The UK should become a Secular State, free of religion

Argumentetum ad baculumCon states that the "argumentetum ad baculum" is "evidence" of my "mistake". He puts forward that if I think the UK should become secular, that this in turn means the MI6 will kill me for ignorance. While wildly amusing, it fails across the board for the following reasons.1, Many people in the UK wish to have a secular state. Con has not provided any evidence of any them being killed by MI6 in any recorded case, ever, for this reason.2, He claims to know the inner workings, opinions and set punishments of a secret service originsation in which is so secret that no acting chief even addressed the public formally for over the first 100 years of its existence. He claims this without backing up his assumptions with any evidence, at all.3. He claims that this killing would in turn prove that the UK should not become secular. The only reason I could see for this irational chain of events to happen for these specific reasons is if MI6 was doing the killing on religios grounds, and this would in turn, would only prove my point even further. To sum up Cons side, Cons stated premises fails to support its proposed conclusion in any way, shape or form and the whole argument is an informal logical fallacy. He has failed to meet his burdon of proof entirely on every aspect, and even if he met it and it was true, it would only serve to prove my purpose. As stated, we share burdon of proof, so I shall move on. Diversity We live in a time when science is taking leaps and bounds, and as a result many more people are growing up as atheists in this country. We also live in a much more diverse country than we previously did, accepting people from countries in all ends of the world, and people of many different faiths. A state that is truely secular would be neutral to all the differing religious doctrines. It is my opinion that state neutrality is necessary for true conviction to be the driving force of religious and social practice, without fear of those who control the state. This again backs up my previous statement that the MI6 arguement is actually a reason FOR a secular state. A secular state would allow every living Muslim, Christian, Jew, or any other, an equal freedom. Freedom to pray and fast as he or she wants to and freedom to follow the footsteps of teachings and Prophets of their own wish. If we truely wish to have diversity in our country, then whether we believe in a God or not, we absolutely need secularism over one particular denomination of one particular religion. Laws and the Equality ActThe monarch promises to uphold Christianity. This means The Church of England's leaders can vote on legislation in Parliament, 26 leaders to be precise, that are allowed to vote on and shape laws that fit their own demoninations and religions practices over anothers. In 2010, the House of Lords narrowly passed an amendment to the Equality Act exempting employees of religious organisations from some aspects of homophobic discrimination. The amendment was passed so narrowly that, without the bishops, the vote would have gone the other way. This means that directly because of our non-secularism, our country passed a law that was in favour of homophobic descrimination. Not only that, but these people are forced, by law, to pay taxes towards an orginisation (the guvernment) that promotes descrimination of that very individual. If I said to you, pay me money so that I can make people descriminate about a personal choice you have made, would you be happy with that choice? I would not. Schools It is the right of tax-paying religious citizens, as all citizens, to access facilities suited to their needs. Education is a need, yet religious schools are allowed to discriminate in selection and recruitment. Above and beyond that, they are allowed to teach creation stories based on religios text, in science classes, over or alongside science. That objectively hinders those childrens education, especially in the case of say, an athiest who wishes to persue biology as a career. You may say that those parents/children could choose to go to another school, but in some rural areas, the faith based school is the only one available. Would you be happy to know that your child was going to a school that is teaching her science which was refuted by scientists before you yourself were even born? Let me put this forward. To date, there are no scientifically peer reviewed articles that disclaim the evolution listed in the science and medical journal database. Yet, some schools take it upon themself to teach science that completely contradicts this. This is only allowed to happen because we are not a secular state. Where does it stop? If we are already at the point of having creation stories sit along side evolution, not only in religios classes but in science classes itself, whats to stop that going further in a non-secular country. The bible gives rules for keeping a slave, tells you countless reasons to stone someone to death, condemns innoscent newborn babies to torture and promotes sexism openly. Should we just go ahead and teach our kids those aswell? What about all the priests who have touched little boys, is that ok cause the Queens on their groups side? Is moving them around the world instead of bringing them to justice ok? What about Christianity denying most of Africa access to condoms, causing mass spread of Aids, should we all just stop safe sex practices too? Should we include that in the schools teachings? At what point do you look at non-secular society and say enoughs enough, and why isn't the line way back at the beginning when you first propose to include religion in your guvernment. ConclusionCons argument is a logical informal fallacy that fails to meet any burdon of proof and, if anything, backs up my claim instead of his. We strive for fair laws and a diverse society, but let religios leaders pass descriminative laws. This would not happen in a secular society. We teach our children false truths based on faith teachings and disproven claims. This would not happen in a secular society. If we say its ok for religios teachings and discriminative law passing, whats to stop the rest from following.