:00:06. > :00:08.Why can't racist insults be settled with a "sorry" and a handshake?
:00:08. > :00:16.Because, says one of our guests, black people already face a
:00:16. > :00:20.lifetime of abuse. -- ethnic minorities.
:00:20. > :00:30.Should any racist insult lead to an immediate red card - on or off the
:00:30. > :00:44.
:00:44. > :00:47.pitch? Or have we become too Good morning, and welcome to Sunday
:00:47. > :00:55.Morning Live. Many have called for Sepp Blatter's resignation this
:00:55. > :00:57.week over his comments on racism. He has since apologised. But can
:00:58. > :01:00.white people ever really understand what causes racial offence?
:01:01. > :01:03.IVF fertility procedures are on the up, but figures out this week
:01:04. > :01:07.showed a big rise too in the numbers of single women receiving
:01:07. > :01:17.it on the NHS. Should the state be creating single mums?
:01:17. > :01:18.
:01:18. > :01:22.And ever get that feeling you've been here before? Coronation Street
:01:22. > :01:25.star William Roache - a man we know for a fact to have lived two lives
:01:25. > :01:28.- actually thinks we lead many more. Reincarnation is real. And if we
:01:28. > :01:30.all led our lives with a better understanding of that principle,
:01:30. > :01:33.the world would be a much better place.
:01:33. > :01:35.My guests this week have all been witness to the issues we're
:01:35. > :01:37.debating. John Amaechi made millions as an
:01:37. > :01:40.NBA basketball player, but that didn't buy him immunity from being
:01:40. > :01:42.called the N-word. Carole Malone was on the infamous
:01:42. > :01:45.Big Brother where Jade Goody was accused of making racist remarks
:01:45. > :01:49.about Shilpa Shetty. And before running ITV and trying
:01:49. > :01:52.to fix the NHS, Sir Gerry Robinson trained as a Catholic Priest. Which
:01:52. > :01:58.of those experiences shook his faith in reincarnation may become
:01:59. > :02:02.clear shortly. We want to know what you think.
:02:02. > :02:06.Call in now to challenge our guests on any of our three debates on
:02:06. > :02:07.Skype. It is your chance to give Skype. It is your chance to give
:02:07. > :02:17.Skype. It is your chance to give your views on Twitter, Facebook or
:02:17. > :02:23.
:02:23. > :02:28.This week, the headlines have been about racist language on the
:02:28. > :02:32.football pitch. But surely what's even more important is racial abuse
:02:32. > :02:36.in everyday life. Do casual racist insults make it easier for people
:02:36. > :02:44.to commit violence against those who look different? Or in modern
:02:44. > :02:46.multi-cultural Britain, are we now too sensitive about racism? Ken
:02:46. > :02:51.FIFA president Sepp Blatter apologised this Friday for
:02:51. > :02:55.suggesting races him on the pitch should be met with a handshake.
:02:55. > :03:00.-- race season. Many felt he should have resigned. The controversy
:03:00. > :03:05.started when John Terry was resp -- accused of racially invest --
:03:05. > :03:10.abusing another player. Many felt he should not have captained
:03:10. > :03:15.England this Tuesday. Campaigns have largely eradicated the races
:03:15. > :03:21.and of the 1980s, when players like John Barnes had bananas thrown at
:03:21. > :03:27.them. But should we now have a zero-tolerance approach to racist
:03:27. > :03:32.remarks, even during play, because people think it be humanises people
:03:32. > :03:37.who look different. Sepp Blatter has now advocated zero-tolerance,
:03:37. > :03:40.but is that another reaction? Or in modern Britain, is any racist
:03:40. > :03:44.comment something we should never tolerate?
:03:44. > :03:50.John Amaechi, are we too sensitive about what might have caused
:03:50. > :03:55.offence? No, there is really good science, people saying bad things
:03:55. > :04:00.about other people, a racially or otherwise, leads to action. That is
:04:00. > :04:10.the question for the text vote this morning, are we too sensitive about
:04:10. > :04:15.
:04:15. > :04:19.We will show you how you voted at the end of the programme. As you
:04:19. > :04:25.might expect, you may hear terms in this discussion we are having that
:04:25. > :04:29.you may find offensive. So you think this is on a continuum, John?
:04:29. > :04:37.Definitely. I know like it since we have made so much progress, and not
:04:37. > :04:43.just with races and, but with the bigger things in society, but when
:04:43. > :04:46.you make progress, that is when you have to be more vigilant. You
:04:46. > :04:54.listen to discussions now, even on television, and it is amazing how
:04:54. > :05:00.many different ways people can get around and say N-word without using
:05:00. > :05:05.it. Give me an example. I have watched debates whether language
:05:05. > :05:10.clearly missed the point where, for example, you start talking about
:05:10. > :05:15.black people and Asian people and how they have lots of babies --
:05:15. > :05:22.where the language clearly gets to the point, and how they breed, a
:05:22. > :05:30.term we used for animals, and it is more sophisticated than simply
:05:31. > :05:36.Yelling the arm -- N-word. So things that may not be meant as
:05:36. > :05:43.racist can be interpreted as racist? They can, and I applaud the
:05:43. > :05:47.progress, but I think the pendulum has swung too far for -- bar. There
:05:47. > :05:52.is such kind of terror of saying something which is interpreted the
:05:52. > :05:57.wrong way, which by no was never meant to mean that. I think we have
:05:57. > :06:01.gone overboard and it is now the subject that we can't talk about.
:06:01. > :06:04.It is something we should be able to talk about in a very open way if
:06:04. > :06:09.we want to continue the progress that John has applauded and I have
:06:09. > :06:14.as well, and to make that progress, you have to get away from that fear
:06:14. > :06:21.of saying the wrong thing. You are nodding it, do you feel the same
:06:21. > :06:28.fear? I do. I think there are racists and people who cause
:06:29. > :06:34.unintentional offence. I recently asked a lady to get to be something
:06:34. > :06:39.in a shop, and the Lady happened to be black, and she was away for ages
:06:39. > :06:42.and that -- asked another lady what had happened and the other lady
:06:42. > :06:48.asked her to describe her for me, up this was the only black lady on
:06:48. > :06:51.the floor, but I was scared to say the word black, because I didn't
:06:51. > :06:56.want to appear an offensive or disrespectful. It wasn't that I was
:06:56. > :07:02.being racist, I was scared to use the word, because... I think what
:07:02. > :07:06.is happening is we have become very frightened, and on subjects where
:07:06. > :07:10.you have an opinion about something, if it involves people of colour,
:07:10. > :07:14.you are frightened to give that opinion. If you have an opinion on
:07:14. > :07:19.immigration, it doesn't mean you are racist because you have an
:07:19. > :07:23.opinion on immigration. Britain is the 6th most overcrowded country in
:07:23. > :07:29.the world. It is a concern for some people that they shouldn't be
:07:29. > :07:37.branded as racist, and I think the boundaries have become blurred.
