I was in conversation with Prof John Curtice about the General Election after the Sung Eucharist this morning.
We touched on what might happen at the election, how a UK government is actually formed, will proportional representation ever happen, will the SNP propose another referendum next year and what it is like being John Curtice in the middle of all this.
The conversation was recorded and is available here:
https://vimeo.com/124745987
I think you miss the point of the book Kelvin. It’s meant to be a guide to listening to *all* sides of the debate, not just those you agree with. That’s what makes the last section so good, because it forces us to deal realistically not just with the genuine evidence on the causality of homosexuality, but also the fact that some people *do* see remarkable change in their sexual orientation (and that others don’t).
We were not called by the last Lambeth Conference to listen to all sides in the debate.
Ruth Gledhill has posted a PDF of the whole thing, for those interested:
http://timescolumns.typepad.com/gledhill/files/Final.pdf
I’ve now read the ‘scientific’ section – thanks for the link ryan – and I thought it was mixed. I thought Glynn Harrison made a serious attempt at dispassion. I think it is a fair point that any person must decide their own priorities, and the final argument must be between theologies, not sciences. I was not so impressed by David de Pomerai – though one could hardly quarrel with his conclusion that we simply do not know exactly what makes one person homosexual and the next heterosexual. However his whole argument was bedevilled by assumptions that, e.g. homosexual men will be more effeminate than straight ones. Anecdotal evidence instantly produces examples where it is the straight male siblings who are drama queens and run from spiders, while gay ones take it all in their stride.
It must be accepted that both gay and straight people live with voluntary or enforced celibacy with no ill effects – and that some people can change their sexual orientation and live happily with the change. What I found truly heart rending were the desperate attempts and the high cost to those who actually did succeed in changing orientation – however much Harrison denies the skin colour analogy, it reminded me painfully of those endless jars of skin lightener which encrust Sri Lankan chemists, where beauty is measured in skin tone. Because whether or not genetic, orientation is not a simple free choice. But I suppose the answer would be: ‘And what is?’
The final point, though, is always the same. Is Christianity a religion of an authoritative book, or an authoritative Person?
here's what I said this morning.
Went to the theatre the other night, in the cinema. You know, one of these live relays of theatre in a cinema. It was Hamlet from the Royal National Theatre in London being relayed live, I think, to cinemas in 16 countries. The play was excellent. Very good indeed. What interested me though was how…
Forgive me, but I can’t help but be interested in the cross-dressing bearded nun story which was in the Herald today. The short version of the story is that a minister removed a picture of himself dressed as a nun from facebook, where it was his profile pic, following a complaint from someone belonging to…
Can someone tell me the difference between Wikileaks publishing US government cables and the Guardian publishing the same cables. So far as I can see, neither organisation has actually leaked anything, they are both publishing the same material that has been leaked by someone else. I’m struggling a bit to see why the editor of…
Leave a Reply