:00:27. > :00:30.Good morning and welcome to The Big Questions. We are live from
:00:30. > :00:33.Samworth Enterprise Academy in Leicester and I am Nicky Campbell.
:00:33. > :00:37.This week, the Home Secretary, Theresa May, announced plans to
:00:37. > :00:39.recruit senior police officers from outside the service and from abroad.
:00:39. > :00:42.But Manchester's Chief Constable, Peter Fahey, says police forces are
:00:42. > :00:46.ignoring the greater potential of home grown talent from the black
:00:46. > :00:56.and Asian communities. He wants to be able to positively discriminate
:00:56. > :00:58.
:00:58. > :01:00.in their favour. Our first Big Question: David McFarlane from the
:01:01. > :01:03.Black Police Association says Britain needs to copy the Northern
:01:03. > :01:07.Ireland Police Service, which had to appoint equal numbers of
:01:07. > :01:11.officers from both the Protestant and Catholic communities.
:01:11. > :01:13.Superintendent Logan says it would be bad for the officer and bad for
:01:13. > :01:17.the service to promote people because of their colour rather than
:01:17. > :01:20.on merit. Rupert Murdoch apologised to the Israeli Prime Minister
:01:20. > :01:25.Binyamin Netanyahu for what he described as a grotesque and
:01:25. > :01:27.offensive cartoon published in last week's Sunday Times. It showed the
:01:27. > :01:34.election-winning Netanyahu wielding a long trowel as he cemented
:01:34. > :01:43.agonised Palestinians into a wall with a mortar of blood. The caption
:01:43. > :01:46.read, will cementing the peace continue? Our next Big Question:
:01:46. > :01:49.This rabbi says to excuse the cartoon as an attack on Netanyahu
:01:49. > :01:55.and not the Jewish people is like using the n word about Obama
:01:55. > :01:57.without meaning to offend black people. The Jewish founder of the
:01:57. > :02:00.Palestinian Solidarity Campaign says it was a legitimate criticism
:02:00. > :02:10.of Netanyahu's policies, not an attack on Israel as a whole. This
:02:10. > :02:13.Tuesday the House of Commons will debate the Gay Marriage Bill. It is
:02:13. > :02:16.a brave stand by David Cameron, given predictions that up to 200 of
:02:16. > :02:19.his backbenchers are planning to vote against it. Our last Big
:02:19. > :02:22.Question: The leader of the Lesbian and Gay Christian Movement says if
:02:23. > :02:25.you believe that God is love, then all love must come from God and
:02:25. > :02:27.marriage expresses that. The Coalition for Marriage says gay
:02:27. > :02:31.marriage will undermine traditional family values. One man and one
:02:31. > :02:41.woman are together the best way to raise children. Welcome everybody
:02:41. > :02:45.
:02:45. > :02:49.Sir Robert Peel founded the modern police force on the basis of
:02:50. > :02:52.consent. The police are the public and the public are the police was
:02:52. > :02:57.his key principle. So, it has always been important in Britain
:02:57. > :03:00.for the police to be recruited from the local community. Here in
:03:00. > :03:05.Leicester the 2011 census found that only 45% of its population is
:03:05. > :03:10.White British. Today 49% come from the black and minority ethnic
:03:10. > :03:14.communities. But only 6.7% of Leicestershire's police force came
:03:14. > :03:23.from those communities and they're mostly at constable level. Is it
:03:24. > :03:28.time for the police to favour black candidates? You are really
:03:28. > :03:35.exercised about this. The think it has been far too long and it needs
:03:35. > :03:43.to happen now. How do we get this change? By legislation. They did it
:03:43. > :03:47.in Northern Ireland. One on one recruitment. The Labour Party
:03:47. > :03:51.introduced the sex discrimination Act to bring more women to
:03:51. > :03:58.Parliament. One writer says, we are the same ship but not the same deck.
