“The demands to make reforms in the state funding of religious and ideological communities an issue should no longer be blocked by the leaders of the democratic parties,” said Frieder Otto Wolf, President of the Humanist Association of Germany, in Berlin on Sunday.
Wolf welcomed the announcements from secular and lay circles in the SPD, Bündnis 90/Die Grünen and DIE LINKE to make reforms such as the end of state church tax collection, the reduction of discrimination through labor law for church-run institutions and the abolition of Section 166 of the German Criminal Code an issue in the upcoming Bundestag election campaign. Wolf noted that the youth organizations of the parties had long since opened up to these demands and had also passed their own resolutions on the subject in a democratic manner. “In contrast, we have often seen a stubborn blockade from the leaders of the parties, which has sometimes seemed somewhat childish,” continued Frieder Otto Wolf. As an example, he cited SPD politician Wolfgang Thierse’s rejection of a secular working group because, according to his count, Christian believers would represent a majority in the party. “All parties today must see themselves called upon to no longer close themselves off to the concerns of the growing number of politically committed people with secular political positions. The issues should not be removed from debate or democratic voting by the general public. Democracy and the political legitimacy of the future Bundestag will be further weakened if the party leaders deny voters the chance to have a say here too.” Wolf reiterated the position that reforms such as the cessation of state collection of church membership fees must be part of the profile of any secular policy that respects the growing number of non-denominational people and the new ideological plurality in Germany. “At least insofar as the requirement of ideological neutrality recorded in the Basic Law is respected, according to which the state and religious or ideological communities should only be in a supportive relationship where there are good arguments for such a relationship. These are not to be seen in the state collection of church tax; from our humanist perspective, there are no good reasons here.” The situation is different when it comes to the equal promotion of communities for their contributions to public culture, as providers of voluntary religious education in schools or as independent organizations, as long as they adhere to the general laws. Finally, Frieder Otto Wolf emphasized that it is again the task of secular and laicist circles in the parties to make it clear that the demands are not to be understood as directed against religious communities per se. “They still play an important role for many people in our country, including many non-Christian believers, as places of culture and sources of ligatures,” Wolf reminded the audience. It therefore makes sense to regularly and critically review the attitudes that have developed here under the impression of strong church dominance in previous decades and to confidently promote the necessary changes to people.
