Episode 16 Sunday Morning Live

She used to be the sugar sweet Disney star, but do Miley Cyrus's

provocative performances means she entered a world which another singer

has called dark and highly-styled pornography?

And is pop music becoming too sexualised?

Good morning, I'm Aquilaniage. Also on today's programme.. The funeral

of a former German SS officer is halted in Italy amid angry protests.

We ask, should old Nazis be left many peace?

And Prince George may have six of them at his christening, but are

godparents still relevant? Reverend Kate Bottley thinks so.

Some godparents struggle the keep the job up once they work out of the

church doors. Others buy presents and Chris and birthdays, but that

isn't what it is aboutment godparents aren't just for cyst.

Joining me are talent manager Professor Jonathan Shalit, than than

also steered Charlotte Church's early career. Broadcaster Nikki

Bedi, who has worked in loss ang lys, mum by and London, and Hardeep

Singh Kohli, a celebrity chef, broadcaster and stand-up comedian.

You can join us via Skype and give your views via Twitter or phone.

Music has used sex to shock and sell for decades, from Elvis, to Madonna,

to Rihanna and Lady Gaga today. But is twerking just a modern equivalent

of Elvis Presley's hip thrusts of the 1950s? At the centre of the

debate is 20-year-old Miley Cyrus, whose overtly sexual performances

have led to concern, because of the Army of young fans she built as a

wholesome Disney star. She was Hannah Montana, the squeak

clean Disney star with a legion of pre-teen fans.

# Finally I've been waiting for this moment

# For you to see the real me # But the real Miley Cyrus was a bit

of a surprise. The long hair was out and the raunchy video was in. And

when she added twerking, a provocative style of dancing to her

repertoire, many were shocked and concerned, including many other

female singers. Sinead O'Connor wrote her an open

letter saying, is it is really not cool and it is sending dangerous

signals to other young women. And Annie Lennox weighed in on

social media, I have to say I'm disturbed and dismaid by the recent

spate of overtly sexualised performance and videos.

Suzi Quatro has been a rock singer since the 1960s. She has misgivings

too. If you look at the videos, they are just short of porn, so once this

has all been done, all this soft porn, what's next? This is what

worries me. Cyrus is unapologetic about her image and says she is in

control. But Suzi is concerned about the influence the pop industry has

on its young audience. They target very young kids, all pop, I'm

talking pop now. 11, 10, 11, 12. Should she really be sexualised to

that extent where that looks normal to them? I think it's wrong. Music

is music industry. Sex is part of it but it shouldn't be all of it. I

firmly believe there should be boundaries. Is Miley Cyrus just

sticking her tongue out at convention? Or is her style and that

of others of her generation symptomatic of something more

disturbing? I have to say, we had a real challenge in finding shots we

felt were appropriate to use from Miley Cyrus's videos that we could

show at 10 o'clock this morning. Jonathan Shalit, has pop music

become too sexualised? Pop music as in youth culture has always been

sexualised, that is pop music and pop culture. When youth are

provocative, the older generations criticise it, that youth become the

older generation but the young behave the way they behaved when

they were young. It is a recurring theme. Has pop music become just too

sexualised? Text the word vote followed by yes or no to 81771. You

can only vote once. You can go online to vote for free.

Hardeep Singh Kohli, young people and their music, is it outrageous?

Yes and long may it continue to be outrageous, but it needs to be the

right sort of outrage. I do feel slightly it is not so much a case of

closing the stable door after the horse has bolted. It feels like the

horse has already been processed into lasagne at this stage. There is

in a wired context, the it is dangerous to remove one element of

the popular arts from society generally. I've been genuinely

worried about the objectivification of women generally and younger

women. We saw supermarkets selling padded Bic pinnies to

seven-year-olds. This isn't just about pop music. Which is leading

which is the question. Whereas pop music is there to challenge people's

econceptions and make them think in a different way, I wonder where this

thought process leads us. I took my daughter to see Miley Cyrus, in

preparation for the programme today, I thought I should watch the video.

Due mean Miley Cyrus or Hannah Montana. Is that the difference if

She has to grow up doesn't she? She is 20 years old. We want to own

these little prop princesses. She laboured under the strictures of

Disney. She wants to come out as an adult. Whether whether she really

needs to use pornographic I can onography is debatable but she has

to amp everything up to make her point. This issue about who she was,

a child star, with those fans who are probably only hitting teenage

years now. There not some kind of responsibility that goes with that?

