Episode 1

Download Subtitles

Transcript

:00:32. > :00:36.Good morning. Welcome to a brand- new series of Big Questions. In a

:00:36. > :00:39.New Year's Day message this week the Pope criticised capitalism for

:00:39. > :00:43.causing hotbeds of tension, and conflict, he said the system

:00:43. > :00:48.creates growing instances of inequality, between rich and poor.

:00:48. > :00:50.So our first Big Question is the Pope right to condemn capitalism?

:00:50. > :00:55.This legal economist says capitalism hasn't gone far enough

:00:55. > :01:00.and the money has to be where the market is most efficient, this

:01:00. > :01:04.Christian activist says responsible capitalism is as elusive and

:01:04. > :01:09.friendly famine. There has been a global conference on human

:01:09. > :01:14.fertility this week in Liverpool. One is to ewe stem cells to create

:01:14. > :01:21.artificial sperm. Now, it could open the door to two women being a

:01:21. > :01:25.baby's biological parents. Our next Big Question, should children be

:01:25. > :01:30.created without fathers? This geneticist says it is morally

:01:30. > :01:40.better for two less been parents to have a child related to both of

:01:40. > :01:42.

:01:42. > :01:47.them. And on this, the feast day of St Basil, famous for defining the

:01:47. > :01:50.Holy Trinity, our last big question, can the Holy Spirit move you? This

:01:50. > :01:56.Christian says he heeled his brother through the fire of the

:01:56. > :02:03.Holy Spirit. This psychologist says any believer can be moved but it is

:02:03. > :02:06.through the charisma of the preacher or healer. O Good morning.

:02:07. > :02:11.It is ironic in the week Pope Benedict decided to criticise

:02:11. > :02:17.capitalism for making us too selfish, the Bank of Italy shut

:02:17. > :02:21.down the Vatican bank because it didn't comply with money-laundering

:02:21. > :02:25.legislation. Does the capitalist system enable the best to flourish

:02:25. > :02:30.and create enough wealth to raise living standards for all? Is it a

:02:30. > :02:33.system of winner take all, the devil take the hindmost? Is the

:02:33. > :02:39.Pope right to condemn capitalism? Abhijit Pandya, is he right? No, he

:02:39. > :02:44.is not. He is misguided. As Adam Smith pointed out, you know, over

:02:44. > :02:50.200 years ago, it is self-interest and greed that makes us prosperous

:02:50. > :02:54.and well thi. It is not just the case of some people are poor and

:02:54. > :03:01.others are wealthy. The wealthy have got there through the

:03:01. > :03:08.Endeavour of self-interest. But the growing inequality is inescapable.

:03:08. > :03:13.That is, it is unarguerbl I would argue it is almost irrelevant.

:03:13. > :03:18.People are becoming wealthy. It is never, no-one lives in a Utopia,

:03:18. > :03:21.that is a fantasy, we, you have to face reality. If capitalism or

:03:21. > :03:25.greed has been the biggest force for world peace, that we know. It

:03:25. > :03:32.is not the interest of corporations that Governments have defence

:03:32. > :03:36.spending, and such lie, like, if people think, for example, that the

:03:37. > :03:42.European Union is about peace it is because of trade and investment.

:03:42. > :03:47.People don't realise capitalism won the Cold War. But the wealth of the

:03:47. > :03:53.top 10% is 100% greater than, 100 times greater than the wealth of

:03:53. > :03:56.the poorest 10%. Is that sustainable, or acceptable?

:03:56. > :04:01.alternative is everyone is poor. It is over time more people will

:04:01. > :04:06.embrace wealth as they have done. There is no fix it all quick fix of

:04:06. > :04:11.suddenly everyone will become rich. This is a delusion. The alternative

:04:11. > :04:14.is not everyone will remain poor. There are other economic Molds and

:04:14. > :04:20.there are co-operatives in the UK. You can have viable, sensible

:04:20. > :04:25.economic models that work. They have outperformed those based or

:04:26. > :04:31.more capitalist models. You say more, is there anence sense of

:04:31. > :04:38.capitalism to them? No comibg model is pure, you have economicsed --

:04:38. > :04:42.mixed economies. We live in the real world where you have different

:04:42. > :04:47.Molds. Some o less profit driven and they tend to be more beneficial

:04:47. > :04:52.for their worker, workers have a stake in them. They can ride out

:04:52. > :04:57.the boom and bust, but capitalism has brought us to the bring of

:04:57. > :05:07.financial crisis, brought us to a crisis, it has been the cause of

:05:07. > :05:10.

:05:10. > :05:13.many wars, people don't think Iraq was not an economic interest.

:05:13. > :05:18.think Angela Merkel the Chancellor really puts this well, when she

:05:18. > :05:24.says that actually, it is the competitive economy that guarantees

:05:24. > :05:30.freedom, and this is a woman that grew up in east Germany and freedom

:05:30. > :05:37.defines us, as human, that is part of humanity. I think actually,

:05:37. > :05:42.capitalism allows for self actual Asian, for each of us, we are born

:05:42. > :05:47.with different talents. Capitalism allows us to push ourselves to meet

:05:47. > :05:53.the best we can be. Is there room for and is there a need for a kind

:05:53. > :05:57.of capitalism with a more compassionate face. It was a cheque

:05:57. > :06:06.leader who tried to create Communism with a human face, that

:06:07. > :06:10.got crushed by Soviet tank, do you think capitalism is possible?

:06:10. > :06:16.about trying to get as much money for yourself and screwing other

:06:16. > :06:20.people, that is what it is about. disagree. You can have free markets,

:06:20. > :06:25.we have had without having capitalism. You don't have to...

:06:25. > :06:28.People want to make money for their families. That capitalism is a

:06:28. > :06:38.specific intervention to accumulate wement wealth for yourself, that is

:06:38. > :06:39.

:06:39. > :06:44.why we have the inequalities we have. A man in the Soviet Union was

:06:44. > :06:48.allowed to keep the profits from his coffee shop. Is that not

:06:48. > :06:51.capitalism? .If You have a small trader who is not trying to

:06:51. > :06:55.accumulate mass wealth, you spend a pound in your community, that money

:06:55. > :07:00.stays in the local economy. You spend it in a chain store, the

:07:00. > :07:02.money leaves the local community and doesn't benefit it. So when you

:07:02. > :07:07.have small trade and exchange you have a benefit for other people,

:07:07. > :07:12.when you have multi-nationals you are accumulating wealth for

:07:12. > :07:19.shareholders and the richest in society. As much they are as much

:07:19. > :07:29.part of society as anybody else. This idea it is about screwing

:07:29. > :07:30.

:07:31. > :07:40.people over is nonsense. It is capitalism. The creation of goods

:07:41. > :07:45.

