Board's Email re Marriage Legislation Survey Results
Dear Member,
We are sorry to send another mailing your way, but we’d like to give you the results of our survey on your views on continuing the process of applying to be added to the list of Marriage Solemnisers and to respond to some issues raised this week.
Firstly, we’d like to clarify that the two emails you received in the past week from Kevin Sheehan (Director of Membership) and Andrew Devine-Rattigan (HAI member) were sent to members’ email addresses without the prior knowledge or agreement of the Board. We are trying to clarify the difference between the right of public viewing of a company’s membership list and the right to use that for unauthorised mailing.
Separately, I had written to Andrew Devine-Rattigan on behalf of the Board on 15th April following receipt of his letter on 12th April offering to email members about an EGM; to date we have not received a response.
We would like to thank all those who have responded with speed to the letter, which we felt was balanced and transparent. Arguments were outlined for and against and included the issue of ‘political cause’. The request for a ‘Yes’ or ‘No’ was to give us an indication of the level of support for the action we had embarked on. Neither the letter, your response nor the overall result mean that you cannot also freely choose to support or oppose the request for an EGM.
The date given for returning the letters indicating the level of support was April 26th and the outcome is as follows:
Members' Opinions Returned 283
Yes 258 91.2%
No 24 8.5%
1 member abstained 0.4%
It is of course healthy that challenges are made and that HAI members aren’t all of one mind. And while we appreciate that the HAI members who are seeking to terminate the efforts the Board with regard to the marriage law are sincere, we sincerely disagree with them.
It may be worth noting that while the much disputed, and progressive legislation has more hoops for a ‘secular body’ to jump through before getting onto the list of Solemnisers, once on the list, they are Solemnisers the same as any other.
In relation to the point raised about the relationship between celebrants and the HAI, the Board has already discussed reviewing that relationship once the new legislation is fully implemented.
The HAI is committed to raising awareness about Humanism, but we are also very definitely committed to gaining equality, and we sincerely believe that the clause in the definition of a ‘secular body’ about ‘political cause’ will not stop us doing that. Legal Humanist weddings would be a fantastic way of raising awareness and increasing membership - not the only way but a very humanist way. Humanist ceremonies are widely acknowledged as creating a welcoming and positive image of Humanism – this awareness and perception of non-believers in a positive way is so important.
The Board is well aware that there are many more areas we could pursue as an organisation, more things that could be done with more volunteers, both at Board and general membership levels. An appeal from the Board for more formal assistance with administration will be sent in the near future to facilitate this. By raising public awareness and increasing membership we aim to move forward, build more local groups, and continue to engage with public and State bodies. The progress already made in these areas has been due to the steady and respectful manner in which we have engaged to date. And we know that the majority of members realise this.
On a personal note I would like to add that I and others have given an enormous amount of energy and time to creating a solid base to move forward from and that has been successful; the HAI is now known and respected in many quarters as a result of this foundation.
Sincerely,
Ann James, Chairperson
Supported by:
Philip Byers, Director of Finance
Eithne Dempsey, Director
Nicolas Johnson, Director of Chaplaincy
Siobhán Walls, Director
Brian Whiteside, Director of Ceremonies
Daphne Wynne, Director
We are sorry to send another mailing your way, but we’d like to give you the results of our survey on your views on continuing the process of applying to be added to the list of Marriage Solemnisers and to respond to some issues raised this week.
Firstly, we’d like to clarify that the two emails you received in the past week from Kevin Sheehan (Director of Membership) and Andrew Devine-Rattigan (HAI member) were sent to members’ email addresses without the prior knowledge or agreement of the Board. We are trying to clarify the difference between the right of public viewing of a company’s membership list and the right to use that for unauthorised mailing.
Separately, I had written to Andrew Devine-Rattigan on behalf of the Board on 15th April following receipt of his letter on 12th April offering to email members about an EGM; to date we have not received a response.
We would like to thank all those who have responded with speed to the letter, which we felt was balanced and transparent. Arguments were outlined for and against and included the issue of ‘political cause’. The request for a ‘Yes’ or ‘No’ was to give us an indication of the level of support for the action we had embarked on. Neither the letter, your response nor the overall result mean that you cannot also freely choose to support or oppose the request for an EGM.
The date given for returning the letters indicating the level of support was April 26th and the outcome is as follows:
Members' Opinions Returned 283
Yes 258 91.2%
No 24 8.5%
1 member abstained 0.4%
It is of course healthy that challenges are made and that HAI members aren’t all of one mind. And while we appreciate that the HAI members who are seeking to terminate the efforts the Board with regard to the marriage law are sincere, we sincerely disagree with them.
It may be worth noting that while the much disputed, and progressive legislation has more hoops for a ‘secular body’ to jump through before getting onto the list of Solemnisers, once on the list, they are Solemnisers the same as any other.
In relation to the point raised about the relationship between celebrants and the HAI, the Board has already discussed reviewing that relationship once the new legislation is fully implemented.
The HAI is committed to raising awareness about Humanism, but we are also very definitely committed to gaining equality, and we sincerely believe that the clause in the definition of a ‘secular body’ about ‘political cause’ will not stop us doing that. Legal Humanist weddings would be a fantastic way of raising awareness and increasing membership - not the only way but a very humanist way. Humanist ceremonies are widely acknowledged as creating a welcoming and positive image of Humanism – this awareness and perception of non-believers in a positive way is so important.
The Board is well aware that there are many more areas we could pursue as an organisation, more things that could be done with more volunteers, both at Board and general membership levels. An appeal from the Board for more formal assistance with administration will be sent in the near future to facilitate this. By raising public awareness and increasing membership we aim to move forward, build more local groups, and continue to engage with public and State bodies. The progress already made in these areas has been due to the steady and respectful manner in which we have engaged to date. And we know that the majority of members realise this.
On a personal note I would like to add that I and others have given an enormous amount of energy and time to creating a solid base to move forward from and that has been successful; the HAI is now known and respected in many quarters as a result of this foundation.
Sincerely,
Ann James, Chairperson
Supported by:
Philip Byers, Director of Finance
Eithne Dempsey, Director
Nicolas Johnson, Director of Chaplaincy
Siobhán Walls, Director
Brian Whiteside, Director of Ceremonies
Daphne Wynne, Director