Of course there is responsibility. I have to say, I think the majority of

the people in the entertainment industry are responsible. It is

wrong to look at the industry as a whole and say it is irresponsible. I

was driving through Belfast last night and I saw five young girls

outside the Mike club wearing the clothes they wanted a. It was very

cold and they were wearing virtually no clothes at all. It is what youth

is about. If you crush them when they are teenagers and the second

she is 18 and can do what she warranting she is going to rebel and

become the opposite. Didn't Charlotte Church say she thought

when she was a young woman, yes I'm a young woman and it is empowering,

and she was encouraged to do it and she regrets it now and she is barely

30. Is it their choice or is it misogynistic men? Charlotte Church

like any teenager if they are having a career, they've got their parents

present. As for the rights and wrongs of Charlotte Church... If

they say yes, it is liberating and it is great, but she's said in an

interview it did her damage and it is too vulgar for the audience she

wants know. Charlotte Church is a great talent but her music didn't go

on to sell. Please remember that culture through the centuries has

always been provocative and sexy. If you look at the art galleries of the

world and look at the nudes... The great respect the difference between

the great nudes of Picasso and the like, we are still looking at them

200 years on. I doubt anyone will be watching Miley Cyrus in 20 or 30

years other than a dis on society. I wonder is there any link between the

increased objectification of women in popular culture and the fact that

men seem to have their hands on the levers of power? That's not true.

That's what I'm asking. If you go around any record or television

company where this youth culture is predominantly taken to the public,

more women in marketing than there are men. But not in control. The

CEOs... How many women are directing the videos that so many people are

taking offence for? Rihanna's new video is directed by a man. I'm not

saying this is why they are being "sexualised" but the Robin Thicke

video. The Blurred Lines one. That was directed bay woman and she had

her tongue in cheek and we were supposed to see it as a joke. That's

what they said about lad's mag designs. That it was tongue in

cheek. Which tongue in which cheek? There's so much concern about their

overt sexualisation and young girls feel under pressure. Clearly there

are boundaries on everything and there are boundaries pushed beyond

what is acceptable. Do remember that you are speaking like an older

person who was a younger person once. Who, me? Yes. I support any

person's choice to be creatively artistic or artistically creative.

You show your body if you want to do that. It might not get you too far.

I think younger people are much more intelligent now and savvy than older

people realise. Hardeep, do you buy that? No. Either way, Miley Cyrus,

in my book, is wrong. If it is something unthinkingly done, she

thought, you know... He the look away from the screen. I found that

too much to deal with. If it is done with a preconception that it is

going to sell records, I feel that's wrong, because look at Jamelia, I've

never seen her in anything other than great music... A lot of the

critics are people like Annie Lennox and Sinead O'Connor, successful pop

stars who've done controversial things in their own past. Again it's

the nature of the beast. Sinead O'Connor tore up a picture of the

Pope and made a massive statement about women. Annie Lennox played on

the and rojny of music. Those are concepts we need to keep alive and

discussing. I'm not quite sure, the controversy of Miley Cyrus's video

will last as long as the celluloid takes to burn. Madonna used

sexuality. Do we think of her as a weak, manipulated woman? You may be

right about Miley Cyrus, she may not have the staying power of a Madonna.

Isn't the discomfort that a lot of us feel, particularly as the father

of a daughter who loved Hannah Montana, we've watched this girl

become a woman. It feels as though we are privy to a private awakening.

Tilly is a blogger known as, that pesky feminist. Is Miley Cyrus being

picked on unfairly, or young women who say we are expressing our

artistic independence? Absolutely. It is forgotten that she is 20 years

old and it is a tough time. I'm 20. We are not teenagers any more but we

still need to carve out our adult life. In the pop industry, that is

sexualised, that is known. Charlotte Church said exactly that in her John

Peel lecture. Tilly, I think we have a problem with the webcam. Can you

start that sentence again Tilly? What sentence? You were just saying

the John Peel lecture. Charlotte Church said in her John Peel lecture

exactly that, sexualisation is pretty much pressured on to young

women and women, and even though I am a proponent of the idea that

Miley could very well be choosing this for herself to be in control,

we have to accept if she is choosing it, it is from a limited range of

options. Is that enough though? When her fan base is very much the

pre--teen girls who watched her as Hannah Montana, is it not different?

Are you not concerned? Hannah Montana was a character. I

appreciate that. For her fans, does it make a difference that her fans

are little girls? But she's not making music for little girls any

more. Good point. Do the girls not see her as a role model? If they

don't, their parents should. OK. Parental responsibility. One

wonders, if she isn't making music for little girls, who is she making

music for? That is who was buying her music for years. I feel sorry

for her dad. I'm sure his achy breaky heart is feeling this. Miley

Cyrus is the one having the last laugh. Britney Spears, people looked

at her, a successful pop star, ex-Disney and they've seen a public

breakdown. It is very easy to create the reason for the public breakdown.