:07:46. > :07:51.and services... I would start off reading Adam Smith old chap. It is

:07:51. > :07:56.a dead thing, the finance shall crisis was caused by bad regulation,

:07:56. > :08:01.if capitalism had been allowed to flourish, the banks and other

:08:01. > :08:05.markets would... So less regulation would have allowed a financial

:08:05. > :08:12.crisis. Crisis is a natural part of ups and downs of the economy. There

:08:12. > :08:16.is no such thing as a perfect economic model. The fairness is

:08:16. > :08:20.difficult, the redistribution is difficult, when you video the

:08:20. > :08:25.globalised situation, where by many big companies can pick and choose

:08:25. > :08:28.where they pay their tax. Indeed. The central question is about

:08:28. > :08:34.regulation, the Pope's concern is unregulated capitalism. We now live

:08:34. > :08:36.in a context where corporations are more powerful than the regulator

:08:36. > :08:42.than the Governments themselves, we have to get back into a situation

:08:42. > :08:46.where Governments can control something which is globally...

:08:46. > :08:49.Governments are infernt infantry at controlling. Capitalism the

:08:49. > :08:55.transparency it provides, particularly in today's age, where

:08:55. > :08:58.we have technology, we have twitter, the Pope uses Twitter, it is about

:08:58. > :09:03.you know, Starbucks is a good example. The community was outraged.

:09:03. > :09:10.Why did they change? Not because of a regulator, because of consumers,

:09:10. > :09:15.that is capitalism working. I think the Pope was right to set the flash

:09:15. > :09:21.light on this issue. Because the language that we are using, that it

:09:21. > :09:27.is irrelevant what happens to other people, this is not the language of

:09:27. > :09:31.a world that is caring for each other, and what I would bring, a

:09:31. > :09:35.different question to the table. When we look at a system, what are

:09:35. > :09:40.the morals that we are trying to bring? What are the questions? The

:09:40. > :09:45.questions in economics should be, is this helping the social

:09:45. > :09:49.cohesion? Is this helping the next generationst is this helping global

:09:49. > :09:54.stability? Not that the measurement of good is how much money do I earn,

:09:54. > :10:00.do I benefit? I disagree with that that capitalism is about profit.

:10:00. > :10:04.The profit is a result of providing something of value. What is it

:10:04. > :10:09.about if not profit? It is a result. Then you are saying the good is

:10:09. > :10:14.just the making the money? No, the good is whatever you are providing;

:10:14. > :10:22.if you are baking bred for the community, if you are making goods

:10:22. > :10:31.locally... That is production. Christopher Hitchens, the late

:10:31. > :10:41.Christopher Hitchens, said, he said he took issue with the tenth

:10:41. > :10:46.commandment, you shall not covet your neighbour's ass. He said it

:10:46. > :10:50.deh emulates the desire to aspire, and you know, create wealth. Do you

:10:50. > :10:54.agree with that? It is not necessarily about creating wealth.

:10:54. > :10:59.The wealth comes from focusing on a goal and providing something of

:10:59. > :11:04.value. Again... Wanting a better ass than your neighbour. Let me say

:11:05. > :11:09.donkey instead. It is part of human nature. With socialism as Margaret

:11:09. > :11:12.Thatcher says, you run out of somebody else's money. You look at

:11:12. > :11:17.the spirit level, all the countries which have the biggest division

:11:17. > :11:19.between the rich and the poor have the biggest social problems..

:11:19. > :11:22.does the money come from in the first place. Somebody is creating

:11:22. > :11:26.that wealth. We can't say we are poor because they are wealthy they

:11:26. > :11:32.are wealthy because they are creating the wealth. I would say

:11:32. > :11:37.that wealth comes from God. It is our duty to look after it carefully.

:11:37. > :11:46.It comes from God because as individuals we are being the best

:11:46. > :11:51.decan be. For yourself. So it is inherently sell -- selfish. Without

:11:51. > :12:01.proper language and regulation, this system is selfish. What would

:12:01. > :12:02.

:12:02. > :12:06.you like to say? You are Maelo and a blogger. I think unregulated

:12:06. > :12:10.capitalism is a disastrous role model for children. It is a false

:12:10. > :12:14.state. Children everywhere think that money grows on trees because

:12:14. > :12:17.of a false image that capitalism presents. I mean, there is

:12:17. > :12:25.excessive spending everywhere. What kind of image THAT is that

:12:25. > :12:30.presenting to children? That stumped you. Quite the opposite.

:12:30. > :12:37.Regulation, the whole idea of overregulating is based on the idea

:12:37. > :12:43.money grows on trees. You can control the events from a

:12:43. > :12:48.bureaucratic machinery, which doesn't work. This is proven to be

:12:48. > :12:51.unworkable. Do you want to come back? We are bombarded and our

:12:51. > :12:57.children are bombarded with images saying if you consume more, if you

:12:57. > :13:02.possess this, you are going to... So as a parent you say that is

:13:02. > :13:05.rubbish. I know. We try and consume and make ourself happy through

:13:05. > :13:09.retail therapy. We are poorer in term house of we feel in ourself,

:13:09. > :13:15.our self worth, because we are trying to consume our way to being

:13:15. > :13:19.better. Money does not grow on trees, mine, people bg even the

:13:19. > :13:23.middle class are relying on food banks because they are hungry, I

:13:23. > :13:28.have seen it round the community. How can we survive when the rich

:13:28. > :13:31.know they are going to inherent, the middle class have a sense of

:13:31. > :13:41.entitlement and the work class don't think anyone cares because of

:13:41. > :13:44.

:13:44. > :13:46.Who said the Lib Dems' electoral prospects were bleak? All the main

:13:47. > :13:51.political parties support capitalism but the debate is about

:13:51. > :13:55.whether there should be, within that system, redistribution and a

:13:56. > :13:58.decent welfare state. How welcome it is that the Pope is talking

:13:58. > :14:07.about something other than homosexuality. That should be

:14:07. > :14:13.welcomed. Can we discuss how capitalism allows for freedom? If

:14:13. > :14:17.you are in the bottom 10%, does it? No access to medical care,

:14:17. > :14:22.education. What freedom is that? Surely the problem is about having

:14:22. > :14:27.a compromise in terms of regulation. Over-regulation limit growth but to

:14:27. > :14:30.little regulation causes excessive inequality. Surely we need a

:14:31. > :14:36.rational regulation, such as you were talking about advertising. Why

:14:36. > :14:39.not make advertising costs so you cannot take away from the costs as

:14:39. > :14:43.a business. Make it that you can only pay for advertising using

:14:43. > :14:49.profit. That would limit the amount spent on marketing and allow

:14:49. > :14:54.capitalism to flourish. Good morning. Good morning. Capitalism

:14:54. > :14:58.is not consistent with itself. It does not believe in the free-market

:14:58. > :15:02.principles it espouses. We have reached the stage where we can bail

:15:02. > :15:06.out banks but we cannot be allowed individuals that are struggling. If

:15:06. > :15:13.he believed in the free market, you would not bail out banks. If it is

:15:13. > :15:18.a dog-eat-dog world, you would not be allowed anything. -- bail-out

:15:18. > :15:21.anything. I agree. The Government was wrong to bail out the banks.