:03:58. > :04:02.What has happened is we have got an entrenched, historical, and
:04:02. > :04:08.institutionalised racist government under the police force which
:04:08. > :04:12.actually prevents the promotion of black people. Equal-opportunity
:04:12. > :04:18.means... The Macpherson report, the Met recruited three times the
:04:18. > :04:24.amount of black candidates until now. What do they do? They park
:04:24. > :04:30.their NAV. Equal-opportunity should mean a system whereby they are
:04:30. > :04:36.promoted. The difficulty for going through his horrendous. Therefore,
:04:36. > :04:43.what the Government needs to do is to legislate so that they can
:04:43. > :04:47.change the law. Not only that, the people at fault but the Home
:04:47. > :04:53.Secretary's and also chief constables. They are responsible
:04:53. > :05:01.for the lack of promotion. What is the argument - you are changing the
:05:01. > :05:05.law so you can promote black people over white people? Had it not been
:05:05. > :05:11.this endemic institutionalised racism, there would not be a need
:05:11. > :05:16.for that. What other problems? have spent millions of pounds on
:05:16. > :05:25.diversity training. It is not just the police service. It is in the
:05:25. > :05:32.NHS, local authorities and the fire service. He is right. It is about
:05:32. > :05:42.institutional racism. It is about retention. We need to keep people
:05:42. > :05:42.
:05:42. > :05:47.by constant reducer. They are not enough barriers. We have not really
:05:47. > :05:52.worked out what positive action is all about. We have not removed it.
:05:52. > :05:57.We must really promote and look how we instep from start to finish. It
:05:57. > :06:03.is about looking at under- represented groups and working with
:06:03. > :06:10.people to encourage them to join, put themselves forward. Rather than
:06:10. > :06:18.legislation? That is one part of it. We have had the legislation in
:06:18. > :06:23.place. It is about an institutional discriminatory practice that goes
:06:23. > :06:26.on. Do you want to come then? needs to change. In a place like
:06:26. > :06:32.Leicester, the police needs to adequately represent the population
:06:32. > :06:37.of Leicester, Bristol, Birmingham, London. We want to see the police
:06:37. > :06:42.force and all public services as being representative. That must be
:06:42. > :06:45.on merit. What I find concerning his there is a conversation that
:06:45. > :06:51.says, one of the reasons we need black police officers in these
:06:51. > :06:55.positions is to be able to speak to the black community. We might shift
:06:55. > :07:01.into a mentality about ghettos where people can only be spoken to
:07:01. > :07:07.by people of their own race. Based on merit, and my hearing right? It
:07:07. > :07:17.is like running the 100 metres for the 200 metres with Usain Bolt and
:07:17. > :07:18.
:07:18. > :07:24.expecting to win and ran a race. 47 years ago, the first police officer
:07:24. > :07:34.was appointed. There is no merit. We will wait for ever. We need
:07:34. > :07:38.legislation now. I think it is a multi- pronged attack. There are
:07:38. > :07:43.issues around actions we can do now. We are talking about talent
:07:43. > :07:49.spotting and talent management. They can compete with colleagues.