Lots of people have breakdowns. The difference is most people don't have

them this public. The music industry has no responsibility at all? People

will be wondering. Every industry has responsibility. The music

industry takes that responsibility very seriously indeed. Britney spear

has a history of problems with her own family. It is her family

business to sort those problems out. The industry didn't create those

problems. It is wrong to blame the industry. Without blaming them I do

think they need to take some responsibility. If you look at these

pop princesses, Lindsay Lohan, we describe her life as a train wreck,

so cruelly. In the age we live in, the when Sinead O'Connor tearing up

a picture of the Pope, we saw that on television and occasionally on

the internet. Now people are watching across all sorts of media

and also the increased take of pornography with young men is

creating a Frankenstein's generation. There's a blurring of

lines between what's pornography and not normal. Jazz Summers, a music

manager, who has managed George Michael and Scissor Sisters, joins

us. One would think there is not much left of the imagination from

these videos? Well, the gentleman made a very good point just there.

We are in an age where everything is instant, whether it be Twitter,

Instagram, YouTube. And pornography is huge. That puts pressure on

everybody making videos. It puts pressure on the artists and record

companies to try and keep up with pornography, which is ridiculous.

And with everything being instant, you can do something one-minute in

Los Angeles, and everyone knows about it around the world. Do you

think there is more artists should do to draw a line and say, we don't

need to go that far? Is it tacky, these videos? Absolutely. But as

Jonathan said, if you have got a 20-year-old artist like Miley Cyrus,

she makes her own decision. Also, people in the music industry are

accused of exploiting this. Of course, there are some, mainly in

America. Most meetings I have been in record companies around the

world, the Americans are the ones who sexualise things more than we

do. We are more classy in the UK. Let me read some comments before we

continue to stop John says, this has been going on since the 18 ATS Mac.

Every generation throws up stuff which can be deemed rude. There are

parts of the Bible which could not be on TV. Rob says Miley Cyrus is

being used by the industry to make money will stop it is cynical. Sarah

says Madonna was doing this years ago, it is just becoming more

normal. And Penny says this debate has gone on for decades. There is

nothing wrong with young women expressing their sexuality. And RSS

pop music has become lazy and sex is used as an easy book. Hardeep Singh

Kohli, you were making a distinction between pushing political and social

boundaries, and the suppose its soft porn. Looking at the gender bending

of Annie Lennox and Madonna, do we look back and that and think it was

provoking the right people for the right reasons, or are we just older

and more censorious now? It is difficult to legislate for how

people express themselves. But lazy is a great way of explaining it. If

you push boundaries to the extent that you have images like that of a

20-year-old woman, where does one go next? As a feminist, I believe

absolutely in the expression of women and I would champion that to

my dying breath. But the responsibility that comes with the

right of feminist expression... Miley Cyrus is not expressing

feminism. That is about a young woman wanting to sell records, and

it is not -- it is depressing. Jonathan, what are your thoughts?

Have you changed your position? I am hearing opinions that I dreaded of

sharing when I was young. We sound like dinosaurs. The point of youth

culture is to experiment. I have never said there should be no lines.

Most media are responsible and do not show things which should not be

shown. But youth culture should revoke. Whereas the legislation on

the internet? That is another debate, but you can legislate in

terms of the times that music videos can be shown, like MTV does. Things

can be an rotation after mid night. Think about artists like Laura

Mvula, who don't use their body to sell their music. For every Miley

Cyrus, there was a great artist with integrity. Jonathan, if you were

advising a young person like Miley Cyrus now, would you say, you have

to take your clothes off to get attention and she said, I don't want

to, could she still make it? Absolutely. Looking at Adele at the

opposite end of the spectrum, she is everything we on this dinosaur panel

would like. Don't call us dinosaurs! Let the young beyond. They aren't

stupid. They have enough awareness of what is going on around the

world. You can't sense of global videos any more. People will decide

if they like something. If the quality is not there, people will

not buy it. You can do an outrageous video, but if the song is not good,

they will fail. We will revisit this at the end of the programme. Our

vote is still open. Has rock music become too sexualised? You can only

vote once. You have 20 minutes before the vote closes. Still to

come: teaching children about christening and a vicar's view on

what role godparents have. And the holy spirit. And we all say

amen! The body of a hundred -year-old man

has been held under guard at a military base near Rome because he

has brought back time -- memories of a terrible time in Italian street.

