Ms Jane Donnelly:

I thank the joint committee for asking me to make a presentation. As legislators, what would members do if I was sick and my local State-funded hospital told me that it might be able to treat me but only after it had first treated all sick Catholics? What would they do if I was burgled and gardaí in my local Garda station told me they might be able to help me but only after they had first dealt with all Catholic crime victims? What would they do if any State-funded service had two separate queues, one dealing with Catholics and the other to deal with the rest of us later? Would members tell me it was okay as a majority of people in my local area were Catholic and that it was what the local majority wanted? Would they tell me I had a choice to move elsewhere or set up my own hospital or police service? Would they tell me the State had decided to pay Catholics to run State-funded services according to their Catholic ethos? No, they would not. As legislators, they would tell me they would defend my human rights to freedom of conscience, freedom from discrimination, equality before the law and to a private and family life. I know this because the State has already signed various international human rights treaties and guaranteed these rights for me. Nevertheless, when it comes to State-funded education, my children and I are forced to leave our human rights at the school gate. The State allows my only local State-funded school to tell me it will admit all Catholic pupils first and that it might then get around to my children if there are extra places available and only if we do not undermine its ethos. That breaches my human rights to freedom of conscience, freedom from discrimination, equality before the law and to a private and family life. It also breaches the rights of the child. This is not acceptable in a democratic republic in which all citizens should be treated equally.

Imagine if my local State-funded hospital, police force or other public service not only helped all Catholics before getting around to me but also actively promoted Catholic faith formation while helping me. What would legislators tell me then? Would they talk, as they do now, about the possibility of opting out of Catholic faith formation? That still breaches my human rights as both the United Nations and the European Court have stated that is not enough to protect my human rights. Article II of Protocol 1 of the European Convention on the right to education obliges the State to respect secularism as a philosophical conviction and there is a positive obligation on it to respect this conviction throughout the entire education system. A positive obligation means that it must actively do something; it is not just a negative, a right permitting us to let our children opt out from religious instruction classes. Opting out will not fulfil the State’s obligations under human rights law. This right to respect is an absolute legal right, not one to be balanced against the rights of others or the ethos of the school or to be gradually achieved. Even if opting out was enough - which it is not - we cannot even opt out in practice as nearly all State-funded schools integrate their religious ethos into all subjects of the State curriculum. The State is legally obliged to protect secular families from this religious integrated curriculum because it is not delivered in an objective, critical and pluralistic manner. Just last month the UN human rights committee asked Ireland what it was doing to protect these human rights and what progress it was making in setting up non-denominational schools around the country. As legislators, members would not allow hospitals, the police force or any other public service to help Catholics before dealing with anyone else, to actively promote Catholic faith formation to non-religious citizens, or to integrate that ethos into their work. Therefore, why are they doing it with State-funded schools? Why are legislators forcing me and my children to leave our human rights outside the school gate?

Atheist Ireland’s written submission describes exactly how these issues breach human rights law and what changes are needed to protect our human rights, including changing section 7(3)(c) of the Equal Status Act. Please do not use the committee to fine-tune our "separate but equal" laws for State-funded schools that pretend to be inclusive but that have an admissions policy based on discrimination and segregation. Please pass laws that treat all children of the nation equally, regardless of the beliefs of their parents about religion or atheism. Please protect equally all of our human rights to freedom of conscience, freedom from discrimination, equality before the law and to private and family life, as well as the rights of the child. I am happy to answer questions in this regard.