:00:13. > :00:22.Dodgy hacks, bent coppers and gutless politicians. Has Britain
:00:23. > :00:37.
:00:37. > :00:41.been corrupted? And is the Murdoch Good morning. Welcome to Sunday
:00:41. > :00:46.Morning Live. A month ago you would have been hard-pushed to find a
:00:46. > :00:50.politician who would say boo to Rupert Murdoch's. Now there is a
:00:50. > :00:54.queue a mile long. What does that say about our leaders?
:00:54. > :00:57.We have been preached at to celebrate the joys of sex but one
:00:57. > :01:02.of the nation's unofficial sex therapists says we should stop
:01:02. > :01:07.banging on about it. I am a sex columnist but I think it is time
:01:07. > :01:11.that sex takes its tableaux back. And a BBC documentary about
:01:11. > :01:14.Muhammad elects not to show its face. Is that respect or something
:01:15. > :01:23.else? Our guests have all broken a few
:01:23. > :01:26.taboos. David Aaronovitch is a debunker of conspiracy theories.
:01:26. > :01:30.Anne Atkins was Agony Atkins at the Telegraph. And her Christian
:01:30. > :01:32.beliefs didn't stop her donning a burka and liking it. And Ajmal
:01:32. > :01:38.Masroor sees no contradiction in being a TV imam, politician, and
:01:38. > :01:48.marriage guidance councillor. We would like to know what do you
:01:48. > :02:02.
:02:02. > :02:04.Rupert Murdoch may have apologise this week but it seemed like only
:02:04. > :02:10.yesterday the great and good were queuing up to bow down to his
:02:10. > :02:15.lieutenants. How close can people in power get to the press before it
:02:15. > :02:19.corrupts them? Is Rupert Murdoch to blame or is there something rotten
:02:19. > :02:29.in the heart of the UK? David things we are less corrupt than we
:02:29. > :02:34.
:02:34. > :02:38.We have always known that politicians cosying up to the media
:02:38. > :02:42.that David Cameron has admitted he had 26 meetings with News
:02:42. > :02:46.International executives since he has been Prime Minister and invited
:02:46. > :02:51.his disgraced media chief, Andy Coulson, to Chequers even after he
:02:51. > :02:55.resigned. The relationship that became too close, we were all in
:02:55. > :03:01.this world of wanting the support of newspaper groups and even
:03:01. > :03:05.broadcasting organisations. And it is not just politicians. There are
:03:05. > :03:08.allegations the police took money from hacks and the Met fight --
:03:08. > :03:12.hired a former News of the World adviser while they were
:03:12. > :03:17.investigating phone hacking. Does this show that Britain has been
:03:17. > :03:22.corrupted and when did it start? After all, some bankers cheerfully
:03:22. > :03:27.acted irresponsibly and let us foot the bill. Then we found that some
:03:27. > :03:32.politicians had their snouts in the trough in expenses scandal. So are
:03:32. > :03:36.we now a tinpot regime for people on the take? Or does the fact we
:03:37. > :03:42.found out about the scandals show how honest we are? It is rare to
:03:42. > :03:48.see the head of a media empire asking for forgiveness. A would you
:03:48. > :03:52.apologise? Of course. Many other countries have questionable
:03:52. > :03:56.relationships between government, media and police but there is less
:03:56. > :04:03.sign of the moral outrage we have seen here. They seem to accept it
:04:03. > :04:06.as inevitable. And the media, particularly the Sunday Morning --
:04:06. > :04:10.particularly the News of the World, have had a role in bringing
:04:10. > :04:14.corruption to the public life. So at the end of the week are we left
:04:14. > :04:20.with the sense that Britain is becoming more corrupt or confidence
:04:20. > :04:26.in our ability to spot and root out corruption, however higher it goes?
:04:26. > :04:31.David, are we a corrupt society? We are less corrupt. We know far
:04:31. > :04:34.more about what is coming on and we used to. Over the centuries the
:04:34. > :04:40.British establishment was never used to answering questions about
:04:40. > :04:44.itself. It ran itself how it wanted to. That has completely changed.
:04:44. > :04:54.The last few scandals we have seen are the signs of what a scrutiny
:04:54. > :04:59.
:04:59. > :05:02.society we have become. That is the If you think we it is, text the
:05:02. > :05:05.word "vote", followed by "yes". If you think it isn't text "vote"
:05:05. > :05:14.followed by "no". Our text number is 81771 and texts will be charged
:05:14. > :05:20.We have never been a society mired in corruption but we have had
:05:20. > :05:24.establishments, press, politicians, even the BBC to a certain extent,
:05:24. > :05:29.have been able to run themselves out for public scrutiny, pay
:05:29. > :05:32.themselves what they like, not answer to people and so on. What is
:05:32. > :05:38.increasingly happening is that all these relationships are coming out
:05:38. > :05:40.into the open. We increasingly have scrutiny bodies like the Office for
:05:40. > :05:44.Budget Responsibility and the statistics office to say whether
:05:44. > :05:48.the government is telling the truth about statistics and this has been
:05:48. > :05:55.a long-term development which has accelerated so that nobody in power
:05:55. > :06:05.if they, what is a great thing. Imam, do you think this week has
:06:05. > :06:05.
:06:05. > :06:09.shown there is something corrupt at I think we have never been a
:06:09. > :06:18.corrupt society. Some institutions have shown they have a propensity
:06:18. > :06:23.to be corrupt. If politicians had no accountability, there would have
:06:23. > :06:26.them probably going down the same road as Zimbabwe and Pakistan, we
:06:26. > :06:31.see what corruption really means. But with the media the corruption
:06:31. > :06:35.has become more acute because they are not accountable, they and not
:06:35. > :06:38.directly elected, they are not accountable to anybody except
:06:38. > :06:41.themselves. I think media corruption has indicated that
:06:41. > :06:45.nobody is beyond reproach and we have established authorities that
:06:45. > :06:55.can take anyone into account and if somebody is found to be breaking
:06:55. > :07:01.Anne, people have been concerned about who they should look up to
:07:01. > :07:06.him this crisis. Should they look up to the politicians? Police?
:07:06. > :07:11.is fascinating, has Britain become corrupt? We had a wonderful history
:07:11. > :07:20.teacher, Margaret Chamberlain, and I remember her saying you think
:07:20. > :07:26.people don't change, people do change hugely. In this sense we all
:07:26. > :07:32.have a tendency to be selfish and corrupt but society can change
:07:32. > :07:37.hugely from one era to another and I agree with David that the
:07:37. > :07:41.encouraging thing it is a tiny minority of politicians and police
:07:41. > :07:44.and journalists who had broken the rules but the great thing is that
:07:44. > :07:53.we live in a society where we really care about this kind of
:07:53. > :07:58.Comparing with how we may have changed over several hundred years,
:07:58. > :08:04.I think society does come and go in its expectations and laws and in
:08:04. > :08:08.some ways, the late 18th century up to the 20th century, actually from
:08:08. > :08:12.the mid-nineteenth century, we had an extraordinarily high level of
:08:12. > :08:22.expectation of public morals in a way that we probably did not have
:08:22. > :08:22.