He was a former an artsy war criminal. He hid for nearly 50 years

after the war and his hometown in Germany have refused to take the

body. His burial service this week ended in chaos.

This is the funeral, normally an occasion for respect and reverence.

Not this one in Rome. German Erich Priebke's hers was besieged by

demonstrators and eventually, the burial service had to be called

off. He died at the age of 100 after being sentenced to life imprisonment

in 1998 for his part in a notorious Nazi massacre in Italy during the

Second World War. Erich Priebke was one of the officers in charge of SS

troops who executed 335 Italian men and boys in retaliation for the

killing of 33 German soldiers by resistance fighters. In a video

message released after his death, Erich Priebke said he was just

following orders. TRANSLATION: Shultz told everyone the order was

coming from Hitler, and if anybody refused to do it, he would be one of

the victims and would have been shot. The Vatican ordered that no

Catholic Church should host Erich Priebke's funeral, but one splinter

group agreed to carry out the service, although the protests

prevented that. After the horrors of the Holocaust, the Simon Wiesenthal

Center, the Jewish organisation which still hunts Nazi war

criminals, said none of those responsible for atrocities including

Erich Priebke, deserved to rest in peace. And to underline that, they

have launched a poster campaign in Germany, appealing for information

about surviving Nazis, under the slogan "late, but not too late" .

Erich Priebke's lawyer says he will now be buried at a secret location

to avoid further protest. So is it right for older Nazis to still be

pursued? You can take part in the debate by webcam or make your point

by phone, text, in now or online. It discuss this are Geoffrey Wansell,

an author who has written about this, Charlie Wolf and the Reverend

Kate Bottley, an Anglican priest from the parish church of St Mary 's

in Nottinghamshire. Jeffrey, is it right to still be pursuing these

elderly Nazis? Absolutely not. Late and far too late should be the

slogan. It is impossible. No one denies the horrors of the Holocaust

or the dreadfulness of the Nazi regime. But to take away a

91-year-old, my mother is 91 and can barely walk. The thought that

someone will arrive at her front door. Let's say she was a chef at

Auschwitz, which she wasn't, if someone is going to arrive at her

door and send her to prison for three years, where she is going to

die, there has to be a line somewhere. The logical place to

start is to say, I'm terribly sorry, we must forgive. It is easy to look

at people in today's context when they are called and frail, but in

the context of 70 years ago, they were strong and evil. This was the

biggest evil committed on the planet in the modern era. 6 million Jews

and another million Roma, homosexuals and others were not just

marched to their death, their humanity was taken from them. They

were stripped naked. They had their hair shorn off and the gold taken

out of their teeth. They were marched into gas chambers or shocked

and dumped into mass graves. This is an evil that has to be recognised.

There is no statute of limitations, and there is an obligation to

humanity and to these dead people to do this. Kate, the Christian notion

of justice is interesting. The Scripture talks about God being a

god of love and forgiveness, but also talks about a God of justice

and fairness. This is such a difficult area. Whenever we have got

war criminals still with us from that era, it is a difficult path to

walk. We can see this in the situation in Italy. Geoffrey, if you

say it doesn't matter any more... I don't say it doesn't matter. Then

why not pursue them? It contradicts the concept of a civilised world. If

we are a civilisation, there must come a point at which it is no

longer relevant all right or proportional to victimise people. We

are victimising them. We are saying, no matter what you may think, I am

not saying for a moment that the atrocities were not dreadful. I am

simply saying that in a civilised world, we must turn the page. I have

talked to Jewish people recently about this, and it contravenes their

view of forgiveness. We are in danger of allowing ourselves to be

dragged into this. Forgiveness is a personal thing. A law professor

friend of mine once said that a trial is an official recollection of

history. This is a crime that has to be documented. To find a naughty war

criminal and put them on trial is not an act of vengeance, it is an

act of justice. That trial is a way of documenting what happened. And we

need to continue to document it. At that and a funeral, there were not

just protesters, there were Nazi sympathisers. Fascism is still alive

and unless we continue to address it, it could flourish again. Let me

bring in a contributor via webcam. He is a chief Nazi hunter from the

Simon Wiesenthal Center. Your organisation has been behind this

campaign to offer rewards for information. One of our guests feels

that this hunt is not about justice, it has crossed the line into

something inhumane? First of all, there is a line. That line is the

physical and mental health of the suspects. We do not want to drag

people on their deathbed into a court of law. That will never

happen. But if people are healthy enough, there is no reason to ignore

them, simply because they were born in 1920. The passage of time in no

way diminishes the guilt of the killers. Old age should not afford

protection to those who have committed such heinous crimes.