:15:21. > :15:28.but then the whole thing would have imploded. Other banks would have

:15:28. > :15:33.bought up the assets. The banking crisis is an excellent example of

:15:33. > :15:38.how also, within a capitalist society, there are rights and

:15:38. > :15:42.responsibilities on all the players, not just the banks. Consumers had a

:15:42. > :15:45.responsibility to only borrow what they could afford to pay back.

:15:45. > :15:51.Investors had a responsibility for investing in things that they

:15:51. > :15:57.understood. This bubble that we lived in, it was not the banks.

:15:57. > :16:01.We're all in it together? Exactly. I do not think that is right.

:16:01. > :16:04.think people are not empowered. You're assuming people have power

:16:05. > :16:10.and knowledge and what defines distress is that people do not have

:16:10. > :16:14.the choice. Is this not a bit rich coming from the Pope? Given the

:16:14. > :16:18.enormous wealth that he presides over, and the trouble the Vatican

:16:18. > :16:24.bank has got into over money laundering, and also previous links

:16:24. > :16:29.to the Mafia, and the biggest cause of world... Sorry, I am on a roll!

:16:29. > :16:33.The biggest cause of world poverty. The lack of contraception and the

:16:33. > :16:37.developing world, and then he says this? I can see how that can be

:16:37. > :16:45.argued and I have no mandate to defend the Pope. I think he has the

:16:45. > :16:48.right to say that human beings are more than commodities. That is the

:16:48. > :16:52.thing I'm hearing from my right. It seems to be a mean view of what

:16:52. > :16:58.human beings are, but the most important thing about them is their

:16:58. > :17:08.ability to generate wealth. Human thriving consists of more than

:17:08. > :17:13.maximising profit. There is an assumption that capitalism relies

:17:13. > :17:18.on profit incentive. But there are other systems that focus on

:17:18. > :17:23.distribution of wealth, like the Islamic Mall -- the Islamic model.

:17:23. > :17:28.It as a historical proven record. If you look at any... Acquiring

:17:28. > :17:34.wealth is not seen as evil? Wealth is a source of good if you use it

:17:34. > :17:40.for good. The point of an economic system is the distribution of

:17:40. > :17:42.wealth. Technology and science helps us to build resources and

:17:42. > :17:47.develop resources but the economic system is not about production. It

:17:47. > :17:53.should be about distribution and this is the Islamic economic model.

:17:53. > :17:56.It tries to distribute wealth and it has many features to do so.

:17:56. > :18:01.Unless you have an incentive to produce the wealth, you have

:18:01. > :18:04.nothing to distribute. There we will leave it, our first debate of

:18:04. > :18:08.2013. Give yourselves a round of applause.

:18:08. > :18:10.I'm sure many of you will have something to say about that so you

:18:10. > :18:17.can log on to bbc.co.uk/thebigquestions and join

:18:18. > :18:22.in online. We are also debating live, should children be created

:18:22. > :18:27.without fathers, and can the Holy Spirit move you? Tell us what do

:18:27. > :18:37.you think about those topics. You're very welcome for future

:18:37. > :18:37.

:18:37. > :18:41.Christians have just celebrated the virgin birth of Jesus Christ, one

:18:41. > :18:46.of God's greatest miracles. But in just five or 10 years, having a

:18:46. > :18:50.baby without a biological father may well be possible. Four in a

:18:50. > :18:53.woman who wants it, thanks to genetic engineering and some stem

:18:53. > :19:03.cells. This is the question. Should children be created without

:19:03. > :19:04.

:19:04. > :19:08.fathers? You have written this fantastic book, like a virgin, how

:19:08. > :19:11.science is redesigning the rules of sex. Would this be a good thing?

:19:11. > :19:18.Children have long been created without fathers. It is something

:19:18. > :19:23.that is already happening. There is a new breed of women, solo mothers,

:19:23. > :19:26.as opposed to single mothers, because these are women who are

:19:26. > :19:33.around the time of menopause, in good financial circumstances to do

:19:33. > :19:36.not have partners but have lots of money. They're getting sperm donors

:19:36. > :19:39.and egg donors if they have run out of their own and having a

:19:39. > :19:43.technological adoption. They're giving birth to a child without a

:19:43. > :19:46.father. It is important to differentiate. Assumptions are made

:19:46. > :19:52.about the negative consequences on the children who are created in

:19:52. > :19:57.this way. But those negative assumptions are extrapolated from

:19:57. > :20:05.looking at single parents who were in a marriage, were there has been

:20:05. > :20:10.the trauma of divorce and the loss of income. Every child has a father.

:20:10. > :20:13.There is a sense of -- a Centre for Family Research in Cambridge doing

:20:13. > :20:20.empirical research on all kinds of families and looking at how

:20:20. > :20:24.children actually suffer. This idea that every child has a father,

:20:24. > :20:31.creating eight child deliberately without a father, with two mothers,

:20:31. > :20:36.would that be beneficial? Is that a good thing for society? Much of

:20:36. > :20:39.this technology, you are talking about generating eggs from stem

:20:39. > :20:43.cells, that has been developed to help the infertile. These are women

:20:43. > :20:47.who have menopause very early, young men and women who have had

:20:47. > :20:50.cancer and chemotherapy and have had their eggs destroyed. It is not

:20:50. > :20:55.to say that once the technologies are available, other people cannot

:20:55. > :21:01.use them, like lesbian and gay couples. Once it is out there, that

:21:01. > :21:04.will be a possibility. If a lesbian couple, if you are permitting gay

:21:04. > :21:11.marriage in society, why should they not have their own genetic

:21:11. > :21:14.children? I have to ask my Christian colleagues, the Bible

:21:14. > :21:19.speaks against homosexuality, and probably one of the reasons is

:21:19. > :21:23.because there is an instruction to go forth and be fruitful. And two

:21:23. > :21:33.men cannot do that and two women cannot do that, yet, but what if

:21:33. > :21:34.

:21:34. > :21:37.they could? Natalie, you run the Gay Family web

:21:37. > :21:40.Fertility Centre. It would be wonderful for you, this? It would.