:07:37. > :07:42.John, the fact that people feel nervous, even describing somebody
:07:42. > :07:46.factually, truthfully, by the colour of their skin. That is at
:07:46. > :07:50.the heart of the issue about whether we are too sensitive about
:07:50. > :07:57.appearing to be, or possibly even being a, racist. I don't think it
:07:57. > :08:00.is, it is the example that this constantly cited. I don't
:08:00. > :08:04.trivialise it, and I have been there, it doesn't mean I don't also
:08:04. > :08:08.share those, but every time we discuss the issue, that is what
:08:08. > :08:16.people trot out, the idea that it is uncomfortable mentioning the
:08:16. > :08:20.black lady in the shop. Why is that silly? Not silly at all, but it is
:08:20. > :08:24.not the core of the problem. If you look at Britain today, people talk
:08:24. > :08:28.about the pendulum swinging too far and then they say we can't say the
:08:28. > :08:36.word blackboards. What they don't talk about is the catch-all races
:08:36. > :08:40.and that does exist. -- casual racism. How you explain the
:08:40. > :08:45.disproportionate number of black and Asian people in prisons. When
:08:45. > :08:49.we talk about women in boardrooms, nobody hesitates to recognise there
:08:49. > :08:53.is a glass ceiling and a bigotry but the same inequality exists in
:08:53. > :09:01.football, 38% of the players are black, but when it comes to
:09:01. > :09:05.management, it is just one. Not 1%, just one. Does a discussion about
:09:05. > :09:10.the language distract from bigger issues about representation? I will
:09:10. > :09:14.give you an example. Sepp Blatter showed a photograph of himself with
:09:14. > :09:20.Tokyo Sexwale a tagger, the South African minister, and then said you
:09:20. > :09:23.couldn't accuse him of being racist, because he had taken the World Cup
:09:23. > :09:29.to South Africa and an achievement like that was being overshadowed by
:09:29. > :09:36.careless remarks about how to deal with insults. Macro know. That is
:09:36. > :09:42.just another manifestation of "by not racist, some of my best friends
:09:42. > :09:46.are black -- I am not.". It was a fundamentally brilliant business
:09:46. > :09:51.decision to take the World Cup to South Africa. This is not a
:09:51. > :09:55.benevolent man who has been misconstrued this one time. Maybe
:09:55. > :09:59.not, and I am not here to defend a Sepp Blatter, believe me, but I
:10:00. > :10:03.think what we need to be talking about in a very hard edged away is
:10:03. > :10:09.why aren't there more black people, Indian, Chinese, whatever
:10:09. > :10:12.nationality, in boardrooms, in serious positions in a whole raft
:10:12. > :10:19.of industries? Those are the debate that now need to happen to move
:10:19. > :10:24.this thing forward. Not, I can't mention the word black, because it
:10:24. > :10:28.is so open to misinterpretation. I think it is getting the way now. --
:10:28. > :10:34.in the way. It has served a purpose but I now think it is counter-
:10:34. > :10:39.productive. In some ways, we are too sensitive. Last year, 20,000
:10:39. > :10:44.children between the ages of three and 11 were reported for racist or
:10:44. > :10:49.homophobic remarks. Schools are instructed to make files on people
:10:49. > :10:53.that use those words. Can a five- year-old really be racist? But
:10:53. > :10:59.authorities are doing this because it looks like they are attacking
:10:59. > :11:06.the problem, but they are not. One young boy called a class make
:11:06. > :11:11."broccoli head" and we have to know the difference between what is a
:11:11. > :11:14.playground statistic and real racist abuse. A I would say it
:11:14. > :11:19.underestimate so massively the power of language to talk on these
:11:19. > :11:25.levels. The fact is that in schools now, it is not necessarily with
:11:25. > :11:30.black children, but gay and lesbian children, they are killing
:11:30. > :11:36.themselves at an unprecedented rate. You talk to them, you did
:11:36. > :11:41.stigmatise them. This conversation came up last time, that file does
:11:41. > :11:46.not go anywhere. Yes it does. It is kept. By think it avoids teachers
:11:46. > :11:52.dealing with it, but the fact is that language is a precursor to
:11:52. > :11:58.action -- I think. Don't stigmatise them. Let's talk to some of their
:11:58. > :12:02.guests we having voted -- invited to talk on the programme. John
:12:02. > :12:06.Barnes is a former international footballer, and we saw that
:12:06. > :12:13.photograph of you having to kick a banana off the pitch. How have
:12:13. > :12:19.things improved? First of all, I didn't have to kick the banana off
:12:19. > :12:25.the pitch, I didn't even now I had done it, so I don't even remember
:12:25. > :12:35.doing it -- I didn't even know. Double issue with the races and,
:12:35. > :12:42.let us first acknowledged that it exists -- races them. For for if I
:12:42. > :12:46.was going to have -- if I was going to have a heart transplant and one
:12:46. > :12:51.of them was from Birmingham and one of them was from London, I would
:12:51. > :12:55.choose the London person. We make discrimination at around the way
:12:55. > :12:58.people talk, the way they look, not just the colour of their skin. If
:12:58. > :13:04.you see the way black people have been disenfranchised for the last
:13:04. > :13:08.400 years, the legacy of slavery, they would be some Pawlett, so
:13:08. > :13:12.white people look at them because of what history tells them. Look at
:13:13. > :13:18.what happens in school today, in the school play, who are going to
:13:18. > :13:25.be Mary and Jesus? Blonde, blue- eyed girl and boy. That is the way
:13:25. > :13:30.we see it. -- Joseph. Let me talk about John Terry and Anton
:13:31. > :13:35.Ferdinand. His race genetic? Anton Ferdinand's mother is white, his
:13:35. > :13:39.father is from the Caribbean, which means he has white blood in him, so
:13:39. > :13:46.if genetically, he is closer to being white than black. Is it the
:13:46. > :13:54.way he looks or genetics? We have to understand what is races before
:13:54. > :13:57.someone is of being racist -- race It's a massively complex thing. It
:13:57. > :14:02.is a social a cultural thing. When people say someone is black, often
:14:02. > :14:07.Times, and then on pejorative sense, you're not just referring to their
:14:07. > :14:11.skin colour, people talk about black music, or food, the areas
:14:11. > :14:15.people live, there is so much wrapped in to bat.