Efforts should be made to find the people who turned men, women and

children into victims. The sympathy thing expressed by Geoffrey is

misplaced. These are people who had no sympathy for their victims,

people who, in their prime of life, devoted their energies to the mass

murder of innocent civilians. So these trials are important for

history and important to fight against Holocaust denial. In my

experience, I have never encountered a single case of a Nazi who

expressed any remorse. I would say up to a point that's right and I'm

not suggesting that a Nazi would express regret. I'm saying that as a

society we should take a different view. It seems to me Dr Zuroff

you've been getting quite a lot of publicity in pursuit of what seems

to me like a vendetta. It is too late. No-one can say the Holocaust

has not been broughtally displayed, drawn over, raked over. When is the

time to stop? I think it has come now. Doesn't each one of the victims

of the Nazis deserve that if the people who murdered them are found,

and are healthy enough to be held accountable, that they will held

accountable? The Nazi were civilised people. They went home after

murdering mass numbers of Jews and listened to classical music. Is that

the civilisation you want? Kate, it is interesting that feelings are so

high and there is a strong neo-Nazi movement. Is there a greater concern

as these last few surviving war criminals and indeed Holocaust

survivor reaching the ends of their lives that there is an extra

impetus? There is a sense of him running out. I was listening to one

of the Holocaust survivors speaking and there is a sense that this will

soon become not first-hand history but second-hand history. There is

that sense of time moving on. There is a worry that graves of Nazi war

criminals will become shrines to the next generation of neo-Nazis. We do

have a responsibility I think to the next generation to send out a very

strong message. But at the same time we have a sense of responsibility to

talk about justice, but also mercy and also... And forgiveness?

Sometimes people think that the word forgiveness is an easy way out for

the criminal, but for me the way I understand forgiveness it is much

more about release for the victim. Talking about forgiveness doesn't

mean that people are getting away with a crime. It means that it

provides some sort of solace. I agree with you, but forgiveness is a

personal thing. The scales of justice as a society need to be

balanced. To address Geoffrey, it is not vindictive. These people aren't

being taken out in the street and having fruit thrown at them or being

murdered in public lynchings, they are being taken to court and if they

can stand trial, they do. The look at Erich Priebke. He had his days

living happily in Argentina #57d was -- and was brought back on trial.

Even then he didn't go to jail. He went to his lawyer's house and died

peacefully in his sleep at the age of 100. That's not how the people of

the Holocaust died. I urge people to go to Auschwitz or the national

Holocaust museum in Washington DC and see how these people died. I

want to bring in a few viewer contributions. An anonymous one says

we will only subject the Nazis to the justice that they denied to

others. That is not cruel but the highest expression of humanity.

Should people escape justice because you are old? No, justice is blind.

Nazis should be found and prosecuted. This one says my

grandparents didn't live to their 90s so why should these people live

though their 90s? It is wrong. This one says what Erich Priebke did is

wrong. Crispin Black is an intelligence consultant and is

former British officer. You were in Berlin when this poster campaign

began. How do they feel about this, the idea in Germany? One of the

interesting things about Berlin is it is set up really in part as a

memorial to the Holocaust and the disasters and nightmares and evil of

the Nazi regime. There are posters all around Berlin anyway of

Berliners, mainly Jewish Berliners but also Social Democrats and

political opponents of Hitler who disappeared in the 1930s and '40s.

I'm slightly on Geoffrey's side. I think that the Germans have made a

civilised attempt over 60 years to try and memorialise honestly the

horrors of that period. Also if you walk around Berlin you get a sense

of the terrible tragedy inflicted on the inhabitants of Berlin by the

Second World War. Incidentally never a Nazi city, I think the German

Government has made such a huge effort, there are neo-Nazis there,

but you don't see or hear of them. The state is clearly deep ashamed

and sorry about this and it is probably time to move on. Charlie?