:21:40. > :21:47.Since we have been running the business, five years, in that time

:21:47. > :21:52.we have had 700 couples who have had children. 85% of them would

:21:52. > :21:55.prefer the donor not to be involved at any point. For this to happen,

:21:55. > :22:00.the children, they would not have that question of how they had been

:22:00. > :22:06.created. That biological connection is very important to you and very

:22:06. > :22:09.important to a lot of people who come to you. Yes. This is what they

:22:09. > :22:12.are concerned about, what do they tell the children when they get to

:22:12. > :22:18.the age when they start asking where they came from, how they were

:22:18. > :22:21.made. You cannot have your cake and eat it too. When the issue was the

:22:21. > :22:25.discussion as to whether gay and lesbian couples should be able to

:22:25. > :22:28.adopt children, the importance of genetic relationships was

:22:28. > :22:33.downplayed and it was said that all that mattered is that you had a

:22:33. > :22:36.committed couple, or even a committed single person, and that

:22:36. > :22:40.the relationship between the parents, nurturing and so on, was

:22:40. > :22:46.the important thing. You cannot have it both ways. I agree that

:22:46. > :22:51.genetic patenting is very important. Well you should celebrate this.

:22:51. > :22:55.think there are issues that we have not talked about and I am concerned

:22:55. > :22:59.about. We are talking about equitable distribution. Most of

:22:59. > :23:04.these lesbian women will not be infertile. I think a fundamental

:23:04. > :23:07.question we need to ask is it appropriate that resources in the

:23:07. > :23:13.NHS, are supposed to be treating the sick, are being used on healthy

:23:13. > :23:17.people? Even if you agree that the resources should be used in that

:23:17. > :23:21.way, I totally disagree with you about the research from the unit in

:23:21. > :23:25.Cambridge which has been shown to be deeply flawed by the only major

:23:25. > :23:31.study that has looked at a large sample of different parenting types

:23:31. > :23:35.in the States, published this year. It shows that there is indeed deep

:23:35. > :23:42.concern for those whose primary interest is the welfare of the

:23:42. > :23:49.child, showing that children who are brought up by lesbian and gay

:23:49. > :23:53.couples have gone on 80 markers they looked at, on 77 they look

:23:53. > :23:58.that they did less well. Very worrying. There has been researched

:23:58. > :24:02.and in America last year, ongoing research which came back to

:24:02. > :24:07.children over 20 years, and the children that had been in a lesbian

:24:07. > :24:11.relationship were achieving better and were more stable. That is

:24:11. > :24:15.precisely not so. Some people will have picked up on the fact that you

:24:15. > :24:18.think that biological connections are important. You have helped

:24:18. > :24:22.couples to have children and another for some of those couples

:24:22. > :24:25.who have sent them abroad to have anonymous sperm. That is an

:24:25. > :24:32.acknowledgement that the biological connection is not important because

:24:32. > :24:39.they will never know. Yes. It is simply there so that when the child

:24:39. > :24:43.asks, there is no answer. There is an answer. These technologies will

:24:43. > :24:50.become de rigueur. I think we are decades away from it. You do not

:24:50. > :24:57.want the child to have answers? truth will end up being that the

:24:57. > :25:01.parent was a dead embryo. I heard the pastor mumbling. I am very

:25:01. > :25:07.concerned about how science is playing God. I am a pastor in

:25:07. > :25:10.Croydon, the most populated by in London. The biggest social problem

:25:10. > :25:15.that we have in Croydon, especially with young men, is that they come

:25:15. > :25:19.from homes without fathers. I cannot believe we are discussing

:25:19. > :25:27.deliberately engineering families without a father. Families Need

:25:27. > :25:32.Fathers. You can talk about the research, but let me talk to you

:25:32. > :25:35.about real life. You have no idea to cataclysmic paint and suffering

:25:35. > :25:43.a families are going through, especially in the Afro-Caribbean

:25:43. > :25:48.community, because there are no fathers. You have to be insane.

:25:48. > :25:52.don't think you should assert... These problems were caused by

:25:52. > :25:57.fatherless homes. You should not assert that everyone who disagrees

:25:57. > :26:01.with you is ignorant of the real world. We have to be clear about

:26:01. > :26:05.the distinction that automate between the prospects for children

:26:05. > :26:09.in children parents hop -- single- parent homes where they had been

:26:09. > :26:15.abandoned by fathers who were not with the mother or whether have

:26:15. > :26:18.been cases of divorce a domestic violence, and a separate occasion

:26:18. > :26:22.where children are brought up by single parents or lesbian couples,

:26:22. > :26:29.with the established view of the research, without such quoting

:26:29. > :26:34.specific studies is that they do very well. They certainly have no

:26:34. > :26:36.disadvantage. Let him finish, I will give you another opportunity.

:26:36. > :26:40.The Liberal way of dealing with this is that people should be

:26:40. > :26:43.allowed to use technology, not on the National Health Service, nobody

:26:43. > :26:46.is arguing that this would be on the health service, should be

:26:46. > :26:51.allowed to use technology to be able to reproduce, unless there is

:26:51. > :26:55.good evidence of a significant harm for the child or the parent that

:26:55. > :27:00.would follow. That has not been shown to be the case and in the

:27:00. > :27:04.case of someone who is sterile because of cancer, a young man who

:27:04. > :27:08.wants to Rome biological child, if later research could derive sperm

:27:08. > :27:12.from other cells in their body safely, with no adverse consequence

:27:12. > :27:17.to the child for that man and his partner, then we should not ban it.

:27:17. > :27:21.That is all I'm saying. I am not talking about banning it. Not for a

:27:21. > :27:26.moment. I totally agree with you that infertility brings a lot of

:27:26. > :27:31.pain. As a GP, I saw lots of it. That deserves treatment, but what

:27:31. > :27:35.we're talking about here is people who were not infertile, but a

:27:35. > :27:40.wanted child. And it is more to do with meeting their needs than

:27:40. > :27:44.bringing up or creating a child in an optimal environment. Natalie

:27:44. > :27:48.wants to come back to that, because it is an accusation of selfishness.

:27:48. > :27:58.It is not just gay and lesbians. Two brothers or sisters might

:27:58. > :27:59.

:28:00. > :28:03.decide. That would remain unlawful. I give you the floor. None of our

:28:03. > :28:06.clients have ever had any support from the NHS. They are all

:28:06. > :28:11.financially stable. You have to remember that these children that

:28:11. > :28:14.they are creating are being created in a loving relationship and have

:28:14. > :28:21.the stability of both parents. Those parents are what they know

:28:21. > :28:27.from the off. That is all they need. A loving, stable home. The children

:28:27. > :28:31.are progressing as they normally would. Good morning. I wanted to

:28:31. > :28:37.pick up on something that the pastor said about fatherless homes.

:28:37. > :28:40.I have worked a lot in this part of London, and I make films with

:28:40. > :28:44.members of -- people who have fallen into the margins. I was

:28:44. > :28:48.speaking to a man who had spent 14 of his 30 years in prison and he

:28:48. > :28:55.was giving me an interview on camera. I asked him where he

:28:55. > :28:59.thought that he had made his wrong choices, to end up where he was.

:28:59. > :29:03.And he said when he was about eight you sit on the couch and want a

:29:03. > :29:08.cuddle with his mother and his father would not let him do that.