:08:22. > :08:26.We set ourselves a double standard. We read the titillating stories set
:08:26. > :08:30.by the News of the World. We buy the newspapers but yet when it
:08:30. > :08:34.comes to corruption in the same industry, we hit the roof. We
:08:34. > :08:38.should not be reading these newspapers! We should not be buying
:08:38. > :08:44.them if they are the ones corrupting society. We cannot have
:08:44. > :08:48.double standards. We can. We need to put other people to account and
:08:48. > :08:53.so, we are not going to do business with you. Just to say devil's
:08:53. > :08:59.advocate, if we didn't buy the stuff, nobody would make money but
:08:59. > :09:03.there can be a sense where there is a noblesse a bleached, where you
:09:03. > :09:09.have the privilege of being in that position. -- noblesse oblige. That
:09:09. > :09:13.is not hypocritical. If you like reading somebody's salacious
:09:13. > :09:17.stories and bedroom secrets... Somebody has to expose it. That is
:09:18. > :09:22.not the same as doing it. But you open up the doors to people to
:09:22. > :09:27.abuse and for people to come and pick it up. We should say we will
:09:27. > :09:36.not read their salacious stories. agree with you but it is fair to
:09:36. > :09:41.have high expectations of --. is incredibly pious. Long before
:09:41. > :09:51.newspapers, a village gossips hung over walls discussing who was doing
:09:51. > :09:57.
:09:57. > :10:02.what with you. Our village is much Let's talk to a former Lib Dem MP,
:10:03. > :10:07.spokesperson for a tough campaign. Is there a wider problem with
:10:07. > :10:13.corruption at the heart of British society? There might be and that is
:10:13. > :10:18.the main concern. Firstly the police are involved, that is one
:10:18. > :10:21.real concern, and it seems that there is evidence that it goes deep
:10:21. > :10:25.and wide not just in the Met Police, unless there is widespread
:10:25. > :10:30.incompetence, but the police up and down the land may have been taking
:10:30. > :10:34.payments and they appeared to have been soft-pedalling on an inquiry.
:10:34. > :10:38.Secondly the links between powerful media moguls and politicians, both
:10:38. > :10:44.in opposition and in government. When key questions were being
:10:44. > :10:47.raised in Parliament about cross- media ownership. The 2003
:10:47. > :10:51.communications bill for example. Huge amounts of lobbying and
:10:51. > :10:54.pressure. The third thing is that this really should have been got to
:10:54. > :10:58.the bottom of a long time ago because allegations were raised a
:10:58. > :11:03.long time ago and it is worrying that even in a country with a free
:11:03. > :11:08.press, it has taken the Guardian newspaper, individual MPs like Tom
:11:08. > :11:13.Watson, to keep plugging away in order for this crisis to be exposed
:11:13. > :11:21.and the scandal to be exposed. I don't think we can... I want to
:11:21. > :11:26.focus more light on the issue with the police. With as is someone from
:11:26. > :11:31.Transparency International. -- with us. How much of a problem is
:11:31. > :11:37.corruption in the police? We have found through a recent study that
:11:37. > :11:42.whereas the problem of corruption and the police is not as endemic as
:11:42. > :11:46.it perhaps wasn't the 1970s, there are a series issues. One area of
:11:46. > :11:49.vulnerability is where police are officers are prepared to take
:11:49. > :11:54.illegal payments in order to trade information and that is precisely
:11:54. > :11:59.the issue that we have seen in this recent scandal. I think this
:11:59. > :12:05.exposes a broader problem which is that the checks and balances which
:12:05. > :12:09.should be operating have failed and we need a much more robust policy
:12:09. > :12:13.response to the problem of corruption. There is a great deal
:12:13. > :12:17.of complacency about this. Let me put some of those points to Ian
:12:17. > :12:27.McDonald. You used to be Assistant Chief Constable at Merseyside
:12:27. > :12:32.Police. Not as endemic as it wasn't the 1970s but the level of
:12:32. > :12:37.corruption exposed in the current crisis is really shocking people --
:12:37. > :12:43.not as endemic as it was in the 1970s. To what extent do you
:12:43. > :12:48.believe it is going on? I think the police today are far more straight,
:12:48. > :12:53.far less compromised, far less likely to engage in any of that
:12:53. > :12:56.kind of activity, than at any time in the past. The police have done a
:12:56. > :13:06.lot of work to combat corruption and they are the best police force
:13:06. > :13:08.
:13:08. > :13:13.in the world when compared to others. David, Imam Ajmal Masroor,
:13:13. > :13:17.do you think it is a sign it is worse or not as bad? It could have
:13:17. > :13:20.been worse and it could be getting better because there is greater
:13:20. > :13:30.transparency but we also have institutions in place that can take
:13:30. > :13:30.
:13:30. > :13:34.account of such corruption but Wasn't it very recently when Vince
:13:34. > :13:38.Cable enlisting said he was declaring war against Rupert
:13:38. > :13:41.Murdoch and David Cameron had to strip him of his power and take
:13:41. > :13:46.half of his department from them. Mr Cameron should be ashamed of
:13:46. > :13:51.himself. That man was saying the right thing. We cannot give
:13:51. > :13:56.absolute power to one individual absolutely. That is exactly what
:13:56. > :13:59.the point is. Do not give too much power would to any individual. Let
:13:59. > :14:04.there be competition and transparent, accountable
:14:04. > :14:08.institutions. There is a mixture of things. Funnily enough, with the
:14:08. > :14:13.BSkyB bid, it is not the accountability you are talking
:14:13. > :14:17.about. Eventually that has happened as a result of a firestorm. The
:14:17. > :14:21.politicians suddenly getting together and turning on his person
:14:21. > :14:26.who have supposed to have given them so much, they have given so
:14:26. > :14:30.much power to over the years. My point is that all the problems we
:14:30. > :14:36.are speaking about our real problems. It is not a great idea
:14:36. > :14:40.for police medicine information. that not evidence... -- it is not a
:14:41. > :14:45.great idea for the police to sell information. Is that not evidence
:14:45. > :14:50.that Britain has been corrupted? Only so far as if you knew what
:14:50. > :14:53.went on before. For a long time. But let me ask, would it be
:14:53. > :15:03.corruption if the police officers leaked the information without
:15:03. > :15:06.
