Graham Bowpitt wrote
My understanding of the law is that believers cannot be prevented from applying (for the humanist post) because there is nothing in the nature of the post that would render them incapable of performing its duties.
and David Voas helpfully spelled it out thus
Under the Employment Equality (Religion or Belief) Regulations 2003 it is illegal to discriminate against people on the basis of their religion or beliefs.
The job specification for this post says that candidates must have 'Humanist beliefs, or an empathy with humanism sufficient to explain and promote humanism, humanist policies, and the aims of the BHA.' I doubt that (as a Christian believer) you'd be a good candidate, but if you felt comfortable promoting the non-religious agenda of the BHA then you're not excluded.
Note that 'employers with an ethos based on a religion or belief' can specify their religion as a job requirement even if it isn't actually necessary to do the work.
In that respect the BHA, the National Secular Society and other campaigning non-religious groups suffer from unequal protection under the law: they could only require job candidates to be non-religious if it's a 'genuine occupational requirement'. Your church, by contrast, could legally refuse to hire a cleaner who didn't share your beliefs.
And Helen Meads gave an example : When Friends (Quakers) advertised for a new Recording Clerk (equivalent to a charity CEO) exemption from the relevant discrimination legislation was obtained on the grounds that one had to understand Quakerism from within in order to be able to do the job.
As I read it then the BHA are within their rights to claim the exemption and specify that candidates shared secular humanist beliefs.. But the irony in that is that they would be admitting that they held a belief system that was in some sense a religious world view... yet if they barred anyone because they held a supernatural world view they would be contracting their values about equality etc... So it is necessary to rely on something more implicit.. the commonsense assumption that potential candidates will have at least an affinity towards the BHA set of beliefs and values..
Yet if a Christian or Muslim organisation advertised a post in, say youth or community work (especially if it had any element of public funding), under the heading "are you a committed Christian/Muslim ?" I suspect the secular fundamentalists would be the first to cry foul and bring a test case under anti-discrimination law. True, they might be a bit more tolerant if the post was that of "preacher" and all the salary came out of the pockets of the congregation. And I can see there is a valid distinction there, although there are many cases in real life where it is hard to draw clear boundaries between religious and social activity.
David Voas also added:As the demonstrations last week illustrate, some religious groups in the UK are far from happy with moves to promote equality, mutual respect and an open and inclusive society where attributes like homosexuality are concerned.
Obviously this is the case and in my view it is unfortunate in that it shows a desire to control and dominate others in terms of the beliefs, values and behaviours that are allowed rather than the grace and tolerance which are central to my understanding and practice of Christianity in face of the question "what would Jesus do?".
I understand of that homosexual practices are condemned in the Bible and Christian tradition, (together with many other sins from unbelief in God to murder, to coveting your neighbours ox most of which, in the light of the sermon on the mount, we are all in our hearts guilty. There is of course a Christian response in terms of grace and forgiveness available through trust in Christ's death...which is mumbo jumbo to the BHA yet life transforming to many of us.).
I am in sympathy myself with Malcolm Duncan of Faithworks (an ulster pentecostal by origin) who has critiqued the approach of Anglican Mainstream and other non anglican conservative evangelicals who are livid about the gay rights issue..and anti discrimination law currently before Parliament.. http://www.faithworks.info/SubSection.asp?id=7305
Theres also a bit more of news and my views in this area on my blog http://gregsnewblogcredo.blogspot.com/2006/10/christians-inciting-hatred.html
And Helen Meads gave an example : When Friends (Quakers) advertised for a new Recording Clerk (equivalent to a charity CEO) exemption from the relevant discrimination legislation was obtained on the grounds that one had to understand Quakerism from within in order to be able to do the job.
As I read it then the BHA are within their rights to claim the exemption and specify that candidates shared secular humanist beliefs.. But the irony in that is that they would be admitting that they held a belief system that was in some sense a religious world view... yet if they barred anyone because they held a supernatural world view they would be contracting their values about equality etc... So it is necessary to rely on something more implicit.. the commonsense assumption that potential candidates will have at least an affinity towards the BHA set of beliefs and values..
