A word on protest
Is it time to ditch the words ‘protest’ and ‘protestor’? Have they become too negative in the public’s mind?
A major objective of ours is to favourably influence those outside the Religious Society of Friends of the merit, justness and benefits of the values embodied in our testimonies. I am afraid that, by some of our support for protest actions, the opposite is being achieved.
Are we not inviting non-Quakers to form a less than positive view of us, by our support for disruptive protestors? Have we actually invited the establishment overkill that took place at Westminster Meeting House (see News, 4 April)?
By what logic is it that, by disrupting the lives of others, we hope to turn them to our point of view? By what reasoning do we feel that, by dropping a constant stream of letters and complaints on the desks of members of parliament and other officials, forever reminding them of their failings and shortcomings, we will incline civil servants, ministers and the police service to look upon Quakers and their goals favourably?
Quakers encourage better husbandry of the planet and its climate. We encourage more social equality and compassion for the less fortunate. Quakers encourage honesty and integrity not just in business but throughout all sectors of society. And Quakers encourage the universal love of humanity and the nurture and care of our neighbours, and therefore we encourage peace and the avoidance of all instruments conflicting with it.
Should we not be replacing ‘protest’ with ‘encourage’, and ‘protestor’ with ‘encourager’, and, in so doing, observe the golden rule of doing to others what we want done to us?
Stephen Feltham
Public nuisance
I am happy to be in The Religious Society of Public Nuisances also known as Quakers.
In peace and friendship.
Gerard Bane