:14:15. > :14:19.John Barnes, did you feel that when you received... And perhaps I
:14:19. > :14:28.should ask you to give the evidence, what kind of language was used
:14:28. > :14:31.about you when you were playing? fans, by players, you heard the
:14:31. > :14:41.word back row, Black this and black bat. You cannot put all black
:14:41. > :14:45.
:14:45. > :14:48.players together. -- you heard the N-word. You had -- have this cross-
:14:48. > :14:53.pollination of cultures, whereby Anton Ferdinand culturally would be
:14:53. > :14:57.much closer to John Terry to a black West African. Anton Ferdinand
:14:57. > :15:02.would have more in common with John Terry and Gregor Tait more towards
:15:02. > :15:06.him, so this whole issue of race, in terms of you are black, in which
:15:06. > :15:13.Anton Ferdinand is genetically more wide, it is a question of the way
:15:13. > :15:23.we look, or is it a question of someone like and are by no? -- an
:15:23. > :15:24.
:15:24. > :15:29.Are we too sensitive when we talk about race? Sometimes we are,
:15:29. > :15:33.sometimes we are not. I can't remember the lady's name, but I
:15:33. > :15:42.understand why people get uncomfortable describing others as
:15:42. > :15:52.black. In the old days, they would say they were Colored People. There
:15:52. > :15:54.
:15:54. > :15:58.is a fear of being accused of racism. If you are a black person,
:15:58. > :16:02.it is said that you look like a monkey. But if you say a white
:16:03. > :16:06.person looks like a monkey, it is not racist. Why is a racist to say
:16:06. > :16:12.a black person looks like a monkey. If you look like a monkey, you look
:16:12. > :16:18.like a monkey. In years gone by, huge mistakes have been made. But I
:16:18. > :16:22.think now British people would very hard at not tolerating racism. I
:16:22. > :16:28.think British people now are generally fair handed and they try
:16:28. > :16:32.to stamp it out in every walk of life of. Let's talk to Elaine. You
:16:32. > :16:39.are a diversity consultant. What do you make of what John Barnes says
:16:39. > :16:48.about this? John Barnes is absolutely right. But I would like
:16:48. > :16:51.to address something that Carole Malone and Gerry Robinson said.
:16:51. > :16:58.They understand their feelings, because we all have different ways
:16:58. > :17:02.of approaching others, and racism is based on a fear of difference.
:17:02. > :17:07.But we must appreciate that we are talking about white privilege in a
:17:07. > :17:12.mixed society. Carol and Jerry have the privilege of saying how they
:17:12. > :17:19.feel about a black person - whether they are nervous or whatever. But a
:17:19. > :17:26.black person comes into Britain into a different society, and has
:17:26. > :17:30.to make their way in it. It means that the whole country has the
:17:30. > :17:37.responsibility to at least try and make us all integrated. We also
:17:37. > :17:44.have a part to play, but the whole country has a lot on its part. As
:17:44. > :17:49.John says, there is a history of black people being invisible. There
:17:49. > :17:54.is a history of people who are treated as though they don't exist.
:17:54. > :17:59.Gerry might talk about getting people on board, but the main that
:17:59. > :18:05.is that a lot of people, especially minorities, are simply invisible to
:18:05. > :18:11.the system. When you add to that people as -- people who treat them
:18:11. > :18:13.as inferior, because that is what racism is about, it is about
:18:13. > :18:17.superiority... I apologise for interrupting, but I wonder about
:18:18. > :18:21.this issue, because you are talking about a gulf of understanding
:18:21. > :18:27.between white people and black people. When white people don't
:18:27. > :18:34.attend -- intend a fence, how do we deal with it when the person on the
:18:34. > :18:43.receiving end perceives offence? is education. Carol and Jerry are
:18:43. > :18:47.both right. People do not go out thinking, I am going to offend a
:18:47. > :18:51.black person today? But as a black person, I do not have a problem
:18:51. > :18:56.calling a white person white. If I am going to describe someone, I
:18:56. > :19:05.will call them white because that is the way they are. De isn't that
:19:05. > :19:10.go to the heart of the problem? I have no issue talking about
:19:10. > :19:19.somebody being white. I am not in any way racist, but why do I have a
:19:19. > :19:29.feeling that I can't quite say that the other way round? Yes, but I
:19:29. > :19:30.
:19:30. > :19:36.think that is to do with peripheral issues, like talking about a
:19:36. > :19:40.blackboard. There is some triviality which is not related. I
:19:40. > :19:47.have to agree with John that language is extremely important at
:19:47. > :19:52.any age. It defines us. If we are happy to have racist language
:19:52. > :20:00.bandied about and being directed at part of society, it says a lot
:20:00. > :20:04.about us. But I agree with Gerry Robinson that yes, we need to leave
:20:04. > :20:10.triviality out of the arena so that we can appreciate each other
:20:10. > :20:20.properly. Nobody should feel nervous about talking about black
:20:20. > :20:20.
:20:20. > :20:23.people or say the word black. me go to Rabbi Alex Goldberg. This
:20:23. > :20:28.issue was sparked by allegations of racist language and how that should
:20:28. > :20:34.be dealt with on the football pitch. Why do you think it is important
:20:34. > :20:40.that there is zero tolerance of this kind of language? I think
:20:40. > :20:45.football is our national game. It is a big business, one which has
:20:45. > :20:53.grown exponentially in the last 20 years of television rights. It is
:20:53. > :20:56.therefore reflective of society at large. We need zero tolerance. I
:20:56. > :21:04.work alongside ambassadors of the Football Association including
:21:04. > :21:09.Garth Crooks and people who have experienced what John Barnes
:21:09. > :21:14.experienced in the '80s, when there was overt racism. Yes, that has
:21:14. > :21:18.changed. But in the last year, I have been to a football match in
:21:18. > :21:21.London where people have been singing for anti-Semitic songs
:21:21. > :21:31.about Auschwitz and the gas chambers. Surely that is not
:21:31. > :21:32.
:21:32. > :21:37.acceptable to anyone. Neil Lennon, manager of Celtic, received some
:21:37. > :21:44.sort of bomb device. This is going too far. When we have young players
:21:44. > :21:48.coming up throughout the football division, we want them to field
:21:48. > :21:52.part of the game. If you are a young superstar, you don't need to
:21:52. > :22:02.have that sort of racist abuse every week. Sepp Blatter is totally
:22:02. > :22:06.out of touch. He has put the game back. In terms of the handshake
:22:06. > :22:13.policy, many of us think that FIFA should shake his hand and show him
:22:13. > :22:23.the door. This is our text poll today. If you think we are too
:22:23. > :22:32.
