How many times have I had to defend my corner against those (generally bible literalists) who would argue that science – and evolution is generally their focus here, is a belief system just as ‘any other religion’. You can have a political, moral or philosophical position, but that must be, by definition, entirely separate from the scientific method, empirical evidence etc.
Now we have a judge in the UK who has declared that believing in climate change is a ‘philosophical position’. Someone had been sacked because of his beliefs about climate change and the judge has granted him leave to make an appeal against his dismissal under the UK's Employment Equality (Religion and Belief) Regulations (UK executive claims he was dismissed for being green - CNN.com
Lawyer for the company: "A philosophical belief must be one based on a philosophy of life, not a scientific belief, not a political belief or opinion, not a lifestyle choice, not an environmental belief and not an assertion of disputed facts."
Case for the employer: Only philosophies which cover important areas of life should be protected by law, and environmentalism is one of these”.
As a postscript, I’m a skeptic about climate change and I base my skepticism on the evidence that I can find, not my philosophical beliefs. If I were to do that, I’d be in the opposite corner with all the liberal greenies, not with those who all appear to be on the far right of the political spectrum.