:29:08. > :29:13.It seems to me that human nature and love are the biggest issues

:29:13. > :29:17.underlying this debate. Love can still exist in a gay couple, just

:29:17. > :29:23.does capitalism is not necessarily a bad thing, it is what you do with

:29:23. > :29:27.it. I think what my sister was speaking about was solo parenting.

:29:27. > :29:37.I do not know any solo parent who thinks that parenting is easy.

:29:37. > :29:37.

:29:37. > :29:40.is not easy, of. Mac. -- it is not easy. For me, the pain of not being

:29:40. > :29:45.involved biologically is enormous for lesbian couples at what is good

:29:45. > :29:50.for children is happy parents. If this is such a divisive issue and

:29:50. > :29:55.no to such a painful issue, that is a problem. I have a flak which is

:29:55. > :29:59.that there are two X chromosomes. My concern is about that as well.

:29:59. > :30:09.It is in very difficult thing because the pain is enormous.

:30:09. > :30:11.

:30:11. > :30:20.confirm that that would be the Unless you use artificial

:30:20. > :30:25.chromosomes. Artificial Y chromosomes? Carry on. So, I think

:30:25. > :30:29.for us, as a society, we need to look at what makes happy units of

:30:29. > :30:33.parenting, whether it is solo or two together. This issue for

:30:33. > :30:38.lesbians is huge, I am frighten wid the -- by the technology, that is

:30:38. > :30:43.the level for me, when it goes into a zone it is so, it is so

:30:44. > :30:48.manufactured I am scared of it. should go to an intensive care

:30:48. > :30:52.units that saves people's lives and say you are frightened by that.

:30:52. > :30:57.There is no danger of sex being eradicated. Most people will choose

:30:57. > :31:03.to have sex. It is only people who have a specific need to use this

:31:03. > :31:08.form of technology, in order to have a happy family, they are

:31:08. > :31:13.biologically related to that would use it. What you were saying to

:31:13. > :31:17.Natalie, it is also true for hetrosexual couple, when they are

:31:17. > :31:20.infertile they want to try everything to have their own

:31:20. > :31:25.genetic children before they look to adoption. I am a single mother

:31:25. > :31:31.and I am not, you can't say all single mothers raise children and

:31:31. > :31:35.live in deprived areas. Are you a sickle mum by choice? No. Would you

:31:35. > :31:40.prefer. That is a great question. Would you prefer the father of your

:31:40. > :31:43.child to be parenting with you, yes or no? The father of my child has a

:31:43. > :31:47.fantastic relationship with my daughter. You see, there are many

:31:47. > :31:51.ways of having a family, and raising children, and it does

:31:51. > :31:55.necessitate that person has to be a man. You have grandmother, you have

:31:55. > :32:01.mothers... Are you happy being a single parent or you would rather

:32:01. > :32:07.have dual parenting? I am very happy being a single parent Whose

:32:08. > :32:15.chat show is this?! I am happy being ale parent. That is not what

:32:16. > :32:23.I am asking you. Would you prefer? In other cultures, where you have

:32:23. > :32:28.care... What about this idea of scaring -- scarring the child?

:32:28. > :32:33.By nowing its parents are a dead embryo? Why are you saying the

:32:33. > :32:37.parents are dead? I don't know if it is the case you start with the

:32:37. > :32:43.precautionary principle. Unless we know what the risks are, we don't

:32:43. > :32:48.know ahead wit, unless there is a compelling reason to do otherwise.

:32:48. > :32:54.What... No. So what are the possible reasons for doing this

:32:54. > :33:00.technology? Well, you can imagine Doomsday snar row o snar rows where

:33:00. > :33:05.there are no men left on earth, or otherwise where you can, you have

:33:05. > :33:10.dispense with the need for a father. There is going to be for the future

:33:10. > :33:14.lots of semen sloshing round the planet. That doesn't seem to be the

:33:14. > :33:17.short to medium term a real reason to go down this road. Then we are

:33:17. > :33:25.dealing with questions of infertility which raise their own

:33:25. > :33:29.problem, then we are dealing with two possible situation, firstly the

:33:29. > :33:33.lesbian couple, but the sole woman who decides I want a child by

:33:33. > :33:40.myself with no man or indeed other human being involved. The only

:33:40. > :33:46.motivation for that has to be selfishness, denial of rationality,

:33:47. > :33:50.has to be a desire to cape that child away from contaminating

:33:50. > :33:55.influences. It could be two women, another human could be involved.

:33:55. > :33:59.Can you not understand the desire to be biologically related to the

:33:59. > :34:05.child? This is preferable than sending off to America for some

:34:06. > :34:11.sperm off the internet. Isn't it morally preferable? When we come to

:34:11. > :34:14.lesbian couples there has been a great deal of argument by those

:34:14. > :34:18.advocating gay adoption to the effect it doesn't matter what your

:34:18. > :34:24.biological background is, the important thing is loving parents.

:34:24. > :34:29.That now seems to be skated over in the argument which is going on.

:34:29. > :34:35.Nobody pretends that anonymous semen donation is a psychologically

:34:35. > :34:43.easy way of conceiveing children. Nobody pretends it is ideal. Why

:34:43. > :34:50.should one pretend this is a better way of raising children than simple

:34:50. > :35:00.adoption, the means...? There will have -- there is no such thing at

:35:00. > :35:01.

:35:01. > :35:05.simple adoption. The arguments were... I take a different view, I

:35:05. > :35:09.say when it comes to liberty, the right to reproduce, not relying on

:35:09. > :35:13.state hand outs or the NHS paying for it, the principle should be

:35:13. > :35:17.unless there is clear evidence of harm, and there isn't in these

:35:17. > :35:20.cases, which should be permissive. We shouldn't ban people from

:35:20. > :35:28.reproducing, as you would wish to do unless they can justify it in

:35:28. > :35:33.some way that suits you. It should be the other way round. There is a

:35:33. > :35:42.principle that trumps to liberty of the barnts and that is the welfare

:35:42. > :35:52.of the child. That is my point. Woody aten said he didn't

:35:52. > :35:56.understand how children survive one mother. -- Woody Allen. One of the

:35:56. > :36:00.solo parents that was studied, there was a case of a Christian

:36:00. > :36:05.woman. She decided to have IVF to have her baby because she didn't

:36:05. > :36:10.have a partner. She believed it was wrong to have sex outside marriage

:36:10. > :36:15.so she chose to have a child that way. That is a fun away twie have a

:36:15. > :36:21.Virgin birth. There we will leave it. Thank you very much for that.

:36:21. > :36:28.If you have something to say about that de bait log on and follow the

:36:29. > :36:38.debate to online discussion. Our last Big Question, can the Holy

:36:38. > :36:48.Spirit move you? If you would like to an an Ade yens you can E mail: -

:36:48. > :36:54.