:22:32. > :22:36.Now, only six letters, but IVF and NHS are a potent mix, especially
:22:36. > :22:40.when you add in a 250% rise in single women trying to become
:22:40. > :22:45.single mothers. But should we regard motherhood as a right,
:22:45. > :22:51.whatever your marital status? The number of single women
:22:51. > :22:55.receiving IVF on the NHS has gone from 200 to just over 700 in the
:22:55. > :23:00.last two years. Do all women deserve the chance of motherhood,
:23:00. > :23:03.even if they have no partner to support them? At the same time as
:23:03. > :23:07.the Government laments the breakdown of the family, should it
:23:07. > :23:11.be paying to create more single mothers? During IVF, and eggy
:23:11. > :23:16.surgically removed from the woman's ovaries and fertilised in a
:23:16. > :23:20.laboratory. Only one in four attempts will end in pregnancy. At
:23:20. > :23:24.the same time as the rise in IVF, there are increasing numbers of
:23:24. > :23:28.children in care needing adoption. Should they be the first port of
:23:28. > :23:32.call for single women wanting to become mothers? And if these women
:23:32. > :23:37.want the state to pay for their IVF, should the state be asking more
:23:37. > :23:40.questions about whether they can afford to raise their children? Yet
:23:40. > :23:45.if a woman is determined and committed enough to undergo such an
:23:45. > :23:51.ordeal, including invasive surgery, perhaps she is ideal mother
:23:51. > :23:54.material. With more commitment, endurance and desire for a child
:23:54. > :23:58.than some biological mothers. Many say they want to have a child with
:23:58. > :24:03.a partner, but have not been able to find one who will commit. So
:24:03. > :24:07.they want to have a child before they are too old to conceive. In a
:24:07. > :24:14.world of scarce resources, do all women have the right to medical
:24:14. > :24:20.help to have a child? If you have a webcam, you can make
:24:20. > :24:24.your point on Skype. And you can join the conversation on Twitter,
:24:24. > :24:30.phone or text. We are going by William Roache from Coronation
:24:30. > :24:34.Street and Fionola Meredith, columnist and broadcaster. Carol,
:24:35. > :24:40.what do you think of single women having IVF on the NHS? I feel
:24:40. > :24:48.strongly that they should not. I do not believe the state owes anyone a
:24:48. > :24:52.child. The NHS - I should also say I do not believe it is any woman's
:24:52. > :24:55.human right to have a child. The NHS was designed to give people
:24:55. > :25:00.healthcare at the point of need, and I do not believe wanting a
:25:00. > :25:05.child is a pressing medical need. William? I believe that nature
:25:05. > :25:09.generally knows what it is doing. If you want a child, the ideal is
:25:09. > :25:12.to create an environment that would attract a child - a good income, a
:25:12. > :25:16.good, loving relationship. People should enquire very seriously as to
:25:16. > :25:20.whether they want a child. Are they thinking of themselves or of the
:25:20. > :25:24.child? Why are you bringing it into this world, which is a difficult
:25:25. > :25:29.place, and can you provide it with a loving home? I do not want to be
:25:29. > :25:33.say they should not have a child on the health service. I am sure there
:25:33. > :25:39.are deserving cases. But people should think very seriously about
:25:39. > :25:44.why they are bringing a child in. Fionola Meredith, is it not enough
:25:44. > :25:48.just to want one? If you are going to allow married women or women in
:25:48. > :25:52.partnerships to have IVF on the NHS, by extension you have to allow
:25:52. > :25:57.single women to do that, because it is a matter of basic fairness. It
:25:57. > :26:00.should be based on clinical or medical need. If women meet the
:26:00. > :26:08.criteria, it should not matter whether they have a man in tow or
:26:08. > :26:12.not. Every statistic says a child is better with two parents, be it
:26:12. > :26:16.two men, two Women or a man and a woman. You are being prescriptive
:26:16. > :26:21.about what a good family constitutes. Families come in all
:26:22. > :26:26.shapes and sizes. The most important thing is that a child is
:26:26. > :26:32.brought up with love, time, commitment and security. If a woman
:26:32. > :26:42.is going to put herself through the ordeal of IVF, that demonstrates a
:26:42. > :26:45.
:26:45. > :26:51.huge level of commitment. We have a speaker who has been through IVF,
:26:51. > :26:56.and you are pregnant now. Do these women know what they are getting
:26:56. > :27:02.themselves into? I don't think they do. It is hard work bringing a
:27:02. > :27:06.child up on your home. I do not disagree with single women having
:27:06. > :27:11.IVF, but unless you have brought a child up on your own, I don't think
:27:11. > :27:15.they realise how much hard work it is. It but the process of IVF
:27:15. > :27:20.itself is extremely gruelling and requires a lot of commitment. The
:27:20. > :27:23.fact that these women are prepared to go through that, as that shown a
:27:23. > :27:33.level of commitment to having a child which perhaps other women do
:27:33. > :27:34.
:27:34. > :27:38.not realise? I suppose so, but if I were a single woman and I was asked
:27:38. > :27:42.if I would have IVF to have a child, absolutely not. Having brought up a
:27:42. > :27:47.child on my home, I would not go through IVF on my own. You need a
:27:47. > :27:54.lot of emotional support. It is physically harder. If you have not
:27:54. > :27:58.got that support, it would be really difficult. It should be
:27:58. > :28:05.pointed out that single women are being given priority over couples
:28:05. > :28:08.in one in five Primary Care Trusts, which is astonishing. We have a
:28:08. > :28:12.government which says the family is the most important thing, and yet
:28:12. > :28:15.we have single women being given priority over married couples.
:28:15. > :28:23.Susannah is doing research on this in Cambridge University. Is that
:28:23. > :28:27.the case? I have been researching the experiences and decision waking
:28:27. > :28:32.-- decision-making of single women have infertility treatment. Is it
:28:32. > :28:37.the case that some single women are being given priority over couples?
:28:37. > :28:40.From the research I have done, I am not aware of that. In my research,
:28:40. > :28:44.only one of the participants has had their treatment funded by the
:28:44. > :28:49.NHS. The rest have had to pay privately, at great cost to
:28:49. > :28:56.themselves. Tell us about the reasons that these women are
:28:56. > :29:00.pursuing this route. For the majority of these women, they are
:29:00. > :29:03.not choosing to become single mothers. All of them would have
:29:03. > :29:07.preferred to have had a child within the context of a
:29:07. > :29:12.relationship. They have found themselves single, getting older
:29:12. > :29:14.and being aware of their decline infertility. Only then have they
:29:14. > :29:19.felt that pursuing single motherhood is their choice to
:29:19. > :29:22.become mothers. And they are using for tillage treatment to do so. One
:29:22. > :29:26.of the phrases which we came across in the research was, even if I met
:29:26. > :29:32.someone tomorrow, it would be too late. So they do not feel they have
:29:32. > :29:38.time to wait to have a child within a relationship. Fine, but they
:29:38. > :29:42.should pay for it themselves. Don't ask the state to pay for it.