:15:06. > :15:11.If it is corruption, you have to ask if the information is public
:15:11. > :15:14.domain information, important information, that comes out in the
:15:14. > :15:19.public interest. Then you wouldn't believe it was corruption. You
:15:19. > :15:26.would believe it was corruption for a good cause. Why don't we put that
:15:26. > :15:30.to Evan Harris? Yes, there are some illegal activities, on the face of
:15:30. > :15:34.it, that can have a public interest defence. But much of the stuff that
:15:34. > :15:39.we are told you about in the phone hacking scandal was not about what
:15:39. > :15:43.is in the public interest. It was not about exposing hypocrisy or
:15:43. > :15:48.wrongdoing. Again, I think we are being incredibly complacent to
:15:48. > :15:52.think that we don't have widespread corruption in political life or in
:15:52. > :15:57.the media, or in the police, until the outcome of the inquiry that is
:15:57. > :16:06.so desperately needed. I think it is now going to have the wide scope
:16:06. > :16:09.and strong powers that are hacked Is there a danger that if the press
:16:09. > :16:11.becomes smaller and shackled as a result of the crisis, there is a
:16:12. > :16:15.danger that the politicians and police could become more corrupt
:16:15. > :16:20.because they are not held to account by the free press. You are
:16:20. > :16:25.right, there is a balance. We have to have proper investigative
:16:25. > :16:28.journalism. That is why many of us from the campaign also want to see
:16:28. > :16:32.a change in libel laws to enable investigative journalism to have a
:16:32. > :16:36.freer rein without the fear of having to make big payouts for
:16:36. > :16:40.mistakes to wealthy individuals, often abroad. So there is
:16:40. > :16:46.definitely a balance. There is a balance that needs to be found in
:16:46. > :16:49.legislation. But the idea that... That doesn't mean that we can sit
:16:49. > :16:59.by complacently and think that there isn't a real problem here,
:16:59. > :17:00.
:17:00. > :17:05.now. Anne? Just going back to a question your last a minute ago,
:17:05. > :17:09.has Britain been corrupt, we are in danger of being far too pessimistic.
:17:09. > :17:14.-- a question you asked a minute ago. The MPs scandal, it was a tiny
:17:14. > :17:18.minority. But if you looked at the British papers, you would have
:17:18. > :17:23.thought that the entire House of Commons was corrupt. That was not
:17:23. > :17:29.the case. I do think that we are in danger of... You are right but we
:17:29. > :17:32.scrutinise things, there can be not exactly an over scrutiny, but an
:17:32. > :17:36.over-emphasis on the problem, which may be very small, and the rest of
:17:36. > :17:40.the press, the rest of the House of Commons, the rest of the police are
:17:40. > :17:45.actually doing a very good job. It's not necessarily the case that
:17:45. > :17:50.more scrutiny makes more Trust, its that it leads to better governance.
:17:50. > :17:53.We are going to demand it in any case. I'm all in favour of his
:17:53. > :17:56.public inquiry. One of the things that is messing me up at the moment
:17:56. > :18:00.is the way in which people are prejudging the result of any
:18:00. > :18:05.inquiry. They are treating the entire Murdoch business as if he is
:18:05. > :18:08.Darth Vader, the killing of the evil intergalactic empire. If you
:18:08. > :18:12.just do something about him then all of your problems are magically
:18:12. > :18:16.going to go away. It isn't true. John says, when the bankers were
:18:16. > :18:19.giving out large loans that people couldn't pay back, it was
:18:19. > :18:26.apparently the customer's fault. When newspapers use phone hacking,
:18:26. > :18:29.it is the public's fault for pushing these stories. Have
:18:29. > :18:33.newspapers corrupted our minds, that we want to read these stories?
:18:33. > :18:38.You blame the readers for wanting to read them. I would never do that,
:18:38. > :18:42.it is both. If we don't read the stories, the stories will not get
:18:42. > :18:45.sold. The journalists that have used corrupt means, and a few
:18:45. > :18:49.journalists have used corrupt means to getting those stories, of course
:18:49. > :18:53.they should be reprimanded. The one thing we can do as the public is
:18:53. > :18:58.say that if you cross the line that we public agree to, we will not
:18:58. > :19:01.bite you. We will not accept this behaviour. -- by you. We will
:19:01. > :19:05.become more accountable to ourselves. We will say, you know
:19:05. > :19:08.what, we will have the moral high ground and make sure that
:19:08. > :19:12.journalists also follow the same ground. Something I like about what
:19:12. > :19:17.you are saying is that change should always come from within.
:19:17. > :19:27.There is an awful lot of pointing the finger at the moment. If I
:19:27. > :19:28.
:19:28. > :19:35.point the finger at you, three. Gerrard, you are a UKIP MIP. How
:19:35. > :19:38.correct is Britain, compared to other countries? I think compared
:19:38. > :19:42.to continental Europe, corruption in British politics is fairly minor.
:19:42. > :19:45.Any corruption is bad enough, it will always take place where you
:19:45. > :19:50.have money and power. If you look over continental politics, it
:19:50. > :19:56.wasn't so long ago when President Andreotti of Italy was considered
:19:56. > :20:00.by a court to be effectively part of the Massif -- Mafia. You have
:20:00. > :20:03.scandals with President Chirac, all kinds of people. On continental
:20:03. > :20:08.politics, you kind of consider that there is something wrong with you
:20:08. > :20:12.if you're not trying to fiddle something. That is fairly par for
:20:12. > :20:16.the course. So, while what we have got is bad and it should be
:20:16. > :20:20.eradicated, I don't think that we should beat ourselves up to much.
:20:20. > :20:24.Politics amongst politicians in this country, corruption tends to
:20:24. > :20:29.be at a fairly low level. I think we have a different kind of
:20:29. > :20:33.corruption. Politicians and newspapers do not actually follow
:20:33. > :20:38.through on the really big issues. For example we have Tony Blair, who
:20:38. > :20:43.was prime minister, on a prime minister's salary, took us to war
:20:43. > :20:46.on a basis of lies, he is now a multi-millionaire. A good
:20:46. > :20:50.investigative journalist would tell us how he made his money. Are we
:20:50. > :20:54.demonising Murdoch? I don't think we are demonising him because he
:20:54. > :20:57.has been an angel, I think there is no smoke without fire. There must
:20:57. > :21:02.be some responsibility for what has happened. There was a culture. It
:21:02. > :21:05.was what you said in the beginning. Nobody would say boo to Mr Murdoch
:21:05. > :21:09.because they were scared. The MPs were scared because they were
:21:09. > :21:13.worried about being exposed. Policemen were scared because they
:21:13. > :21:19.were worried about being exposed. That culture of being scared, or
:21:19. > :21:26.blackmailed into submission, it's wrong. It's not just about being
:21:26. > :21:30.scared. No... Ajmal, let me have a go. Let me finish, then you can
:21:30. > :21:33.have a go. He's not a demon but he has been associated with some
:21:33. > :21:38.activities that indicate that he must be somewhat responsible or
:21:38. > :21:42.associated with demonic behaviour. You worked for him? I worked for
:21:42. > :21:47.him, I've never met him. The Times is a very well-run newspaper. But
:21:47. > :21:51.that's not really the point I want to make. The problem is not people
:21:51. > :21:57.being scared. The problem is that people want to go along with power.