:36:54. > :36:59.While attendances at tradition alchurches have been on the wane t

:36:59. > :37:04.pes cos tal movements have seen their congregations climb in

:37:04. > :37:08.numbers. One reason may be because they encourage believers to be open

:37:08. > :37:12.to feeling their faith, they say they can physically experience the

:37:12. > :37:18.joy of the Holy Spirit entering you, and that this presence can lead to

:37:18. > :37:25.talking in tongues, or healing powers. Can the Holy Spirit move

:37:25. > :37:29.you? Taiwo is here. It has happened to you. Yes. What is the feeling?

:37:29. > :37:35.mean for example my brother, who was living in Warwickshire at the

:37:35. > :37:38.time, he had a issue with himself, like with his brain, and he

:37:39. > :37:42.couldn't walk, he couldn't talk, we would call him, he had slurred

:37:42. > :37:47.speech. We went up, my family went to get him, and we saw him in a

:37:47. > :37:52.state and we were so shocked, and it was like, this guy capable, you

:37:52. > :37:56.know, he is oven his way, he is at uni, he is studying, he had to drop

:37:56. > :38:01.out because he couldn't walk, he couldn't talk, when he would talk

:38:01. > :38:05.it would sound like he was babbling, we took him back to London and

:38:05. > :38:09.brought him to hospital, and he was on the bed for two weeks, doctors

:38:09. > :38:15.were literally trying to find out what was wrong with this guy. So,

:38:15. > :38:19.what we done, we started to pray, and started to interseed for him. I

:38:19. > :38:23.took it upon myself. I said nothing is changing, the doctors are saying

:38:23. > :38:28.they can't find out what is wrong with him. What I then done, I laid

:38:28. > :38:35.my hands on him, and I asked, you know, God to heal him, and to

:38:35. > :38:41.restore him, asap. I believe the fire of the Holy Ghost came upon

:38:41. > :38:46.him. The fire? He was healed he was? He was healed. Describe that

:38:46. > :38:54.fire. When you feel it, is it like a fiery feeling? The Bible talks

:38:54. > :38:58.about it in... I want you to talk about it. Tell me what you feel.

:38:58. > :39:03.is found in the bound -- boundary of prayer. What is that feeling?

:39:03. > :39:08.One of fire inside? It is a spiritual covering you get. It is a

:39:08. > :39:15.spiritual covering. The world will understand, it, I explain. There is

:39:15. > :39:19.three stage, you have the baptism of water, then the Holy Spirit.

:39:19. > :39:24.feeling of ecstasy? No, it's the baptism of fire. Where God gives

:39:24. > :39:29.you spiritual power. Do you speak in tongues as well? That is the

:39:29. > :39:35.baptism of the Holy Spirit. So people speak in tongues, you do

:39:35. > :39:41.don't you? Absolutely. What is the fiscal feeling? As a Christian I

:39:41. > :39:49.get my context from scripture. I believe Jesus spoke in tongues, all

:39:49. > :39:56.of the disies ips -- disciples spoke in tongues. Does everyone

:39:56. > :40:01.start shouting? It is a prayer language, you can pray in tongues,

:40:01. > :40:06.the Bible speaks about the gifts of prophesy. One of those gifts is a,

:40:06. > :40:11.the gift of prop -- prophesy is normally preceded by tongue, what

:40:11. > :40:17.does it feel like? Tongues, tongue, do you understand each other.

:40:17. > :40:23.Tongues are always involved. You always understand each other?

:40:23. > :40:30.when I pray to God in the tongue, the Bible says if I have been bap

:40:30. > :40:34.tiesed in the Holy Spirit my spirit interseeds with God's Holy Spirit.

:40:34. > :40:39.The Bible speaks about praying with your uping and praying in the

:40:39. > :40:45.spirit. What is the fiscal feeling? A warm feel something.

:40:45. > :40:51.Pentecostalism is about experience. What o do you feel? There are times

:40:51. > :40:56.when I feel the presence of God. What kuz that feel like? Sometimes

:40:56. > :41:05.it convicting. Sometimes cleansing. I remember the first time I was

:41:05. > :41:08.audibly, well the phrase was when I became a Christian. I can remember

:41:08. > :41:15.praying, acknowledging I was a sinner, and I felt a weight come

:41:15. > :41:19.off my shoulder, in my heart there was a tangible difference. Love?

:41:19. > :41:24.Some people describe it as liquid love. Some have described it as a

:41:24. > :41:31.weight coming off your shoulders. There was a change, certainly on me

:41:31. > :41:36.on the interest side -- inside. it happen anywhere, on the bus?

:41:36. > :41:42.is found in the boundary of prayer. Has it happened inappropriately.

:41:42. > :41:48.pray when I am driving sometimes. Especially in London. You are

:41:48. > :41:54.listening to the radio? That is not speaking in tongues, that is a

:41:54. > :41:58.phone-in. That is your show! would like to move away. I want to

:41:58. > :42:04.move away from this language of feeling. Because I think the Holy

:42:04. > :42:09.Spirit is bigger than an emotion, it is more than a feeling. I am a

:42:09. > :42:13.rational. I am a rational person myself, I am a head person. When I

:42:13. > :42:17.receive the outpouring of the Holy Spirit in my life, I didn't

:42:17. > :42:21.particularly feel any different. But I knew everything changed. For

:42:21. > :42:24.me it is the difference between maybe watching a movie in black-

:42:24. > :42:28.and-white that can be nice, and you enjoy the movie, but when you see

:42:28. > :42:33.it in colour you have a new perspective. You were energised in

:42:33. > :42:36.a sense? Things have changed for you, you see a life in a new way. I

:42:36. > :42:41.think that is what it is like to receive the Holy Spirit in your

:42:41. > :42:46.life, is the ability to see the richness of the world round you,

:42:46. > :42:49.that maybe you couldn't see before. It is more than an experience.

:42:49. > :42:55.are they feel something I don't know what you are feeling, I am

:42:55. > :43:00.thinking about the Bible. The scriptures what do we see when the

:43:00. > :43:04.Holly spirit came upon then. The prophets talked. When Hannah was

:43:04. > :43:10.praying and she was our first model, Ellie, the priest thought she is

:43:10. > :43:18.drunk, what is happening. She said I am praying, talking, the level of

:43:18. > :43:23.legitimacy to the large world of irrationality concerns me here.

:43:24. > :43:27.mi, -- Jeremy. What is the difference between what these

:43:27. > :43:32.people are telling us, I believe they are feeling this, of course

:43:32. > :43:39.they r but what is the difference between that and a 14-year-old who

:43:39. > :43:47.is getting hysterical about Justin Bieber, or a form of hysteria, we...

:43:47. > :43:50.We are not talking hysteria. that feeling of, you know n a less

:43:50. > :43:57.benign environment, the films of the Nuremberg rally, people getting

:43:57. > :44:01.crazy, what is the difference? There is a lot of things going on.