:29:42. > :29:47.women in relationships are getting it on the state, it is only fair
:29:47. > :29:51.that single women should. It is not fair, because it is not a family.
:29:51. > :29:58.Dennis is not what bringing up a kid is about. It is about having a
:29:59. > :30:02.stable home. A single mother can give you that. I am worried that
:30:02. > :30:09.there is more than a whiff of underlying prejudice against single
:30:09. > :30:19.mothers. You are saying a single mother cannot be a family. A single
:30:19. > :30:24.mother can provide an excellent What degree of counselling goes on
:30:24. > :30:29.with single women? To bring up a child on your own is terrifyingly
:30:29. > :30:32.difficult. Having a man is no guarantee of stability. But I want
:30:32. > :30:39.to know the level of discussion and counselling that goes into a single
:30:39. > :30:44.mother who asks for this treatment. I wonder if you are taking on
:30:44. > :30:47.Fionola's point, that there is an assumption that a certain type of
:30:47. > :30:52.parenting is better, whereas there are single mothers than single
:30:52. > :30:56.fathers who you could hold up as role models. It is very easy to be
:30:56. > :31:00.judgmental. Personally, my view is you need a mother and her father,
:31:00. > :31:06.and statistically that is the best relationship a child can be brought
:31:06. > :31:12.up in. But there will be individuals... Is it a need for a
:31:12. > :31:16.want. Is it a need, I am not sure. If it is just I want a child.
:31:16. > :31:20.parent wanting to be a parent is inherently selfish, nobody wants to
:31:20. > :31:25.do it because they think it is good from the child, they do it because
:31:25. > :31:30.they want to. Bath for the child. What do you mean between the
:31:30. > :31:35.difference between a need and they want? An essential need, our
:31:35. > :31:40.clinical Lee, necessary for your health and well-being. -- a
:31:40. > :31:43.clinical need. You could want a dog for company. It sounds awful to say
:31:43. > :31:50.this, but the single mothers who are asking for this treatment
:31:50. > :31:54.should be really deeply cancelled and talked to about their reasons.
:31:54. > :31:58.Bill is right, if you want a dog, he wouldn't bring it into a family
:31:58. > :32:03.unless she could take care of it and make arrangements for it to be
:32:03. > :32:07.careful. People are bringing in children. How it is a single mother
:32:07. > :32:12.going to adequately be able to take care of a child? They will have to
:32:12. > :32:17.get help from outside and is that right for the child? You are
:32:17. > :32:21.assuming she will be relying on state benefit. No, outside help.
:32:21. > :32:26.What she should try to seek his family support, at that is an
:32:26. > :32:33.important thing a, a wide network of support. Doesn't a child need a
:32:33. > :32:37.male role model? Grand fathers, uncles, brothers. Let's speak to
:32:37. > :32:42.the profession of communications who has written books on feminism.
:32:42. > :32:47.Angela, what you think? Is there something else going on about the
:32:47. > :32:52.way that people think that single mothers can parent or is it just a
:32:52. > :32:58.fact that two parents are better than one? I think two parents
:32:58. > :33:03.obviously can provide a much more supportive environment for a child.
:33:03. > :33:07.Two obviously better than one, but we also have to take into account
:33:08. > :33:12.the real shift in the demographics for young women these days, and
:33:12. > :33:18.young women are encouraged, quite rightly, to train, to become very
:33:18. > :33:22.well educated, get good jobs and to become economically Independent. In
:33:22. > :33:27.many ways, the days of the male breadwinner in the family are now
:33:27. > :33:31.over, and so women have got to become economic the Independent.
:33:31. > :33:36.That means many young women simply do not find themselves in a
:33:36. > :33:41.situation where they are married with a partner and with a job and
:33:41. > :33:45.wanting to have a baby at the same time. The relationship could break
:33:46. > :33:55.down in their thirties, and women are then very desperately wanting
:33:55. > :34:00.children. Is it acceptable, can these women have it all? Is that a
:34:00. > :34:06.good thing? I really don't think the phrase having it all is very
:34:06. > :34:12.helpful. I think it is simply a gender discrepancy. A man can carry
:34:12. > :34:18.on having children right into their seventies, women simply cannot. If
:34:18. > :34:27.the circumstances are such that there is a warm family environment,
:34:27. > :34:34.grandparents, brothers and sisters, if there are people that will stand
:34:34. > :34:38.by, then I see absolutely reason why not. Josephine Quintavalle is
:34:38. > :34:43.found our Comment on reproductive Ethics and you have described it as
:34:43. > :34:48.absurd, why? I am a feminist, our mother of five boys and I would
:34:48. > :34:52.like to ask the people contributing today, should then have equal
:34:52. > :34:56.rights to have a child? -- should men. We have got to be realistic
:34:56. > :35:04.about this. I think the most sensible part of the discussion so
:35:04. > :35:07.far has been this idea that women do wait too long, they have their
:35:07. > :35:12.biological clock ticking, they get panicky and decide they want their
:35:12. > :35:17.child. We need to create a culture in society where they could have
:35:17. > :35:22.some when they are likely to be fertile and will not need IVF. If a
:35:22. > :35:26.single woman is needing IVF there, it is because she has got past
:35:26. > :35:31.every productive peak, otherwise she would simply be looking for a
:35:31. > :35:36.sperm donor, -- her reproductive peak. I think it can be about
:35:36. > :35:39.respect for the male and this idea that women can do without men is
:35:39. > :35:44.very dismissive. They are very quick to turn around when the man
:35:44. > :35:50.is not paying child support. At a block text messages, one saying
:35:50. > :35:55.that IVF should not be available on the NHS for anyone. If we continue
:35:55. > :36:00.to fund it, however, it should be for all women, regardless of status
:36:00. > :36:03.was up and for those who want their child, it is selfish to acknowledge
:36:03. > :36:08.their children are back right, the child will yearn for a father, and
:36:08. > :36:12.that is from someone who knows. Under David says he knows lots of
:36:12. > :36:18.single parents who do a better job at rearing children than married
:36:18. > :36:22.couples, so IVF should be available to everyone. Fionola, at a final
:36:22. > :36:25.thought. I am not denigrating fathers, they perform many
:36:25. > :36:32.wonderful functions and a family but I'm just saying if a woman is
:36:32. > :36:36.on Harrowden, it is her right to be able to go ahead -- on her own.
