|Can Prince Charles ascend to the throne of unreason?|
However, in the interests of keeping the ball of unreason rolling, I thought I'd share a comment we received on the blog this morning from one of our readers, John Hind.
John was the man who put forward Prince Charles back when we were inviting nominations, arguing that the heir to the throne deserved to seize the 2012 Bad Faith crown as a special "lifetime acheivement" award for his services to irrationalism.
He returned to the blog this morning to make an impassioned last-minute plea for his fellow New Humanist readers to vote for Charles, posting a comment so good I just had to share it here. John's clearly a master electioneer when it comes to the Bad Faith game – see if he can influence your vote:
The case for CharlesCan John's plea help raise Charles to the status of a last-minute Bad Faith usurper? Place your vote below (read up on the other nominees here), and remember – the polls close on Monday 26 November.
You could vote for one of the usual ideological nutters from the right wing of Christianity or Islam, but at best it would be water off a duck's back and at worst the opprobrium of a bunch of, in most cases, foreign atheists would be seen as a badge of honor. By my reckoning that leaves Charles, Baroness Warsi and the Indian Catholics. Worthy candidates all!
The latter are tempting, but again the verdict of foreign atheists is unlikely to do good and may well do harm. Shaming their fellow Catholics or Christians into taking an openly critical stand might be more constructive.
Warsi would be a deserving winner, but she makes enemies easily and already has plenty. Is it worth making common cause with the thinly veiled prejudice of the backwoods of the Tory party and the (entirely unveiled) misogynists and theocrats of her own religion just to add one more voice to this discordant choir?
Or we could take this opportunity to send a last minute signal to the heir to the monarchy reminding him that multifaith does not cut it when more of your future subjects are free of faith than profess any one faith. In a constitutional monarchy, the king or queen cannot afford to take sides in any controversy; just steering clear of party politics is not enough. You cannot afford to alienate any significant group of those who must accept you even though they have no say in your selection. And it is not just faith. He openly supports all manner of irrational causes from quack medicine to the mystical, neo-feudal wing of the green movement. Hell, some of us even like contemporary architecture! Think of this as an opportunity to send a warning shot across his bows before it is too late!
Shameless personal plea: Since the editors have kindly (and uniquely) identified me personally as the sponsor of this nomination, it would be cruel indeed if I lost any chance of a place on the honors list and still failed to bag my man!