:21:57. > :22:01.It is absurd that David Cameron has had 26 meetings with News
:22:01. > :22:05.International. But the same thing happened with the Labour Party,
:22:05. > :22:08.Robert Maxwell, the Daily Mirror. By attending these partisan been
:22:08. > :22:14.together, there is a belief that you can be at the centre of things
:22:14. > :22:19.and improve your outcomes. As a non socialite, I have never understood
:22:19. > :22:26.why people thought that it was so necessary and that if they were to
:22:26. > :22:30.stop doing it I would be extremely grateful. Has there been allowed to
:22:30. > :22:39.blossom and in it for what you can get culture? N taking you back to
:22:39. > :22:44.some of these e-mails about bankers, MP expenses. I think there has
:22:44. > :22:49.been... I think what has happened is that our culture, if you look
:22:49. > :22:55.back over a generation or two, the expectation... I think of my
:22:55. > :22:59.father's generation, the mid- 20th century, there was a very high
:22:59. > :23:02.expectation on people who had positions of responsibility. I
:23:02. > :23:07.don't been a big responsibility like Prime Minister, I mean
:23:07. > :23:11.teachers, clergy, lawyers. That sort of thing. There was very much
:23:11. > :23:17.an expectation that you never lied to the taxman, you never lied to a
:23:17. > :23:23.policeman. There was a sense of respect to which my children can't
:23:23. > :23:27.really understand. But a lot was hidden. We say this, we love
:23:27. > :23:30.knocking previous generations for being hypocritical. I say we are a
:23:30. > :23:34.lot more hypocritical than the Victorians. Without putting it in
:23:34. > :23:38.terms of who he's a better generation, an awful lot was hidden.
:23:38. > :23:42.And all for what is hidden today. Because there were expectations,
:23:42. > :23:46.you expected that they would live up to them. And an awful lot of
:23:46. > :23:49.them did. Quite a lot of them didn't. A couple of malt used on
:23:49. > :23:54.this. Simon says it is the readers that have corrupted Britain. If
:23:54. > :23:58.people were not so influenced by tabloids, they would spend more
:23:58. > :24:02.time investigating the facts themselves. The papers would have
:24:02. > :24:07.to print more of the truth than their ulterior opinions. He says
:24:07. > :24:14.people have risen through the ranks through networking and society in
:24:14. > :24:18.general is correct. Ajmal, you are waving your hand? I can give an
:24:18. > :24:21.example, when I was standing at the election there was a false
:24:21. > :24:25.allegation made at may buy a newspaper. The assumption was I
:24:26. > :24:28.would not challenge it. I nearly took them to court, they settled
:24:28. > :24:34.outside of court and said sorry. Many people don't have that
:24:34. > :24:39.knowledge or that courage, or that access to challenging certain
:24:39. > :24:45.newspapers that go down that route. We, as a society, must challenge
:24:45. > :24:55.such corrupt, individual, selfish journalists. That is our text poll
:24:55. > :24:59.
:25:00. > :25:09.this morning. Do you think Britain Go you have around 20 minutes
:25:10. > :25:12.
:25:13. > :25:15.Let's talk about sex. Or should we? This morning we learnt that Ashley
:25:15. > :25:20.Cole allegedly had relationships with three women before getting
:25:20. > :25:26.back with Cheryl Cole. Do we really want to know? Do we want to see sex
:25:26. > :25:31.staring at us from every television and billboard? Agony and Karen
:25:31. > :25:34.Krizanovich thinks it is time we put sex back in the closet. This is
:25:34. > :25:40.her Sunday Stand. I'm a sex columnist and I think
:25:40. > :25:44.that sex needs to get its taboo back. We need to remember that it
:25:44. > :25:48.means babies and diseases and also that sex and love are sacred. What
:25:48. > :25:52.I am saying is that we need to take sex out of the boardroom, out of
:25:52. > :25:57.business, off the high street and put it back in the bedroom where it
:25:57. > :26:01.belongs. But the world is turning into a downmarket strip club, with
:26:01. > :26:06.sex been shoved in our face everywhere we go. It's time to
:26:06. > :26:09.rediscover a sense of restraint. Most people would agree that seven
:26:09. > :26:12.year-old with padded bras are wrong. But the kids are only doing that
:26:12. > :26:17.because they see us do it. To a child, being an adult doesn't mean
:26:17. > :26:23.being considerate, skilful smart. To a child, being an adult means
:26:23. > :26:26.being sexy. The reason there is so much sexuality is not because of
:26:26. > :26:30.nature, it's because of marketing. It's too late to put that genie
:26:30. > :26:35.back in the bottle, but we can still act. I think we should
:26:35. > :26:41.consumer boycott any company whose products are sold using gratuitous
:26:42. > :26:45.sexuality. As adults we need to see that talking about sex means that
:26:45. > :26:54.you can't say anything interesting. We need to make sex private and
:26:54. > :26:57.adult again. As adults, we need to If you have a webcam, you can make
:26:57. > :27:01.your point on Skype or join the conversation on Twitter. The
:27:01. > :27:06.details are on the screen. Karen, you make your living talking about
:27:06. > :27:13.sex. Should we really shut up about it? Yes, we really should. It
:27:13. > :27:19.sounds as if I am anti-nudity, anti-physical beauty, but I'm not.
:27:19. > :27:23.I just find it overkill, the over- exposure, particularly trying to
:27:23. > :27:27.sell us things, it's not only having a trickle-down effect with
:27:27. > :27:32.padded bras for five year-old and seven-year-olds, things like that.
:27:32. > :27:37.Is that a direct result of being open about sex? Is that something
:27:37. > :27:41.different? Sexualisation in our society? Being open is one thing.
:27:41. > :27:46.Using sex as a marketing tool is another. You have to remember that
:27:46. > :27:56.sex is a life force. That is why we are all here. I think there is an
:27:56. > :28:00.abuse now of sexual imagery in order to sell lifestyle things.
:28:00. > :28:07.Perfume ads, actually I like them, but it you see somebody sexy and
:28:07. > :28:12.you think, I want to be like that picture, it's not going to happen.
:28:12. > :28:16.Do you agree? I was so against that but I thought I was going to say,
:28:16. > :28:22.actually, I was born three-party genesis. Maybe that's not true.
:28:22. > :28:26.It's how we talk about sex. We still have an incredible level of
:28:26. > :28:32.sexual ignorance in this country. Sex education, although they are
:28:32. > :28:35.trying hard, the very fact that we allow religious people to opt out
:28:35. > :28:40.of sex education in schools, as if their children are not perfectly
:28:40. > :28:45.capable impregnating other people's children seems to be a scruple far
:28:45. > :28:49.too far. When you ask the question, should we want to know about Ashley
:28:49. > :28:55.Cole's sex life, I don't know if we should. I'm not interested in his
:28:55. > :28:59.sex life. Maybe I can't cope with the idea of somebody sleeping with
:28:59. > :29:03.three people in one go. It does sell newspapers. It does, it also
:29:03. > :29:07.happens to be the strap line we put on this discussion. Presumably we
:29:07. > :29:12.thought it would be something people related to. We didn't open
:29:12. > :29:17.the discussion with a look at sexuality through the centuries.