:36:36. > :36:41.think she should be allowed to if she can afford to do it. As long as
:36:41. > :36:47.the NHS are strapped for funds, you have to make decision. Then get rid
:36:47. > :36:56.of IVF altogether. Don't get rid of it. If we are going to deny people
:36:56. > :37:01.life-saving drugs, NICE authorised this but bad start let's not going
:37:01. > :37:06.to hierarchy... We will have to continue to go into bat on the
:37:06. > :37:09.website. As Ken Barlow in Corrie, he has clocked up three wides and
:37:09. > :37:13.holes the Guinness Book of Records for the longest-running soap
:37:13. > :37:18.character -- wives. Not many people know that William Wright expects to
:37:18. > :37:19.make an appearance in the next one. Do you agree with him, his
:37:19. > :37:25.Do you agree with him, his reincarnation real -- William
:37:25. > :37:27.reincarnation real -- William Roache. You can make your views
:37:27. > :37:37.Roache. You can make your views known on line. And keep a voting on
:37:37. > :37:40.
:37:40. > :37:50.the question, are we too sensitive You have around five minutes before
:37:50. > :37:52.
:37:53. > :37:56.it closes. Now it... They are just discussing
:37:57. > :38:02.what they might come back as. Let's see what has been that spinning the
:38:02. > :38:09.moral compasses of the guests. Fionola, affected of the Pope and
:38:09. > :38:14.than Imam Dr it have to look like they are kissing -- doctored. They
:38:14. > :38:18.are the photographs that show high- profile politicians kissing. Angela
:38:18. > :38:22.Merkel and Nicolas Sarkozy. It is a famous clothing chain and that they
:38:22. > :38:27.are known for their provocative advertising campaigns, what you
:38:27. > :38:32.think of this one? I like this one. I think some of the other ones have
:38:32. > :38:35.been quite tasteless, people with Aids or people on death row. They
:38:35. > :38:40.are a clothing manufacturer, so that is distasteful, but this is
:38:40. > :38:43.much more light-hearted. I now it has caused controversy and I
:38:43. > :38:52.believe the advert with the Pope and the Egyptian Iman has been
:38:52. > :38:58.withdrawn, but it is quite tender. -- Imam. Did you see these? I think
:38:58. > :39:05.it would be lovely if the Pope did kiss a Imam. Are they subject to
:39:05. > :39:09.laws of libel? It is just like the media again. The Vatican came down
:39:09. > :39:14.on it very hard and Benetton capitulated very quickly, which is
:39:14. > :39:21.interesting. William, her story close to home, Corrie capitulate to
:39:21. > :39:30.product placement. -- a story. Does that mean you will be drinking real
:39:30. > :39:34.beer in the Rovers? It is not selling alcohol, or take three
:39:34. > :39:40.wouldn't be very good. I think it is a wonderful thing, because India
:39:40. > :39:45.early days, when we had a packet of cornflakes, if it was branded, we
:39:45. > :39:52.had to put a fictitious name on. You remember the name of the brand
:39:52. > :39:58.of cornflakes? It was Kellogg's. The fictional brand? No, they made
:39:58. > :40:01.of fictional ones all the time. Now it will be more real, we can put
:40:01. > :40:06.the products we are actually using. Everyone knows if you're drinking
:40:06. > :40:09.certain drinks what it is, and it can be that. I think it is better
:40:09. > :40:15.that they get the Revenue that way than taking chunks out of the show
:40:15. > :40:20.with commercials. You are not concerned that your programme is
:40:20. > :40:24.being used... A on the contrary, it is not being used, it is being paid
:40:24. > :40:29.and it is can -- commercial television which needs to get its
:40:29. > :40:32.revenue from advertising. It is not going to push a product in the
:40:32. > :40:38.foreground while people are acting in the background. But it will be
:40:38. > :40:42.allowed to be there, like the real world. We will look more real and
:40:42. > :40:51.it is a splendid way to get the Revenue. Do you think there was
:40:51. > :40:55.something slightly silly about using products that word real?
:40:56. > :40:59.had the fictitious supermarket. could use the real name now. People
:40:59. > :41:02.are trying to push things in and the company get fined, and now the
:41:02. > :41:06.company can have their product shown but they pay for the
:41:06. > :41:12.privilege. It is up to the programme makers to make sure it
:41:12. > :41:19.does not distort what is going on. It is a subliminal finger, you are
:41:20. > :41:25.hardly aware of it. Carol, a neighbour is complaining because of
:41:25. > :41:29.an unusual place to be buried. lady in Kent wants to be buried in
:41:29. > :41:33.her own back garden. She died recently and her daughter has asked
:41:33. > :41:39.the local council if this is OK and that local council has said yes,
:41:39. > :41:42.you can do it, but the lady next door has said she doesn't fancy
:41:42. > :41:52.having a Kebabou a few feet away from her, which I think it's a
:41:52. > :41:52.
:41:52. > :41:57.debit card -- having a good lover. But but if the lady moves into the
:41:57. > :42:01.house and then moved away, will she take her mother away with her?
:42:02. > :42:05.person who is buying the house would have to know. Otherwise, they
:42:05. > :42:10.dig up a body and there will be a police inquiry. Why can't they just
:42:10. > :42:14.be cremated and scatter the ashes, it is so much nicer? I think it
:42:14. > :42:21.appeals to some people. The place where you most loved, the garden
:42:21. > :42:27.where you parked it. It is personal, but I think it will be tough if you
:42:27. > :42:29.move house. What would you do? how much do you want -- do you will
:42:29. > :42:34.honour the wishes of someone? He should be taken with some
:42:34. > :42:38.discretion, you love them that you care about them and you will fulfil
:42:38. > :42:42.their wishes up until where you think is reasonable. But they think
:42:42. > :42:47.to have her cremated and then scatter the ashes would be a good
:42:47. > :42:52.compromise. Even if you move, they are still there. The Ashes don't
:42:52. > :43:00.matter. You have been voting in the text boating. Are we too sensitive
:43:00. > :43:04.about racism? -- of voting. It is now closed, so please do not text,
:43:04. > :43:08.we will give you the result that the end of the programme.
:43:08. > :43:13.It is one of the oldest of mankind's believes, that we are
:43:13. > :43:17.reborn again and again in this world until we finally get it right.