Yet if a Christian or Muslim organisation advertised a post in, say youth or community work (especially if it had any element of public funding), under the heading "are you a committed Christian/Muslim ?" I suspect the secular fundamentalists would be the first to cry foul and bring a test case under anti-discrimination law. True, they might be a bit more tolerant if the post was that of "preacher" and all the salary came out of the pockets of the congregation. And I can see there is a valid distinction there, although there are many cases in real life where it is hard to draw clear boundaries between religious and social activity.
David Voas also added:As the demonstrations last week illustrate, some religious groups in the UK are far from happy with moves to promote equality, mutual respect and an open and inclusive society where attributes like homosexuality are concerned.
Obviously this is the case and in my view it is unfortunate in that it shows a desire to control and dominate others in terms of the beliefs, values and behaviours that are allowed rather than the grace and tolerance which are central to my understanding and practice of Christianity in face of the question "what would Jesus do?".
I understand of that homosexual practices are condemned in the Bible and Christian tradition, (together with many other sins from unbelief in God to murder, to coveting your neighbours ox most of which, in the light of the sermon on the mount, we are all in our hearts guilty. There is of course a Christian response in terms of grace and forgiveness available through trust in Christ's death...which is mumbo jumbo to the BHA yet life transforming to many of us.).
I am in sympathy myself with Malcolm Duncan of Faithworks (an ulster pentecostal by origin) who has critiqued the approach of Anglican Mainstream and other non anglican conservative evangelicals who are livid about the gay rights issue..and anti discrimination law currently before Parliament.. http://www.faithworks.info/SubSection.asp?id=7305
Theres also a bit more of news and my views in this area on my blog http://gregsnewblogcredo.blogspot.com/2006/10/christians-inciting-hatred.html
In short my view is that, while I understand that many Christians have a conscientious objection to personally promoting or condoning homosexual activity I don't think they have a right or duty or responsibility to demand these standards of others, let alone to discriminate in the provision of services (or the offer of jobs). I sympathise with their dilemma but believe they should spend their time doing more constructive things that reflect and faithfully follow their beliefs and values, such as living in loving, faithful, monogamous marriage, graciously promoting the faith, and following Christ's teaching and example of caring for the poor, healing the sick and liberating the oppressed.
In terms of policy and practice I think there is much common ground between me and the BHA... Maybe we should simply recognise and allow communities and organisations to operate on the basis of affinity, shared values or constructed identity and be honest about it rather than imposing legal requirements.
Yet if we hadn't got anti-discrimination law we might return to the days of signs saying "no coloureds, no Irish". The hope expressed in the first Race Relations act was that it would be educative..The best law indeed is the one that is so widely accepted it is never broken and never comes to court.
I'd love to hear other people's reaction to these musings...
Wednesday, January 10, 2007
New published paper based on an old piece of work
[FIR 1.3 (2005) 291-311] Fieldwork in Religion (print) ISSN 1743-0615
Fieldwork in Religion (online) ISSN 1743-0623
Greg Smith
Religious Identities, Social Networks and the Power of Information:
Fieldwork in Religion (online) ISSN 1743-0623
Greg Smith
Religious Identities, Social Networks and the Power of Information:
Fieldwork Issues in Mapping Religious Diversity in London
If you'd like a pdf copy please email me at greg@maister-smith.fsnet.co.uk
If you'd like a pdf copy please email me at greg@maister-smith.fsnet.co.uk
Monday, January 08, 2007
More Photos from the Lake District: January 2007
Mainly Derwentwater at Keswick, the Honister Pass and Crummock water
Thursday, January 04, 2007
Riverworks Preston
The debate about the plans to "regenerate" our local river have surfaced again with last nights front page story in the Lancashire Evening Post see http://www.prestontoday.net/ViewArticle2.aspx?SectionID=73&ArticleID=1953277
The story and editorial comment is not that bad and will help provoke much needed debate: But I'm a signed up supporter of SAVE THE RIBBLE and their blog is great http://save-the-ribble.blogspot.com/
The story and editorial comment is not that bad and will help provoke much needed debate: But I'm a signed up supporter of SAVE THE RIBBLE and their blog is great http://save-the-ribble.blogspot.com/
My Letter to The lancashire evening post:
Dear Sir
I appreciated the fairness of you leader article of 3rd January although I felt the news coverage in the same issue relied over much on the viewpoints, language and press releases of Mike Brogan and the Preston Vision Board. Ever since I first heard of the Riverworks Project I (as a riverside resident) have been convinced of two things : Firstly that any barrage or weir that destroys the flowing stream and the tidal nature of the Ribble would be an environmental disaster, especially for the precious wildlife living there. Secondly that destroying the greenbelt on the Penwortham side by the injudicious building of housing on the floodplain would rob us of one of the greatest attractions of our neighbourhood. Open country so close to our city is probably the greatest environmental asset we have (and my dog and hundred's of others agree!).