But the problem is it is not about the Germans or Germany but these

individuals. I have no vendetta against the German people. It is the

Simon Wiesenthal Center and private Nazi hunters that go out and want to

bring them back to justice. As we know from the Danjnuc case, the

courts have a duty and obligation to try that person. If someone wants to

make a defence of, I was just following orders or I was a cook

under threat of my own life, let them have their day in court. I want

to bring Dr Efraim Zuroff back. You heard what was said, there that the

Germans are ashamed by it and enough has been done. What Mr Black did not

mention was the announcement that September 3rd this year by the

German prosecution, they are recommending the prosecution in

Germany of 30 people who served as guards at the Birkenau death camp,

where 1. 3 million human beings were murdered, among them 1. 1 million

Jews. So the state, Germany, which has done a lot - no question - in

terms of dealing with the Holocaust continues to understand that it has

an obligation to bring those perpetrators who again who can be

brought to prosecution, who are healthy enough to stand trial, to

have their day in court and send a very powerful message that the

crimes of the Holocaust are so terrible that even today many, many

years later it is still a worthy effort and a noble mission to try

and find them and hold them to account. Geoffrey, is it enough to

say everyone is very ashamed of it, isn't that the easy option, as Dr

Efraim Zuroff would say? I'm saying it is not an easy option but

sometimes to take a silised view as society is important. It is far too

easy to knee-jerk the reaction to say it was dreadful and we must do

something dreadful by way of revenge. This is not revenge but a

call to justice. It's the same sort of justice. Taking a 90-year-old, is

that justice? However long it takes to balance the scales of justice is

only fair. If it was my child has was killed, 90 years from now I

would want to bring the perpetrator to justice. I don't think Ian Brady

because he is an old man should be allowed out of prison. We have

crimes that need to have the scales of justice balanced. This is a prime

example. We have to leave it there but thank you for your honest and

frank discussion. It is time to look at another of the

stories making the news. We look at what's been in the papers. We want

to look first at this story in today's Sunday Times of a woman who

is a childcare worker who is bringing the case under the Human

Rights Act as a Christian to say she shouldn't have to work on a Sunday.

I used to work in a shopping centre as a teenager. It was clear I wanted

to take Sundays off so I could go to church. It is protected in retail.

What I would say, for me, what I understand the law about Sabbath to

be is the spirit of the law rather than the letter of the law. The

spirit of the law in that case for me of that commandment is make sure

you get proper time off with your family. That might look like a holy

day, or a Sunday, but it might also be a day in the week where you take

proper time away. So the spirit of the law is more important for me.

What do you think art this, Charlie? There was a case recently about

someone denied jobseeker's allowance in the Jewish community because he

said I wasn't available to work on a Saturday but was available on all

the other days. That was unfair. We should try to respect the Sabbath

where possible. As a Jew I know if I'm called to work upon a Saturday

it is because of what I do as a living and I accept that. We have to

balance the needs of people with the needs of business. Some small

employers, it may not be possible but we should try to work together.

I'm I wonder if I'm allowed to go on to the other story, that Archbishop

of Canterbury is critical of energy companies putting up their prices

and says there's a moral obligation to think of the impact. A bit rich

from a march who used to work for an oil company. The Church of England

has shares in Centrica and others. He is trying to make his mark as

Archbishop of Canterbury. Fair-dos to that. I think it is pretty

hypocritical. He is riding a wave. We all now know that after bankers

it is going to be energy executives that will get a Tuesdaying in the

Commons. 2 5 billion last year He is your boss. He is not my boss, but my

manager. I'm a big Justin fan. I think as the Church of England we

have a role and responsibility in commenting on big matters like this.

Jesus never shied from challenging the powers of authority. I think we

have a responsibility to do the same. We'll have the leave it there

but thank you all very much indeed. You've been voting at home on our

poll question on whether pop music has become too sexualised in the

light of Miley Cyrus and some of the videos and the twerking. The vote is

closing now, so do not text, as your vote will not count and you may bed.

We'll bring the vote at the end of the programme.

First, the Prince George, the son of the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge,

will be christened next when at St James's Palace in London. The couple

may choose six godparents and they may include close personal friends

rather than royal relatives. But is the role of a godparent still an

important religious duty or a quaint old tradition that no longer holds

any relevance? Reverend Kate Bottley has no doubts about the issue. This

is her Sunday Stance. At the churches I look after we

introduced children to the meaning of baptism by doing a mock-up of the

ceremony using dolls and teddies. It can ba splashy business but it is

magical time. Christening is a fundamental part of being a

Christian and being asked to be a godmother or godfather is a sacred

duty. It is easy to make a promise on the day, but keeping that promise

and ensuring you're there for the child is a much bigger challenge.