:43:17. > :43:22.William Roache thinks that if we knew the truth of reincarnation, we
:43:22. > :43:26.would value life Capitol Mall and fear death and little less. -- a
:43:26. > :43:31.little more. Here, fresh from filming on Coronation Street, is
:43:31. > :43:36.his Sunday stand. Reincarnation is real, we should have no fear of
:43:36. > :43:41.death. Life is too unfair for reincarnation not to be true. If
:43:41. > :43:45.there is only one life, whereas the fairness? One child is born into
:43:45. > :43:50.poverty in Ethiopia and another into luxury to the American
:43:50. > :43:54.millionaire. We are spiritual beings in a spiritual realm and we
:43:54. > :43:59.come to inhabit a body. When that body dies, the spirit returns to
:43:59. > :44:03.the spiritual realm and the process is repeated many times. The earth
:44:03. > :44:08.on which we live is a school and the purpose of this life is to
:44:08. > :44:12.learn some of its many lessons. We are here to learn, amongst other
:44:12. > :44:18.things, the difference between right and wrong, and if we do, we
:44:18. > :44:23.become kinder, healthier and happier. On this journey called
:44:23. > :44:28.Live, dying is just the end of one part of this ongoing process --
:44:28. > :44:32.life. I may not like the actual act of dying but I look forward to the
:44:33. > :44:41.release, to the going home. It will be like walking out of the smoke-
:44:41. > :44:45.filled room into the fresh air. Everybody is on a spiritual journey,
:44:45. > :44:49.whether they know it or not, but if we could all have a true and full
:44:49. > :44:54.understanding of the principles of reincarnation, the world would be a
:44:54. > :44:58.much healthier place. You can join in by webcam or you can make the
:44:58. > :45:08.point by phone, text or e-mail. Gerry Robinson and John Amaechi
:45:08. > :45:09.
:45:09. > :45:13.Wiliam, this comes from quite a personal experience, doesn't it?
:45:13. > :45:16.doesn't come from personal experience. By personal experience
:45:16. > :45:20.of the loss of my daughter and my wife endorsed what I already
:45:20. > :45:25.understood. The word belief is a dodgy one, because a belief may or
:45:25. > :45:29.may not be the truth. A lot of people say what they believe.
:45:29. > :45:33.People are blowing each other up because of beliefs. It is important
:45:33. > :45:40.to turn a belief in to a truth before you act on something. I had
:45:40. > :45:46.a great fear of death when I was growing up. My father was a doctor,
:45:46. > :45:51.and I was terrified all the time. I have spent my life reading, surging,
:45:51. > :45:55.meditating, to find out. It is not just - is reincarnation a
:45:55. > :46:00.principal? That is only a gateway into a wider understanding of what
:46:00. > :46:04.it is that we incarnates. What are we? Once we embark on this journey,
:46:04. > :46:09.you realise that we are spiritual beings, first and foremost. We come
:46:09. > :46:13.from the spiritual realm and go back to the spiritual realm, and
:46:13. > :46:17.for a short period, we incarnate to discriminate between right and
:46:17. > :46:21.wrong. In the spiritual realm, you'd go back to the level of your
:46:21. > :46:25.worth. By coming here, you meet Saints and sinners and learn to
:46:25. > :46:29.discriminate. Jerry, you did a whole programme helping people to
:46:29. > :46:34.divide out their spoils once they have died. Do you think that people
:46:34. > :46:39.then come back? No, but I would love to think we came back. But I
:46:39. > :46:43.do not believe it at all. I think it is increasingly clear from
:46:43. > :46:46.scientific evidence that the brain is capable of doing all kinds of
:46:46. > :46:52.things, making all kinds of connections, remembering things
:46:52. > :46:54.from the past that had not happened. There is part of us that finds it
:46:54. > :46:59.extraordinarily difficult to believe that when your time is up,
:46:59. > :47:05.your time is up and that is it. I understand the desire. But there is
:47:05. > :47:08.not a shred of evidence. John, would it be a motivator for good
:47:08. > :47:13.behaviour if we thought we were going to come back or be punished
:47:13. > :47:17.when we came back? That is the essence of it, the idea that since
:47:17. > :47:21.we were painting on cave walls, we needed a way to keep people in
:47:21. > :47:27.check and their way to explain the often cruel aspects of the world
:47:27. > :47:31.that remained cool even a society has developed. This is one of those
:47:31. > :47:36.ways, you can explain away tragedy, the things that most closely impact
:47:36. > :47:40.us, and allow them to become less painful. But I do not think that
:47:40. > :47:48.should supersede scientific truth about it. We have a lot of guests
:47:48. > :47:54.who say they have had different experiences. Let's start with David,
:47:54. > :48:04.head of a Buddhist Order. You believe that in a former life, you
:48:04. > :48:07.
:48:07. > :48:11.were a Christian monk? That is just one of many experiences I have had.
:48:11. > :48:18.But the point I want to make in relation to what we are talking
:48:18. > :48:22.about is that much of belief is based on powerful experiences.
:48:22. > :48:27.These have a profound effect on people's lives. It is not a
:48:27. > :48:31.question of whether it is true or not. Memory is notoriously
:48:31. > :48:36.unreliable. We have John Barnes's earlier saying he did not remember
:48:36. > :48:42.kicking a banana. But that apparently happened in front of
:48:42. > :48:46.thousands of people in front of cameras. Memory is unreliable. And
:48:46. > :48:51.memories of previous lives are bound to be even more unreliable.
:48:51. > :48:57.But people have these experiences, and they have powerful effects on
:48:57. > :49:01.their lives. People live with people through their lives, and
:49:01. > :49:04.they inspire others to live in a different way. It inspired me in my
:49:04. > :49:10.life and led to me doing many things that I would not have done
:49:10. > :49:15.if I had not had such experiences. Many of the most notable figures in
:49:15. > :49:20.history have had experiences of these kinds. We are spiritual
:49:20. > :49:26.beings in a subjective sense. What it means in terms of history,
:49:26. > :49:32.science and so on, who knows? I do not think there is a scientific
:49:32. > :49:40.truth about this. There is not a scientific truth about most things.
:49:40. > :49:44.Let's ask a scientist. Chris French is professor of psychology. It is
:49:44. > :49:50.obviously a very powerful feeling that people have who believe in
:49:50. > :49:55.reincarnation. Is their science behind it? Is it even fair to trump
:49:55. > :49:59.that belief with science? There are claims from some scientists who
:49:59. > :50:03.claim they do have evidence to support reincarnation. But when you
:50:03. > :50:07.look at this evidence critically, most of it does not stand up to
:50:07. > :50:14.scrutiny. I think Gerry had it right. We are dealing with false
:50:14. > :50:24.memories that can come about through a variety of means. We have
:50:24. > :50:27.another guest who is a trained psychologist and a Sikh. Is it
:50:27. > :50:36.false memory? You have an extraordinary belief about where
:50:36. > :50:41.you met your wife in a former life. Yeah, it is not a belief system.
