Security, Human Rights and Religion. Part four.

Part four of Security, Human Rights and Religion. I have previously shown that I believe thought needs to be given to the word conscience, and the fact that in several matters there is a wide divergence in what may, or may not, trouble a person's conscience. In offering the following comment I justify it by the thought that it acts as a lead in to what follows. The comment is that, I understand, persons becoming residents of the UK are now required to promise their allegiance to the Queen. I have heard that the ceremony itself can be both meaningful and moving.

I assume that, comparatively, few citizens of the UK have formally undertaken such allegiance. While knowing that ignorance of the law is no defence for breaking it, most of us have not formally declared that we will obey the laws of the country. Perhaps one such law that, I suggest, should be put on top of the list already exists, essentially it should read something like this; "I will not deliberately, directly or indirectly, kill or injure, nor attempt to kill or injure any person or persons whatsoever unless permitted by the UK government under one or more of the following conditions". Here should follow the usual disclaimers regarding a state of war existing, self defence or protection of life or property etc etc.

Every adult resident wishing to become, or remain, a citizen of the UK must sign to acknowledge their agreement to all of the UK's laws.
In part five of Security, Human Rights and Religion I will suggest other laws that, I feel, should be created.

Frederick W Gilling 08 August 2009