:29:17. > :29:23.Ajmal, do we talk about it too much or not enough? I want to say to
:29:23. > :29:26.David that religious people agree that... Not all religious people
:29:26. > :29:30.say they don't have sex. It's an essential part of our life. It's
:29:30. > :29:34.very divine, as far as I am concerned. It's a spiritual
:29:34. > :29:39.experience. Ultimate submission of your Lhasa that you share with
:29:39. > :29:44.somebody that you are committed to. -- your love. What is divine sex
:29:44. > :29:52.like? I'll tell you in a minute, or read my book! A chapter in my book
:29:52. > :29:55.talks about it. You need to read that. Ultimately, we have
:29:55. > :29:58.sexualised as society too much. The other day I was on the Underground,
:29:58. > :30:02.a seven year-old kid was sitting next to his mother. There was a
:30:02. > :30:06.scantily dressed couple, half-drunk, groping one another in every
:30:06. > :30:12.possible part you can think about. Nobody was saying anything. This
:30:12. > :30:15.poor mother was put in his hands over his eyes. She was blushing. He
:30:15. > :30:19.was staring. This is what we are talking about, over sexualised,
:30:19. > :30:29.irresponsible... Is that a result of our openers in talking about sex
:30:29. > :30:30.
:30:30. > :30:34.or a different problem? As a result There is the difference between
:30:34. > :30:40.being open about sex and that you can have sex without being in love.
:30:40. > :30:50.A don't agree with that. I knew you were going to say that! Is your
:30:50. > :30:51.
:30:51. > :30:55.The abuse of this, it is like trying to take marketing to the
:30:55. > :31:00.ultimate. We are all interested in sex one way or the other but we
:31:00. > :31:08.think that we can buy it. You can buy sex obviously, that was a slip
:31:09. > :31:16.of the tongue, but... At what cost? It is over exposure. We are immune
:31:16. > :31:21.to any sort of... Ajmal, you are beginning to sound like my
:31:21. > :31:25.chemistry teacher. The first thing he said was, penis, and everybody
:31:25. > :31:31.laughed and he got angry and said, how dare you start laughing, my
:31:31. > :31:37.wife and I enjoy six very much end it is the sacred bond between us? I
:31:37. > :31:41.thought, I will never have sex like that. You cannot sell it to me by
:31:42. > :31:46.telling me it is sacred and him -- divine. There is something
:31:46. > :31:50.wonderfully dirty about sex when it is done right. We are always
:31:50. > :31:54.worried about other people's children have been too much sex,
:31:54. > :31:59.what other people are doing in society and responding to
:31:59. > :32:07.advertising, not ourselves. You could just have said to the couple,
:32:07. > :32:13.get a room. That is what the phrase exists for. Ajmal, did you approach
:32:13. > :32:19.it? It was a tube like a tin of sardines. The bigger problem is
:32:19. > :32:26.that we as society have taken our eyes of a responsible attitude as
:32:26. > :32:31.adults. We have sex but in the privacy of our home. We don't have
:32:31. > :32:37.to flaunt it. But I don't want us to have abortion illegal and have
:32:37. > :32:40.to wear hats. I am not suggesting that. I think we should teach
:32:40. > :32:44.children at sexuality in a responsible money. Widowed pimp
:32:44. > :32:52.children by getting them to dress up like a, I don't want to use the
:32:52. > :32:56.word, like unsavoury... Robbing them of innocence. Cameron, Ajmal
:32:56. > :33:05.is saying a lot of what you have said -- Karen. And yet you are
:33:05. > :33:09.flinching. Because she associates me with religion. No. I think there
:33:09. > :33:13.is a problem. In principle I agree but I also think that children want
:33:13. > :33:18.to grow up. The first thing you want to do is lose your innocence
:33:18. > :33:22.and be an adult and they are equating adopted with sexuality
:33:22. > :33:27.rather than being smart and considerable. Isn't that the
:33:28. > :33:32.problem? Some kids equate sex with love. What I mean by that is that
:33:32. > :33:35.if they are not loved and wanted and don't have relationships with
:33:35. > :33:42.their parents where they think they are loved conditionally, they look
:33:42. > :33:47.and think, how can I achieve this, get his team, through sexuality? It
:33:47. > :33:52.is not the padded bras... As much as I don't like them. Rachel
:33:52. > :33:57.Gardner is director of the romance Academy. Is that something you are
:33:57. > :34:03.concerned about? Yes, I love that last comment about self-esteem and
:34:03. > :34:07.sex. I am quite concerned about relationship ignorance, not just
:34:07. > :34:12.sexual ignorance. We speak about sex as if it is without context but
:34:12. > :34:16.we don't talk about how to build relationships and it is the context
:34:16. > :34:20.and meaning of the relationship that makes sex more fulfilling.
:34:20. > :34:23.This conversation has been great but there has been no mention of
:34:23. > :34:29.relationships and that is what she wished -- what we should be talking
:34:29. > :34:34.more about with young people. relationships and love bond people.
:34:34. > :34:38.You said you don't think you can have sex without love. I said in a
:34:38. > :34:42.relationship when you have sex. Mechanically you can have sex with
:34:42. > :34:49.anything you want but sex that is meaningful and fulfilling and that
:34:49. > :34:53.does not make you feel cheap and dirty, it is in a relationship.
:34:53. > :34:58.you know the Woody Allen quote, it is only good if it is done dirty.
:34:58. > :35:07.How many marriages do you know where there is no sex? You can have
:35:07. > :35:13.a perfectly fine relationship with no sex, West sexed -- or whether
:35:13. > :35:17.sex life dwindles. What about the man who has sex with a pavement?
:35:17. > :35:21.am worried about David. His attitude to sex is indicative of
:35:21. > :35:28.his chemistry teacher. He should have been taught by a biology
:35:28. > :35:33.teacher! Let's talk to a former teacher now. Good morning. Good
:35:33. > :35:42.morning. You are now a porn star and a stripper. This will shock
:35:42. > :35:45.David! Is there a contradiction. For four years are was a secondary
:35:45. > :35:51.school teacher and the head of personal and social health
:35:51. > :35:55.education, I taught French, German, sociology and religious studies.
:35:55. > :35:59.The central theme of citizenship is respect. Respecting the rights of
:35:59. > :36:04.people to do certain things and respecting their choices in life.