:50:41. > :50:46.For me, it is experiential reality. We can believe whatever we want to
:50:46. > :50:52.believe. Belief that is perhaps the biggest barrier to looking at life
:50:52. > :50:56.as it is. My own subjective experience has demonstrated to me
:50:56. > :51:04.categorically not but I have just one life, but that I have had an
:51:04. > :51:12.extraordinary number of lives. I would like to address the point
:51:12. > :51:18.about false memories. There is a chap called Dr Ian Stevenson from
:51:18. > :51:28.Virginia, a professor of psychiatry, who has been tracking 3000 cases of
:51:28. > :51:29.
:51:29. > :51:34.children with past life memories. How do we explain that? But if I
:51:34. > :51:40.can get to the heart of this, tell me what you believe about where you
:51:40. > :51:45.met your wife. It is not so much a belief. It is an experiential
:51:45. > :51:54.process. I would like to differentiate that. I have known my
:51:54. > :51:58.wife end my previous life. She was a unsee it when I met her. And
:51:58. > :52:01.instantly on meeting her, I recognised too she was -- she was
:52:01. > :52:08.not a secret I met her. She came from a background that was
:52:08. > :52:15.Christian. She did not have a reincarnation idea, but instantly
:52:15. > :52:20.recognised me. My younger son, who was a Sikh, when I took him to
:52:20. > :52:27.India, he was recognised at the age of six by the Buddhists to be a
:52:27. > :52:32.former teacher. So my experience has demonstrated. Plus also my
:52:32. > :52:36.meditation practices. I have been a practitioner of meditation for 40
:52:36. > :52:44.plus years, so I have a decent understanding of what my subjective
:52:44. > :52:48.experience is. This seems very benign, the idea of believing or
:52:48. > :52:53.not believing in reincarnation. My problem with it is that there is a
:52:53. > :52:56.fundamental difference between something not yet been proven and
:52:56. > :53:00.something absolutely lacking anything other than anecdote. Every
:53:00. > :53:03.time we come to this, we hear an anecdote. I am not saying that is
:53:03. > :53:09.not deeply personal and resonant with the individuals, but it is not
:53:09. > :53:14.the same as evidence. There is no evidence. It is an individual
:53:14. > :53:19.journey. This is why to argue this is pointless. Any individual who
:53:19. > :53:23.embarks seriously on wanting to understand who they are and why
:53:23. > :53:27.they are here will come across the fact that we do reincarnate. But
:53:27. > :53:32.reincarnation is not important. We are the sum total of what we have
:53:32. > :53:34.been. It is important to express our spiritual values of love,
:53:34. > :53:40.compassion, peace and the higher aspects of ourselves. It is an
:53:40. > :53:48.essential tenet of the Hindu faith. We can talk to the Hindu priests'
:53:48. > :53:52.Association. What do you believe happens? You said it is a universal
:53:52. > :53:59.tenet in the belief of the Hindus. I would say it spreads not only
:53:59. > :54:03.through the Hindus, but all the related faiths, including the six
:54:03. > :54:11.and the James. I can understand that some of your guests are quite
:54:11. > :54:16.reticent in giving any credence to this. But the previous chap
:54:16. > :54:22.mentioned Dr Ian Stevenson. Matters of faith should not be judged by
:54:22. > :54:29.scientific parameters. For instance, if you were going to prove a point
:54:29. > :54:35.of law, you would not revert to it. So I understand that you are
:54:35. > :54:43.reluctant to believe that. However, the evidence shown from Dr Ian
:54:43. > :54:46.Stevenson's work, there are over 3000 case histories which have
:54:46. > :54:53.stood rigorous scientific gratification. These were children
:54:53. > :54:57.between the age of two to four, and the oldest being seven, who were
:54:57. > :55:04.able to pinpoint exactly who they were in a previous life. Then that
:55:04. > :55:08.evidence was corroborated. For example, they had birthmarks at the
:55:08. > :55:12.sight of a trauma they had sustained. Going back to Dr Chris
:55:12. > :55:16.French, professor of psychology, you put a very important question
:55:16. > :55:20.to the programme, which is, should matters of science ever -- should
:55:20. > :55:26.matters of faith be subjected to scientific scrutiny? Certain
:55:26. > :55:30.matters of faith can be subjected to scientific scrutiny? I am
:55:30. > :55:33.familiar with Dr Ian Stevenson's work. Although superficially, it
:55:33. > :55:37.looks convincing, Stephenson said he did not have a single case which
:55:37. > :55:42.he considers to be watertight. There are alternative explanations
:55:42. > :55:45.for the kinds of things he was putting forward. In general, we are
:55:45. > :55:50.hearing views being put forward about people would like the
:55:50. > :55:55.universe to work, not the way it actually does. It is all generally
:55:55. > :56:02.based on subjective impressions. But if it could be proven, that
:56:02. > :56:06.would be it. Everyone would say right, it exists. The whole point
:56:06. > :56:11.about spiritual life is that in the exploration, you express your
:56:11. > :56:14.spiritual self and grow spiritually. Whether you accept reincarnation is
:56:14. > :56:20.unimportant, but it is important to know you are a spiritual being.
:56:20. > :56:26.We have to end it there. Our votes are in. We asked, are we too
:56:26. > :56:34.sensitive about racism? 85% of those of you who texted in said we
:56:34. > :56:41.are. 15% said No. Jerry, you think we are too sensitive. I do think we
:56:41. > :56:45.are, and I think that that is on help for. That was an astonishing
:56:45. > :56:51.response. It tells me that we have not got this subject right at this
:56:51. > :56:55.moment in time. And it is an important subject to get right. We
:56:55. > :56:59.have gone overboard with it. And I think it is harmful rather than
:56:59. > :57:04.helpful. John, you presumably agree that it is an important subject to
:57:04. > :57:08.get right. I am not surprised by the results. But it is important.
:57:09. > :57:16.If you are out there, don't worry about calling someone black if they
:57:16. > :57:18.were in a room full of white people. Worry about wincing when you hear
:57:18. > :57:23.some of the things people say around you. That is the racism we
:57:23. > :57:26.need to worry about. We had a text saying that the fact that racism
:57:26. > :57:29.exists in the 21st century is embarrassing for the world as a
:57:29. > :57:33.whole. Another says those who are not at the receiving end of racism
:57:33. > :57:36.can never understand how it feels. People must not be treated
:57:36. > :57:46.differently because they look different. Everyone deserves to be
:57:46. > :57:49.treated with respect. That you for your comments. My thanks also go to
:57:49. > :57:53.all of you who have taken part in the programme. Please do not text
:57:53. > :57:58.or call the phone lines any more. They are now closed. You can
:57:58. > :58:02.continue the conversation online. That is it for this series. Thanks
:58:02. > :58:07.to all of the guests who have enlivened our Sunday mornings, even
:58:07. > :58:10.those he did a good job we infuriating you. Thank you to you