I'm really blessed. I'm the vicar of three wonderful villages where I

christen around 30 children a year. I see some very active godparents. I

know the value it can bring, but it is not always the case. Some good

parents struggle to keep the job up once they walk out of the church

doors. Others simply send presents at Chris and birthdays. Godparents

aren't just for Christmas. Godparenting is about that God

conversation, about praying for the godchild, bringing them to a place

like this into the family of the Church and teaching them about

Jesus. It is also about supporting them on the right path in life and

helping them to make good, moral choices. These are not easy things

to do, but they remain hugely relevant. So if you are choosing a

good parent or you've been asked to be one, think about it. You are

about to take a very important step. One that could change your life. And

we all say, amen. The views of the Reverend Kate

Bottley. We are joined by this discussion by Kate and Hardeep Singh

Kohli and Nikki Bedi. I gather you are a godparent, what are they for?

Many times over. What are they for? In four cases parents chose me and

the fifth case the child chose me. She wasn't baptised or christened

and she missed out on what everybody else seemed to be having. I think a

godparent is there to show a special interest in that child. I don't give

spiritual guide arrange even though I have a background that's

predominantly Hindu, Muslim and Buddhist. My godmother is Jehovah's

Witness. I do my duty to her by attending some meetings, even though

I don't believe in a word of it. But you haven't been able to be a

godparent in some cases? My sister is a Catholic, has seven children.

They say, aunty Nikki, will you be going to Mass? And I say aunty Nikki

will be washing her since away in a bath with bubbles. I am subversive

and naughty but I have a moral compass. Hardeep, do people have

time to be a proper godparent these days? If one looks historically at

the role of godparents they were very much within a community, around

the church, and you were seeing that godparents. I grew up in Glasgow and

we were parented by society, so theicalliy on the bus home would

parent you, the parky would parent you. By lots of people. As we lead

more dislocated lives, more shift work, people working away, I think

the role of godparenting has changed. I'm lucky I'm a godparent

three times over, but that's only because I imported olive oil to New

York. I made a reference to the Godfather film which seemed to be

lost on almost everyone, including me! I don't hear the word God in

gods parent. Not many people do it for religious reasons. Should they

turn it down if they are not Christian? I don't think so. I have

christening conversations in the pub with my godparents and parents who

are getting their children christened. I say to them that it is

about being on that journey. We are all on a journey of faith, even

those of us who are professional Christians, if you like. We are all

trying to figure out a spiritual path. I am not. That is the issue. A

lot of people are not on the path, that do not buy into any faith. They

struggle to find a modern role. To show kindness is an example. If you

have another faith, can you be a God parent? Not officially. You need to

be christened. But we also have people we call sponsors. You were

saying it takes a village to raise a child, and where I work, it is a

village. I see godparents out in the shops. But in a spread out society,

that becomes more difficult. It has become an increasingly godless

society, and it becomes difficult. You are not held to account by the

church so much. With respect, even members of the Church are not help

to account by the church properly, so lay members of the Church can't

expect any sort of traction by the church. But I do think a gap is

being filled in formally. For brown folk that grew up, we have an

informal network. But in a godless society, what is the role of

godparents? Let me bring in someone from the British Humanist

Association. What is your view on godparents? Do they have a role? I

agree that if a godparents shares the same belief system as the

family, it is a recognisable role. But a lot of godparents who are

elected don't have any religion, and therefore find themselves

hamstrung. They don't know what to do. They have the best interests of

the child at heart, but they are not sure how to operate with the child.

I am human list and don't believe in God. Therefore, a godparent is

irrelevant to me. But I have heard that humanists can be guide parents,

here and that! That is a fantastic alternative term. Thank you for

that. Isabel, in reality, our humanists

that. Isabel, in reality, our role they could fill as a substitute

guide? Yes, and not a substitute. It is a very real role. Sorry, I am

afraid is a very real role. Sorry, I am

the audio on your Skype, so forgive us. Hardeep, let me move it on to

what you were saying about how a lot of cultural networks in Asian

families don't do godparents, but they have huge support networks. I

used a thing, I don't have godparents, so there must be

something wrong with me. But you can have godparents and not miss Sarah

Lee have a relationship with them. Is there an issue about it not being

as important a role in reality as it is supposed to be? B families can

break on and nobody knows that more than eight hundred the Glaswegian.

But there is something about having an extended family and always having

someone to turn to for advice. I regard my relationship with my

younger brother's children as far more profound than God parenting. I

feel like they are my children. As they get older, they will spend more

time with me. There was that notion within bigger families in a

different age when people had more children that there was always

someone to turn to. But is there a sense that it has become a

middle-class status symbol thing? There is an honour about being asked

to be a godparent. Lots of families see it as a way of ringing in

friends for the rest of that child's lives. So where friendships

might break down over the years, if you are tied in as a godparent, you

are a friend for life. Lots of gap parents I talked to say, I am not

sure what I believe, but I like to think I set a good moral example. I

asked my godson's mother, why did you choose me as a godmother? He is

now 18. I'd handled him on my knee as a baby, and now he is at Oxford.