:36:04. > :36:08.One of the central aspects of social education is to give people
:36:08. > :36:13.the information to make their right choices in life and by that I mean
:36:13. > :36:19.right for them, not right for their parents and religion and the school
:36:19. > :36:26.and society and what society fez is acceptable. I did a job where I use
:36:26. > :36:33.my brain in the day and my body at night and it became public
:36:33. > :36:38.knowledge but stripping and pornography is a form of
:36:38. > :36:41.entertainment. If I can turn the question on its head. There are
:36:41. > :36:46.professionals up and down the country who do all sorts of things
:36:46. > :36:51.that might go against arguably what they do in their day job. What
:36:51. > :36:56.would you say about the teacher who smokes as other front of the school
:36:56. > :37:00.gate and has the smell of cigarette on his breath? Is he allowed to
:37:00. > :37:10.teach the dangers of smoking? Teaches that drink after school in
:37:10. > :37:14.the pub? Is it therefore logical for Johnny to say that pornography
:37:14. > :37:22.and what he does is perfectly acceptable? And that is something
:37:22. > :37:26.we should teach our children to pursue? Pornography is and there to
:37:26. > :37:30.teach children. Children should not be watching pornography. --
:37:30. > :37:35.pornography is not there to teach children. Are you saying you would
:37:35. > :37:42.allow your children to pursue the same path as you? Been in a porn
:37:42. > :37:45.star? I would allow my children to choose at the age that is
:37:45. > :37:49.appropriate as long as they are being in respect for two other
:37:49. > :37:55.people. If they have taken into account all the consequences and
:37:55. > :37:57.that is their choice, I would absolutely respect that. There are
:37:57. > :38:04.perfectly legitimate job that I don't have respect for but if that
:38:04. > :38:08.is somebody's choice, absolutely. If that sort of sex that you are
:38:08. > :38:14.comfortable with? I think the only thing that is wrong with John it is
:38:14. > :38:17.the strange surname he has! I do understand the particular
:38:17. > :38:22.qualifications that you need for the job. He has obviously got a lot
:38:22. > :38:28.to offer the world of teaching. I think it is a shame that you can't
:38:28. > :38:31.do both. I presume the problem would tend to be ridiculed. It may
:38:31. > :38:38.be difficult for somebody having watched you on the internet to read
:38:38. > :38:43.your mind entirely... The funny thing is, two weeks before I was
:38:43. > :38:47.suspended from my job, and within this two weeks I had a number of
:38:47. > :38:51.students, particularly male, who came up to me and said, we have
:38:51. > :38:54.heard about what you do and I denied it but I actually got far
:38:55. > :39:01.more respect from children, particularly boys, who had been
:39:01. > :39:06.badly behaved in those lessons than I had before. Rightly or wrongly!
:39:06. > :39:11.Maybe teachers should be paid a little more, just a thought. Karen,
:39:11. > :39:18.you want us to push talking about sex into the closet but I'll be
:39:18. > :39:23.comfortable talking about it? Even the nature of this discussion? --
:39:23. > :39:28.are we really comfortable talking about it? No. I don't think it
:39:28. > :39:33.works any more. We are aware of it but I think we are pretty immune to
:39:33. > :39:37.the shock value now, it has been around too long. I think there is
:39:37. > :39:41.an absence of been francs. We are prepared to talk about the act but
:39:41. > :39:45.we are not really prepared to talk about the difficulties, problems
:39:45. > :39:49.and sometimes the pleasures of sex. I think it is still something we
:39:49. > :39:55.have immense problems with. personally think sex as a concept
:39:55. > :40:00.has been misunderstood by many, by a complete abstention, saying it is
:40:00. > :40:05.dirty, and the other, doing it far too much and displaying it too much
:40:05. > :40:09.in public. Moderation would be... How much is too much? Moderation
:40:09. > :40:14.would be better. We have certainly talked about it enough on this
:40:14. > :40:17.programme! Later on Sunday Morning Live. How far would you go to avoid
:40:17. > :40:25.offending a religious person? Banning bacon butties? Not
:40:25. > :40:35.swearing? How about not showing an You can join in by webcam. Or you
:40:35. > :40:35.
:40:35. > :40:45.can make your views known by phone, The question we ask: Has Britain
:40:45. > :40:52.
:40:52. > :40:58.You have around five minutes before the voting closes.
:40:58. > :41:04.What else as been tingling our guests' more taste buds? You think
:41:04. > :41:06.fat people are having it too easy? I am not saying that. I think a lot
:41:06. > :41:14.of people who are obese are themselves responsible for making
:41:14. > :41:19.the decision to use the weight. What started this for you? When I
:41:19. > :41:24.was much younger, I had four stone it too much on my body. I was
:41:24. > :41:30.depressed, I was unfit, I was going through a bad phase and I decided
:41:30. > :41:36.enough is enough and I lost four stone in three months by willpower.
:41:37. > :41:41.I did more exercise. I became more positive about my lifestyle. So you
:41:41. > :41:46.get cross when you've read stories about people who say they have a
:41:46. > :41:51.right to surgery and gastric bands...? I am not cross, I feel
:41:52. > :41:58.sad for them. If I was a doctor... Ajmal, why do you think some people
:41:58. > :42:02.do not have will power? Why? Self- esteem. Maybe things that have
:42:02. > :42:07.happened in their life. Their upbringing, exposure to things,
:42:07. > :42:11.experiences. If I was a councillor, I would look at the root issues
:42:11. > :42:15.rather than the gastric bands and any other superficial ones. If I
:42:15. > :42:20.could deal with their issues to do with their self-esteem and the way
:42:20. > :42:25.they see themselves then I think there would be... Didn't you ever
:42:26. > :42:32.think that maybe you would just state tubby? You have total control
:42:32. > :42:35.of your body like Madonna? Yes. Rarely? Yes because I believe if I
:42:35. > :42:40.do not have control of my body, what is the difference between me
:42:40. > :42:44.and another more? That is not being obsessive, it is about me knowing
:42:44. > :42:51.that I can use my mind to do lots of things, including the lose
:42:51. > :42:56.weight. We can go to the moon and back because we want to. So you
:42:56. > :43:01.have no fear of failure? I don't fear failure. If I fail, I will
:43:01. > :43:10.stand up and carry on and that is about self-esteem. Before this
:43:10. > :43:16.turns into a therapy session, Karen, your story about suicide? That
:43:17. > :43:21.right. There was an author who took his life in using, I believe, an
:43:21. > :43:28.American-style suicide kit, which you can order online apparently. I
:43:28. > :43:34.have not looked into that. They are in two states in America, assisted
:43:34. > :43:40.suicide it is legal in two Estates, and this is echoing the Terry
:43:40. > :43:45.Pratchett been a few weeks ago about Dignitas. -- the Terry
:43:45. > :43:51.Pratchett thing. In his note, he said he thought the �10,000 fee for
:43:51. > :43:57.Dignitas was too high. This is a well-respected man. The last line
:43:57. > :44:02.of his emo was "some people lived too long". It is interesting that
:44:02. > :44:08.so many of us are living a lot longer and we become infirm and
:44:08. > :44:13.people were read. I keep hearing this, we worry about the burden, we
:44:13. > :44:16.worry about the lack of dignity, and obviously there is a big
:44:16. > :44:25.proviso on this but it would be nice if we had Dignitas in this
:44:25. > :44:30.country. Ajmal. My father is 87. What if he didn't have your family?
:44:30. > :44:35.He has dementia. He went out the other day for half-an-hour and did
:44:35. > :44:40.not return until nine hours later. I love him dearly. I would hate to
:44:40. > :44:46.see anybody suggesting he is a burden. But what if he wanted that?