:44:01. > :44:06.Emotion and and rational experience. What is the relationship between

:44:06. > :44:10.language and experience. How do we make sense of experiences? There

:44:10. > :44:15.are experiences which change consciousness, a football stadium,

:44:15. > :44:21.a rally. It is Newcastle United for you. Unfortunately not doing too

:44:21. > :44:29.well! When Shearer was playing we had moments, and the point... The

:44:29. > :44:32.point here is,... They are speaking in Geordie tongues. What language

:44:32. > :44:37.do we employ to describe experiences? Psychologists from

:44:37. > :44:40.William James in the 19th century taked about intense experiences,

:44:40. > :44:47.changing personalities, and today we have neuroscientists saying that

:44:47. > :44:57.when people are speaking in tongues, the lobe, the blood going to the

:44:57. > :45:00.

:45:00. > :45:04.The key thing is happen to people interpreted? In different cultures

:45:04. > :45:10.and different contexts, experiences art -- interpreted in different

:45:10. > :45:15.ways. Context is important. I do not think he understands because

:45:15. > :45:19.the fire of the Holy Ghost comes about through holiness. You get it

:45:19. > :45:28.through holiness. It is the highest level for a believer. Could he feel

:45:28. > :45:34.it? Again, to move away from the experience side of it, let us talk

:45:34. > :45:38.about the ethical side. For me, the baptism of Holy Spirit, for example,

:45:38. > :45:42.I come from a family of broken marriages. My father has been

:45:42. > :45:49.divorced and was married three times. I have been faithful to my

:45:49. > :45:54.wife for 17 years. To me, that is my -- not my own strength, it is

:45:54. > :45:58.the power of the Holy Spirit. It is not this ecstatic thing, there is

:45:58. > :46:03.an ethical element. Plenty of people without religion are capable

:46:03. > :46:12.of being faithful to their wives. That is not the point I was making.

:46:12. > :46:15.For me, in my context... Meyer view is that I do not do it -- my view,

:46:15. > :46:17.I do not deny that you have these feelings and their common across

:46:18. > :46:22.many religions. Many religions that are contradictory to each other.

:46:22. > :46:27.You have to choose which one is the truth and which one is not. But it

:46:27. > :46:31.is harmful only when it comes into this issue of therapy. There may be

:46:31. > :46:37.vulnerable people who think that they can be healed when they have

:46:37. > :46:42.something seriously wrong with them. I am not happy with and a fierce

:46:42. > :46:48.talking about my Pentecostal faith. He is a doctor. I am still a doctor.

:46:48. > :46:52.People who have serious conditions need not to be sidetracked into

:46:52. > :46:58.things for which there is no good evidence of effectiveness. If faith

:46:58. > :47:05.healing was effective, just answer this question, if faith-healing was

:47:05. > :47:09.effective, why is there no single example of an amputee being healed?

:47:10. > :47:16.And at BT has been healed. When was this? It sounds unbelievable but

:47:16. > :47:22.there is evidence. There are people that had the fire of the Holy

:47:22. > :47:27.spirit. His leg grew?! Laurel wants to come back to the fire. It is not

:47:27. > :47:31.for me to speak about someone else's religious experience. But

:47:32. > :47:35.when you use the word fire, the fire has been used as a

:47:35. > :47:40.justification for burning other people, and that is one issue that

:47:40. > :47:43.I would love to race here. When we talk about Holy Spirit, lots of

:47:43. > :47:48.religious people feel moved by different spirituality and religion

:47:48. > :47:52.and institutions, and that is great. So long as it does not clash with

:47:52. > :47:56.therapy. But the word fire, how do you use fire with other people? Do

:47:56. > :48:01.you use it to ensure that other people become Christians? What do

:48:01. > :48:05.you do with that? It is the danger would here. You could say that of

:48:05. > :48:10.conviction or anything? The word fire is very different. Possessed

:48:10. > :48:13.children in some churches, children are said to be possessed and they

:48:13. > :48:23.go through exercise a more worse. I think that is a form, and I'm not

:48:23. > :48:26.saying that happens in your church, but it happens in some churches.

:48:26. > :48:35.Alexander Perepilichny, it has been said that some people reciting the

:48:35. > :48:44.Koran enter a state of ecstasy. -- Alexander Perepilichny.

:48:44. > :48:48.There are some sect's that convulse, and they might jabber various

:48:48. > :48:53.things or recite prayers in that state of ecstasy. I would agree

:48:53. > :48:58.that there are different religions where attendants will enter into

:48:58. > :49:02.convulsions and will start speaking in tongues. When you here at the

:49:02. > :49:08.beautiful recitation of the Koran, do you not feel warmth imbuing your

:49:08. > :49:13.spirit? Generally speaking, the Islamic orthodoxy have not embraced

:49:13. > :49:16.the idea of God entering into the creation and going into a human

:49:16. > :49:22.being and making them convulse. not talking about that, but a

:49:22. > :49:26.feeling of well-being. That is a psychological aspect. It is faith,

:49:26. > :49:30.the sweetness of faith. This is a psychological aspect of human

:49:30. > :49:38.beings, faith secures you and makes you feel happy and content and

:49:38. > :49:42.fulfilled. Of course, when you have a court consciousness, in the

:49:42. > :49:45.throes of such consciousness, you will be happy and content. Is this

:49:45. > :49:50.on the same spectrum? What is fascinating is that different

:49:50. > :49:53.religious traditions and cultures have these kinds of peculiar

:49:53. > :49:56.experiences. The questionnaires, why do people interpret it in

:49:56. > :50:01.different ways? What is the relationship between language and

:50:01. > :50:06.experience? Every cultural system demonstrates this kind of aesthetic

:50:06. > :50:11.experience. A no other face has the fire of the Holy Ghost.

:50:11. > :50:15.question is not so much the imagery or the feeling, but the question of

:50:15. > :50:19.can the Holy Spirit move you. Move you to do what? I am not bothered

:50:19. > :50:23.of how you experience it. I do not care whether you are swinging from

:50:23. > :50:29.chandeliers or sitting in silence, but all the spirit moves you to

:50:29. > :50:33.change the world. All the spirit is the power. I want to hear from

:50:33. > :50:37.audience members. I want to hear from the congregation. Good morning.

:50:37. > :50:41.I think we have to be very careful. There are some places around the

:50:41. > :50:44.world where people are using the whole the spirit to heal people.

:50:44. > :50:47.For example there are places where children and adults are being

:50:47. > :50:51.refused treatment because they are going to be healed by the whole

:50:51. > :51:01.disparate. In the worst-case scenario, people have died for

:51:01. > :51:01.

:51:01. > :51:05.refusing treatment. I think we have to consider that. These feelings

:51:05. > :51:12.you're feeling, why are they not demonstrable to everyone on a wide

:51:12. > :51:18.scale? Because they do not have the fire. It is in your head, basically.

