Sir – It may surprise Mr Nandris (Letters, May 1) to know, that as an atheist, like others of my persuasion, I would emphatically be in favour of allowing the Passion Play to take place.

What many atheists, secularists and humanists are campaigning for has nothing to do with preventing such events from taking place. They are simply suggesting that in a diverse society no belief or idea, of any persuasion, including atheism, should be allowed an entrenched privileged position over any other belief or idea.

Whether it be in education, the House of Lords, or any other place that should represent society in its entirety. Passion Plays don’t bother me personally in the least, I doubt whether they do many other unbelievers.

It is inevitable that ideas of all kinds will influence society, we are not against that, and will do our best to have our own influence, but do not ask for, or expect, a privileged position.

Our opponents often use the kind of language Mr Nandris does in calling people “anti-religious fanatics”, but is there anything fanatical about the aims I have stated above? Non-believers are often referred to as militant atheists, but the people who knock on your door trying to convert you, or appear on Thought for the Day on Radio 4, or even the Archbishop of Canterbury, are not called militant Christians. Why not?

I hope Mr Nandris will understand my support for the Passion Play taking place, and use less intemperate language in future when referring to people who don’t believe as he does.

Paul Surman, Horspath