:44:46. > :44:51.We should not encourage suicide. Under any circumstances. You are
:44:52. > :44:57.not living his life. I am giving him love. Is the issue encouraging
:44:57. > :45:01.suicide? No. Increasingly the autonomy that people demand over
:45:01. > :45:07.their own lives extends to their deaths. People living lives that
:45:07. > :45:17.are for them absolutely think they are intolerable and we make
:45:17. > :45:18.
:45:19. > :45:25.The question is if they have the right to choose, not encouraging it.
:45:25. > :45:29.Suppose your father said to you, Ajmal, I've had enough, I don't
:45:29. > :45:35.want to live any longer. You have been a great son to me, but this is
:45:35. > :45:39.what I want? But isn't it true that if we all decided to take our lives
:45:39. > :45:42.when things became hard, many of us would have been dead. Because any
:45:42. > :45:46.time small times become big, you never know if things can become
:45:46. > :45:50.better tomorrow. Motor neurone disease and process doesn't allow
:45:50. > :45:54.you to. You haven't made that decision for yourself, you have to
:45:54. > :45:58.let nature take its own cause. That means that life is ours, not to
:45:58. > :46:01.take but to enjoy. It's obviously an issue that needs further
:46:01. > :46:04.discussion and I'm sure we will be addressing it later on in the
:46:04. > :46:07.series. Moving on, you have been voting in
:46:07. > :46:12.a text poll. We asked at the beginning of the programme, has
:46:12. > :46:22.Britain been corrupted? The poll was closing, please do not text as
:46:22. > :46:23.
:46:23. > :46:26.your vote will not count but he may be charged. -- you may be charged.
:46:26. > :46:30.A BBC show tells the story of Muhammad. But it doesn't show his
:46:30. > :46:33.face because Muslims would find it insulting. Is that right and
:46:33. > :46:43.proper? Or is it another example of what people claim is a fear of
:46:43. > :46:44.
:46:44. > :46:47.Some depictions of Muhammad have caused widespread anger and violent
:46:47. > :46:52.protests amongst Muslims. Particularly satirical images like
:46:52. > :46:57.the Danish cartoons which included a picture of Muhammad with a bomb
:46:57. > :47:01.under his turban. The BBC has chosen to tell the biographical
:47:01. > :47:07.story of Muhammad without using his visual image, in line with the
:47:07. > :47:10.Islamic tradition. He has been on everything, and we don't represent
:47:10. > :47:15.God. In order to be clear with the relationship with God, we never
:47:15. > :47:20.have an image of any of the prophets. It's not just the last
:47:20. > :47:28.prophet, Muhammad, its Abraham, Moses, Jesus, they are not seen or
:47:28. > :47:32.drawn in anything like this in Islam. Neither the Koran or the
:47:32. > :47:37.Haditha that tells the story strictly forbid his depiction. But
:47:37. > :47:40.showing his face is seen by many Muslims as worshipping an idol. By
:47:40. > :47:45.obeying their teachings do we show respect to Muslims and their
:47:45. > :47:50.beliefs? Is it a sign of our tolerance as society? While we
:47:50. > :47:54.caving into a religion that remains a minority in the UK? After all,
:47:54. > :48:01.why are we open to ridicule and Christianity in a Christian country,
:48:01. > :48:05.yet shy away from offending Islam? Is our ability to insult a religion
:48:05. > :48:10.essential for healthy criticism and debate? Or does it just alienate
:48:10. > :48:15.believers and breed conflict between faiths? What do you think,
:48:15. > :48:21.are we scared of offending Muslims? You can make your point by text, e-
:48:21. > :48:27.mail or online. Anne Atkins joins us again. Is it self-censorship out
:48:27. > :48:30.of respect or fear? It makes us avoid even showing a picture of the
:48:30. > :48:34.person we are talking about. haven't seen this particular
:48:34. > :48:38.programme but the thing is that good manners seldom cost very much.
:48:38. > :48:46.It was interesting that you had a clip of life of Brian. That is one
:48:46. > :48:49.of my favourite films of all times. But I have to say, I find the last
:48:49. > :48:54.minute but two deeply offensive. I can't watch the last couple of
:48:54. > :49:01.minutes because it is ridiculing... The Crucifixion? The crucifixion
:49:01. > :49:04.scene. I think the rest of the film is wonderful. But for myself I was
:49:04. > :49:08.wishing that it hadn't had the last bit at the end. I don't think it
:49:08. > :49:12.would have lost anything. This particular instance, what do we
:49:12. > :49:15.lose by not showing a picture of Muhammad and a documentary?
:49:16. > :49:19.Absolutely nothing, as far as I can see. If that makes it more
:49:19. > :49:23.comfortable viewing, it doesn't matter if it's a tiny minority, it
:49:23. > :49:28.simply good manners. Where it becomes worrying is when we cannot
:49:28. > :49:32.express an opinion, where freedom of speech is curtailed. If you
:49:32. > :49:36.cannot challenge it. For example, I am married to a clergyman and when
:49:36. > :49:40.he became the parish vicar he was invited into the church to give
:49:40. > :49:44.assembly. The first assembly he did, he talked about Jesus's claim to be
:49:44. > :49:48.the way, the truth, the life. He was never invited back. The
:49:48. > :49:51.headmistress thought it might offend somebody in the school. At
:49:51. > :49:57.curtailing freedom of speech. Not showing a picture, frankly, it's
:49:57. > :50:00.only television. Ajmal, Anne Atkins chooses not to watch the things
:50:00. > :50:04.that she finds offensive. Couldn't Muslims did the same? The biggest
:50:04. > :50:09.problem is that Prophet Muhammad's face is not ever photographed.
:50:09. > :50:14.There is no photograph. Nobody has drawn it. There was no accurate
:50:14. > :50:20.description. How would you bring that image? Who would depict him?
:50:20. > :50:23.There is no photograph of plenty of people in religious beliefs. But
:50:23. > :50:30.people of course do sketches and impressions based on historical
:50:30. > :50:34.documentation. I agree with Anne, absolutely right, it is manners.
:50:34. > :50:38.But I agree that freedom of speech must be embedded in everything. If
:50:38. > :50:42.there is something you disagree with with Islam, you should have
:50:42. > :50:48.every right to challenge it. If we are disagree with anything anybody
:50:48. > :50:51.says, we must speak our mind. But here is a simple thing, there is
:50:51. > :50:55.being good to one another by saying that we will be sensitive to one
:50:55. > :51:01.thing and not show the face of Muhammad. I think good manners are
:51:01. > :51:05.important. The first point is that there are representations of
:51:05. > :51:09.Muhammad. Not contemporary, there are medieval Persian
:51:09. > :51:12.representations. We are talking about something that is in the
:51:12. > :51:19.grammar of the visual. The majority of people in this country are not
:51:19. > :51:21.Muslims. They are not accused of idolatry if they look on the
:51:21. > :51:25.representation of the Prophet Muhammad. So they can't be guilty
:51:25. > :51:29.of the thing you are most worried about. So this offence... And not
:51:29. > :51:31.talking about that. The offence we are talking about would have to be
:51:31. > :51:38.a deliberate idea of wanting to take offence at something somebody
:51:38. > :51:42.else has done. Who says it is an offence? That is a bigger question.
