In this chapter I will examine one symptom of what José Casanova describes as the emergence of new historical developments associated with ‘a certain reversal of what appeared to be secular trends’ in that ‘religions across the world are entering the public sphere and the arena of political contestation’ (Casanova, 1994: 6). These developments are taken by some to be evidence of the advent of ‘post-secular societies’ (Habermas, 2006: 46), which is having particular effects in terms of the necessity of fostering the willingness to communicate (Habermas, 2010: 16) between what Habermas calls ‘secular citizens’ and ‘religious citizens’. There are obvious problems associated with the inference (in the prefix ‘post’) that secularization is a linear and homogenous process (Reder, 2010: 38). Reder and Schmidt attempt to downplay ‘the post-secular’ as epochal shift and instead refer to it as a term that (1) acknowledges the continuing social role religions play in societies and (2) has become synonymous with examples of increasing engagement (that is, ‘constructive dialogue’) between faith communities and governments (Reder and Schmidt, 2010: 1). With regard to the latter, Dinham and Lowndes have stated that: ‘academics, policymakers and practitioners are grappling with the emphatic return of faith to the public realm of policy making, and seeking to make sense of its implications’ (Dinham and Lowndes, 2009: 1). This chapter is an example of these ‘grappling’ activities. I will be examining a particular question in this context which is directly linked to questions raised by Raymond Plant’s chapter, namely: to what extent are religious identities and arguments being included in the public political culture? By so doing I will examine two high-profile contributions that attempt to make sense of religious identities and religious arguments in the public realm, and that make recommendations with regards to their place, role and significance.

Introduction

This chapter focuses on the social and political climate in which hate crimes, whether racially motivated or as a result of homophobia, are increasingly being taken seriously by local authorities and police forces in England and Wales. The chapter explores the special place hate crimes occupy in the 1998 Crime and Disorder Act ‘community safety’ ethos, with particular attention being paid to how police forces, especially Hampshire Constabulary, have been attempting to win the trust of lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender (LGBT) communities in Southampton.

In the course of the chapter, it will be argued that police forces in England and Wales are at the forefront of the project of increasing the ‘civic participation’ and ‘active citizenship’ of the members of LGBT communities in England and Wales. Homophobia is the umbrella term used to describe the prejudice expressed by societies, institutions and individuals who hate (and fear) homosexuals.This classification of prejudice is also used to describe the hatred and fear of lesbians, bisexuals and members of the transgender community (although the term transphobia is increasingly being used to describe fear and hatred of members of transgender communities). The recent history of the policing of LGBT communities has been one similar to that of other minority groups in that the general perception of these communities was that they were ‘over-policed and under-protected’. This perception was in turn associated with two interdependent factors: the existence of institutionalised homophobia in police forces, and, as a result of this, the lack of trust LGBT communities had in the police. It will be argued in this chapter that there is currently a sea change in the policing of the LGBT community in England and Wales in the post-1998 Crime and Disorder Act context. This alleged ‘culture’ change is examined later in the chapter in a case study that focuses on the policing of LGBT communities in Southampton. What these developments suggest is that in Southampton, and elsewhere in England and Wales, policing is no longer concerned with driving sexual minority communities (such as gay men) underground. Rather, new policing styles and practices are emerging in relation to the LGBT community where the primary objective is to open up and improve the channels of communication between these communities and the police.