Fantastic. And she said, because I knew you would always be there. But

having said that, isn't the rule that if anything happens to the

parents, you take them on? I could never have done that. Let me bring

in another contributor, the author of Pope Francis - and tying the

knot. What do you make of all the non-Christians who are opting for

God parenting and whether they are taking on role as they should? B

well, I think that that shows that imitation is the sincerest form of

flattery. It obviously works. Godparents were first introduced in

the early church. The godparents would promise to look after the

child's mind, body and spirit. They would help the parents. They were

introduced because they were converts in Roman times who did not

have parents who were Christians, so people would stand beside them will

stop it has become a system which works in lots of ways. If you

minister want to do that, that is fine. When I was researching the

book on the Pope, I talked to one of his friends who had asked him to be

a godparent, but the boy was also christened quite a late and they

wanted another friend to be godparent who was Jewish. And the

parish priest said, you can't have a Jewish person as a godparent. And

the Pope, who was not the Pope then, said yes, you can. As long as

I am that look after the Catholic side, he can look after the other

side. So we have a Pope who thinks it is OK for godparents to not

necessarily be of the same faith. It shows the breadth of what is needed.

The important thing about Prince William and Kate is that they are

not going for the old Royal formula of choosing heads of royalty from

around Europe. They are getting their friends to do it. It is the

friends who understand more. Am I the only one looking forward to

seeing these godparents featured on the cover of magazines? By the way,

I had an audience with Pope John Paul II. So for my Catholic sister,

I have delivered a christening gift seven times over. You are a

one-woman panel discussion on religion and ethics, Nikki! Thank

you very much. Marie says the role of godparent is good, but it should

be divorced from religion. Lizzie says godparenting has no legal

status, so it means nothing. Now, you have been voting in our text

vote. Has pop music become to six large? We could have had this

discussion 50 years ago, but here is what you told us today. 90% of you

said yes and 10% said no. Kate, as the vicar on the panel. The moral

compass. You heard the discussion about Miley Cyrus. Her critics

include women who made it themselves as pop singers at times when people

talked about too much sex in music. Youth culture is always going to

tread a fine line between appropriate and inappropriate. Its

role is to push boundaries. If it was my daughter, would I be happy?

Probably not. But it is good to have the debate. As you say, it is a

conversation that has been going for generations. Part of the role of

people in the industry is to advise the younger ones. I hope she is

getting good advice and doing it because she wants to. There are

limits. Were discussing where this goes from here. It can't go further

unless somebody has their legs open and showing bits of their body that

they shouldn't. In that case, there are laws, decency laws to prevent

that. Everything is going to swing around again. This is a watershed

moment. People on Twitter were criticising me for saying Madonna

was OK for doing it and Miley Cyrus wasn't. The difference is the

watershed in terms of the dissemination of media is very

different now from when Madonna was doing it. Also, we didn't grow up

watching Madonna as a child. Imagine Shirley Temple doing what Miley

Cyrus has done. That has put weird images in everyone's head. That is

how a generation of feeling. Madonna and Debbie Harry were also over 30

when they hit the big time. Does that not make a difference? Debbie

Harry was accused of being too sexy. Isn't that interesting? The sexiest

people from history are people who have put more clothes on and removed

them. For me, it is to binary to think, take some clothes off...

Gosh, I have seen it all with more clothes on in the shower than Miley

Cyrus in that video. It is also about young girls watching and young

pop stars. It is about choice for me. I have a 12-year-old daughter. I

hope I am doing a good enough job as a parent, and her godmothers are

doing a good enough job that she knows this is about choice and

empowerment. If Miley Cyrus is being forced into this, that is one

conversation. But boys are watching that and thinking that is what girls

should do, and that is equally worrying. Thank you to everyone who

has taken part in our discussions. Thank you to all my guests. Don't

text or call the phone lines any more. They are now closed, but you

can continue the conversation online. The links are on our

website. Before we say goodbye, we may need to acknowledge that one of

the Reverend Kate Buckley's hidden talents is as a dance. And when a

couple asked for a different sort of wedding, Kate obliged in style. You

may kiss your bride. Kate has raised the expectations for

all our religious guest from now on! Join us again next -- again.

Goodbye.