:51:42. > :51:47.There are lots of television programmes we have where the camera
:51:47. > :51:52.itself becomes the person and it tells a story. We are saying, how
:51:52. > :51:55.can we cleverly make a story, how can we portray Muhammad, that a
:51:55. > :51:59.bigger discussion. If you are worried about people not being able
:51:59. > :52:04.to say anything about Islam, that you can't express your views, that
:52:04. > :52:07.particular view is wrong. Another example, when I was an
:52:07. > :52:10.undergraduate we did a lot of student reviews. When you are
:52:10. > :52:14.students, you are experimenting with stuff. Funnily enough, in the
:52:14. > :52:18.same review, there was an item about communion, which I happened
:52:18. > :52:21.to find offensive. I didn't make a big deal about it because it didn't
:52:21. > :52:27.matter to me. There was a sketch about an air crash. I didn't think
:52:27. > :52:31.it was funny, that doesn't matter. One person, on one light -- night,
:52:31. > :52:35.left the theatre in tears because his brother had been killed in an
:52:35. > :52:40.air crash. It was not worth it for that amount of pain that a member
:52:40. > :52:43.of the audience had. I don't think we lose anything. Actually,
:52:43. > :52:51.although I am inclined to agree with you are a lot, by the examples
:52:51. > :52:57.you're giving I am distancing myself further. I think we would
:52:57. > :53:01.have lost a lot from not having had always look on the bright side of
:53:01. > :53:04.life, because of the others circumstances. We also lose
:53:04. > :53:07.something by saying that we are so worried about the sensibility that
:53:07. > :53:11.we will not show those representations of the Prophet
:53:11. > :53:15.Muhammad that do exist and which were this film about anybody else,
:53:15. > :53:17.would have been shown. Would you object to the medieval
:53:17. > :53:22.representations? There is an understanding that his image will
:53:22. > :53:27.not be shown. In Muslim society, if they wanted to show something, who
:53:27. > :53:33.are Muslims to say team non-Muslims that you can't? Just like freedom
:53:33. > :53:37.of expression, we can protest. But the decision would have been yours.
:53:37. > :53:40.I would like to ask a question that is more specific. Is there anything
:53:40. > :53:43.about Islam that you feel frightened of saying? If the
:53:43. > :53:48.society at large feels they cannot say things honestly because they
:53:48. > :53:52.are... I can give you an example. I've given you an example of my
:53:52. > :53:55.husband being censored because somebody somewhere, not a Muslim,
:53:55. > :54:00.not a member of a minority faith, thought it might be offensive to
:54:00. > :54:03.somebody. That's censorship was of I want to talk to Andrew Marsh on
:54:03. > :54:06.the webcam. He's from Christian concern for our nation. Do you
:54:06. > :54:15.think that Christians should be more offended by some of the things
:54:15. > :54:20.that are shown? Well, yes, on occasion. Christians are concerned
:54:20. > :54:23.about truth. Where there are portrayals of Christianity that are
:54:24. > :54:28.inaccurate in the national media, and be seen how important the
:54:28. > :54:32.national media are in the national debate, whether it is caricature,
:54:32. > :54:35.think it's important that Christians do speak up for the sake
:54:35. > :54:39.of the national debate and discourse. Jesus Christ is not
:54:39. > :54:44.afraid of robust debate. I think he is compiling, reliable, relevant in
:54:44. > :54:48.his own right. Historical testimony bears witness to that. It stands up
:54:48. > :54:52.to scrutiny. What has happened with regard to Christianity is that it
:54:52. > :54:57.has become too easy, rather than to engage in those realities in a
:54:57. > :55:00.responsible way, to resort to ridiculing, rubbishing and
:55:00. > :55:05.caricature. When we are relying on commentators like Christopher
:55:05. > :55:10.Hitchens, whose explanation of the Christian message is so far from
:55:10. > :55:13.the mark that it turns the Christian message upside-down, I
:55:13. > :55:17.think that we are doing a disservice to our public debate and
:55:17. > :55:23.discourse and to the public, who deserve a more reliable and
:55:23. > :55:26.possibly more respectful approach. Adam Dean is an Islamic scholar and
:55:27. > :55:32.also joins us. Some would say that there is a perception that Islam is
:55:32. > :55:36.less tolerant than Christianity, are they right? Firstly, I'm not an
:55:36. > :55:45.Islamic scholar. I thought I would say that first. Apologies.
:55:45. > :55:49.worries. Adam is worried and is thinking, people will call them up
:55:49. > :55:55.and say, how dare you say you are an Islamic scholar? How would you
:55:55. > :56:01.describe yourself? A Muslim thinker. His Islam less tolerant than
:56:01. > :56:07.Christianity? I don't think so. I think what is important is who is
:56:07. > :56:13.the Muslim and who is the Christian in question. We will find many
:56:13. > :56:17.examples of Muslims who behave in a tolerant manner when their faith is
:56:17. > :56:22.criticised. Regarding the discussion so far, I think we are
:56:22. > :56:26.missing the 11th in the room. That is that the programme is
:56:26. > :56:33.effectively objective in looking at the life of Muhammad. Because they
:56:33. > :56:37.have someone on the show called Robert Spencer. Robert Spencer
:56:37. > :56:42.calls Muhammad, peace be upon him, all sorts of names, making him out
:56:42. > :56:47.to be an opportunity EST -- opportunist and warlord. I think we
:56:47. > :56:51.are losing focus of the actual documentary. You can make your mind
:56:51. > :56:55.up, you can see the second programme in the Life of Muhammad
:56:55. > :56:59.series tomorrow night on BBC Two. We have the result of our text poll.
:56:59. > :57:08.We asked if Britain had been corrupted. Here is what you told us.
:57:08. > :57:15.86% of those who text did in said it has. 14% said no. I can hear a
:57:15. > :57:18.gasp from Ajmal. Are you shocked? Again, I think media has been
:57:18. > :57:22.successful in manufacturing consensus. Which part of the media?
:57:22. > :57:27.I'm going to say that in a moment. You say that you don't respect the
:57:27. > :57:32.vote? I think it is the way you set the question. The country may have
:57:32. > :57:37.been corrupted by certain incidence of our time today. But if this same
:57:37. > :57:40.question is asked at a time when such media and public war was not
:57:40. > :57:44.going on, the answer would be very different. Let's put it in a
:57:44. > :57:47.different way, it would take in the poll after the end of The
:57:48. > :57:54.Apprentice it probably would have gone the other way. It is who is
:57:55. > :58:01.watching on Sunday morning. Love them, though I do! I hope so.
:58:01. > :58:05.Thanks to everybody who has been taking part today. Please don't