:51:18. > :51:24.Do you really need to tell me that knowing God, you are sealed? 95% of

:51:24. > :51:27.the Church right now, they are stuck between sanctification and

:51:27. > :51:34.de-baptism of all the ghost. They do not have the fire? That does not

:51:34. > :51:43.really make any sense to me. brother is not from the same church

:51:43. > :51:47.as me. He has a different take. But the question, does the Holy Spirit

:51:47. > :51:53.move you? Jesus gave the Holy Spirit to his disciples with the

:51:53. > :51:58.call of evangelical witness. virgin birth. Let me finish. Today,

:51:58. > :52:03.the Pentecostal church is the fastest growing movement within

:52:03. > :52:06.Christianity, because they are moved by the Holy Spirit. What

:52:06. > :52:12.happened with the Virgin Birth? They are moved to show their faith

:52:12. > :52:16.-- share their faith. The Virgin Birth. My understanding of the

:52:16. > :52:19.Virgin Birth is that the whole the spirit came upon the Virgin and the

:52:19. > :52:24.reason why that is important to Christians is because Jesus, we

:52:24. > :52:28.believe, was different from every other being that ever lived on

:52:28. > :52:34.planet Earth. We believe his life was supernatural and his birth was

:52:34. > :52:38.supernatural at his death was supernatural. He did not have man's

:52:38. > :52:43.fallen nature which is why he could not be born from a man. He had the

:52:43. > :52:49.nature of God which is why we can say that Jesus was without sin

:52:49. > :52:53.because he did not have Adam's nature. It is good to hear that the

:52:53. > :52:56.Holy Spirit can move you but I would like to know why does not and

:52:56. > :53:00.why there are so many people who do not get a whisper it. There are

:53:00. > :53:03.friends of my family who had a daughter who was diagnosed with

:53:03. > :53:06.leukaemia at three years old and three years later she died, despite

:53:06. > :53:14.being a Christian family that went to church every Sunday. Nothing

:53:14. > :53:18.worked, so why does a Holy Spirit...? One of the interesting

:53:18. > :53:21.points is the belief that, for example this lady said, and a

:53:21. > :53:25.picket is a fair point, but what matters is not how it is

:53:25. > :53:29.interpreted culturally but whether it moves you too could -- moves you

:53:29. > :53:32.to do good things. But I think it is just as legitimate to do good

:53:32. > :53:39.things for their own basis, to use our intellectual power, judgment

:53:39. > :53:43.and reason, to say that this is good and not rely on some mystical

:53:43. > :53:48.or spiritual insight in order to do good things. It is actually

:53:48. > :53:51.subversive things, things that challenge power. To quote my a

:53:52. > :53:56.Pentecostal friend's interpretation of the Bible -- the Bible, it is

:53:56. > :54:01.about freedom and the good news to the poor. These are the things that

:54:01. > :54:04.the Bible quotes. I want to know, how do you challenge power and how

:54:04. > :54:11.is it good news for the poor, how are people being liberated? I want

:54:11. > :54:16.to hear that because that is the biblical evidence. I see a clash

:54:17. > :54:23.between evangelical Christianity or any religion and freedom. I don't.

:54:23. > :54:30.You are imposing your fire on someone else. That is his. His fire,

:54:30. > :54:35.your Holy Spirit. If you started religion... My face freed me. -- My

:54:35. > :54:39.Faith freed me. It freed me from simple habits. You have an

:54:39. > :54:46.evangelical mission. His question was, how is the Holy Spirit moving

:54:46. > :54:50.us to do good to change the culture. How have you helped the poor in

:54:50. > :54:55.Croydon? How would they helped by this? We support a homeless charity

:54:55. > :54:59.and typically we have not given to charities before. In preying as the

:54:59. > :55:03.pastor of the Church, I have been looking at how we are going to use

:55:03. > :55:07.our resources. I was moved by the Holy Spirit to start making

:55:07. > :55:11.donations to homeless charities. Amazingly, we stepped in as Croydon

:55:11. > :55:18.council were stepping out. That is one of the ways the Holy Spirit is

:55:18. > :55:22.moving us. Is this entirely benign. That is wonderful and lots of

:55:22. > :55:26.religious and non-religious people do fantastic things. I do not feel,

:55:26. > :55:29.I do not think that this is entirely benign, because when the

:55:29. > :55:32.Christian majority and the established Church comes and talks

:55:32. > :55:41.about evangelical missions in any way, and other parts of the Church

:55:41. > :55:47.are talking about fire, as someone who... A budget deism is where the

:55:47. > :55:53.fire originated. For us, the people who had been victims of the fire...

:55:54. > :56:01.-- but to Judaism is where the fire or originated. Some hands have shot

:56:01. > :56:04.up. In the time available, --... do not understand why you have to

:56:04. > :56:09.make a connection to religion with these feelings. I am an atheist and

:56:09. > :56:11.I can have amazing feelings when I am surrounded by my family or I

:56:11. > :56:17.could wake up one day and see the world differently. I do not

:56:17. > :56:22.immediately think it must be some omniscient God. Someone might say

:56:22. > :56:26.something to you that changes should day, and this connection to

:56:26. > :56:32.religion, and we get excluded as atheists, but we cannot have these

:56:32. > :56:37.feelings. And actually we do, we just don't like it to a god.

:56:38. > :56:40.you don't have any power. That is the thing. What do you mean? She

:56:41. > :56:46.doesn't have power because she does not have the fire? What I say the

:56:46. > :56:50.fire, Jesus says that you will be baptised by the whole spirit and

:56:50. > :56:56.with fire. The world does not understand that. When you are a

:56:56. > :56:58.believer and you have sold out for Jesus Christ, you will get it.

:56:58. > :57:01.think one point is that people interpret their experiences

:57:01. > :57:06.differently. Psychologists of religion have shown that we need to

:57:06. > :57:12.come back to the Court of humanity. But she cannot have the fire.

:57:12. > :57:17.People have different views about their experiences. We can tolerate

:57:17. > :57:22.and understand people when we respect this. The question is been

:57:22. > :57:29.asked, can be Holy Spirit move youth, and the emphatic answer from

:57:29. > :57:33.Christians is, absolutely, yes. should not be making claims... You

:57:33. > :57:39.should not be making claims that legs grow back. That is the

:57:39. > :57:44.fundamental problem. As soon as you say things like that, you exploit

:57:44. > :57:49.the vulnerable. Clare any response to that. We have a young lady in

:57:49. > :57:53.our church. When she was born she was born severely prematurely and I

:57:53. > :57:56.came down and prayed for her. We rallied the church to pray and the

:57:56. > :57:59.doctors said that they were going to turn off the life-support

:57:59. > :58:05.machine within 24 hours and she was not going to make it. You can

:58:06. > :58:09.always say these anecdotes. Doctors do not say the things that family's

:58:09. > :58:12.field the doctors have said. Under the law, thank goodness, the

:58:13. > :58:17.responsibility is not to reject medical treatment. Thank you all

:58:17. > :58:21.very much indeed. The debate continues online. We're here next