There may well be a number of good ideas for useful urban regeneration to be found elsewwhere in the Riverworks report. We could certainly make more of the River Corridor, Canal and Docks in economically beneficial and environmentally sensitive ways. How about for example developing the docks rail corridor into a tram system with a huge new park and ride at the western edge of the city and a wall across the Blackpool Road to keep out unwanted polluting traffic from the Fylde?
However, it is hard to judge the value of the proposals since until now the report appears to have been treated as a top secret document. It seems to me the unelected Vision Board who most probably represent big business, and well paid planning consultants and senior council officers much more than local residents, have shot themeslves in the foot by denying us the chance for proper consultation at an early stage. They may not wish "to raise false hopes or fears" over a pre-feasility study, but they have achieved just that in a remarkable way by their cowardly secrecy. An early consultation would make it clear from the outset what the public will or will not stomach. It would probably knock on the head any crazy ideas such as a barrage, without the need to waste further public money on investigating the idea. And it might generate a number of exciting and more feasible suggestions for improvement from the people who know the neighbourhood far better than any of the external consultants.
At least some of our local councillors, claim that they have not yet sold out to the Vision Board's ideas and are engaging in the debate. I am no fan of New Labour either at the national or local level, but it is to the credit of the local members for Riversway ward that they have invited residents to contribute, in a fairly open ended way to a consultation exercise covering at least a part of the Riverworks proposal. It is to be hoped that many local people will make their views heard, that the council will listen carefully and respond to the good sense of the majority of local people who oppose much of the scheme.
The Bible tells us that "without a vision the people perish". I fear that the with the mistaken and blurred vision of the Vision Board it will be Preston's people who suffer, and the river Ribble that will die.
Tuesday, January 02, 2007
Liverpool in Winter Sun
Liverpool has long been an iconic city, now nominated European City of Culture and in the winter sunset light of December 30th 2006 (for five minutes at the end of a gruesome wet grey day) looked magnificent.
How should one react to Liverpool... ? I honestly don't know if I love it or hate it... But at least I enjoyed taking the photos..
The city that ran the Slave Trade when 2007 marks the bicentenary of abolition (for Christian response see http://www.setallfree.net/index.html)
The regenerated docks with the galleries, museums and cafes now a rather pleasant tourist attraction. http://www.albertdock.com/
The city of the Beatles and "Ferry Cross the Mersey"
Mersey Ferries - Home of the world famous Ferry Across The Mersey
Operates in the River Mersey, will take you on a journey past all the fascinating waterfront of Liverpool and Wirral, also available to hire privately for
Ferry 'Cross The Mersey
Fan site for Gerry and the Pacemakers includes news, discography, history, filmography, and
A city of two cathedrals, once strongly divided between orange and green... less so since the work of Bishops Sheppard and Worlock see http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/1260179.stm
And two football clubs The Reds http://www.liverpoolfc.tv/ and the Blues http://www.evertonfc.com/index.php both of whom regularly beat my team http://www.whufc.com/index.php
But it's also the city of the "Toxteth Riots" of 1981... of the Miltant struggles of the 1980s and of continuing poverty and deprivation... Lots of interesting research reports on
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