:07:49. > :07:56.As a result, they can be judged on merits. In America, positive action
:07:56. > :08:02.has been tried. We have seen people pushing back on that, saying, you
:08:02. > :08:10.only got there because you were black. People think, I am only a
:08:10. > :08:13.Superintendent because I am black. We need to judge on merit. Like
:08:13. > :08:20.everything, even the direct entry scheme that has been consulted
:08:20. > :08:23.about, we need to look at how we can get this action. We in the
:08:23. > :08:28.Metropolitan Police Black Police Association say it is important to
:08:28. > :08:36.do this. Also in the medium and long-term, we are bringing in
:08:36. > :08:41.legislative changes. The answer to your question is, yes. The use of
:08:41. > :08:45.the word favour it is unfortunate. It gives a bit of a slant. We are
:08:45. > :08:50.talking about encouragement and enabling black people to become
:08:50. > :08:57.senior police officers. positively discriminate means
:08:57. > :09:05.favour? It is the practice that actually counts. In Northern
:09:05. > :09:10.Ireland, it was favouring. It had to happen. They are talking about
:09:10. > :09:14.dumbing down the police service. I think if we go back to what Sir
:09:14. > :09:19.Robert Peel was saying, we have a police service that is policing by
:09:19. > :09:23.consent and we are not the police state. The police service has to be
:09:23. > :09:27.representative of the whole community. If we had a wholly male
:09:27. > :09:34.police force, people would be jumping up and down and saying,
:09:34. > :09:42.where are the women? We have heard about Northern Ireland. In Northern
:09:43. > :09:47.Ireland, this is not about quotas and discriminations on the grand of
:09:47. > :09:51.sex - it is about religion and religion alone. In this country,
:09:51. > :09:56.the law is so specific about not discriminating on the grounds of
:09:56. > :10:01.race, sex or gender. If we're going to change the law about the police,
:10:01. > :10:07.I think we have to change the law for society as a whole. If we're
:10:07. > :10:13.going to have positive discrimination - quotas - that has
:10:13. > :10:17.to be there the whole of society. All professions broadcasting - the
:10:17. > :10:23.Church, education. It has to be completely across the board. I do
:10:23. > :10:30.not think this country is quite ready for that. In your time in the
:10:30. > :10:40.police, you said you never saw any racism. No. You need to beat on the
:10:40. > :10:41.
:10:41. > :10:44.receiving end! I am saying about my experience. Unfortunately, they
:10:44. > :10:51.have an open-door policy but no one is going to come into your office
:10:51. > :10:57.and say, by the way, chief, I am being attacked racially. You have
:10:57. > :11:03.to be very proactive will start until the process is changed under
:11:03. > :11:07.this government, you might recall that I started as a constable.
:11:07. > :11:15.started as a constable in Bristol and I worked in The Saint Paul's
:11:15. > :11:19.area. My experience is not just about my recent experience. Looking
:11:19. > :11:24.at the career progression of these two gentlemen, is there a story to
:11:24. > :11:31.be told? When the first black officer joined the Met but support
:11:31. > :11:41.Condon became commissioner. So Paul Roberts became Detective Sergeant.
:11:41. > :11:43.
:11:43. > :11:48.He is a few rungs higher but things are improving not as fast as they
:11:48. > :11:53.should. He is white! Let me explain what is happening in the police
:11:53. > :11:56.service and I expect it is happening elsewhere. Tim gets all
:11:56. > :12:01.the training and support in order to make it up and Lee Roy does not
:12:01. > :12:09.get the encouragement. When they go for an interview for promotion, Tim
:12:09. > :12:17.will be better because he has had all the preparation for it. Could I
:12:17. > :12:22.finish? That is a total and utter travesty of my life. I had 30 years
:12:22. > :12:29.experience in the police service. Many colics right across the United
:12:29. > :12:32.Kingdom... I am from a working- class background in Bristol. I was
:12:33. > :12:39.the first member of my family to get to A-levels, University Guide
:12:39. > :12:45.get a degree and go through the very intense selection system.
:12:46. > :12:50.was not being personal. I was giving an example. It is not a very
:12:50. > :12:55.good example! The police are kind of a special case because they have
:12:55. > :13:03.to blend into the community and work with communities. How do we
:13:03. > :13:07.get to that stage? We had the figures with Leicester early on.
:13:07. > :13:11.Something like 95% in the police are white. There are other great
:13:11. > :13:16.cities of ours in exactly the same situation where communities do not
:13:16. > :13:21.feel properly served and properly represented. How do we get there
:13:21. > :13:27.now? We have to acknowledge the police has made a great deal of
:13:27. > :13:33.progress. How do we get there soon? It cannot be done soon. It is a
:13:33. > :13:37.very practical reason. I am afraid to bring in spending cuts. At the
:13:37. > :13:42.moment, we're talking about losing thousands of police posts across
:13:42. > :13:52.the country. The ranks above getting things out most quickly up
:13:52. > :13:54.
:13:54. > :14:01.the ranks that the right represents. It will be a very difficult job. --
:14:01. > :14:06.Leroy. It will be very difficult to get any body through the ranks.
:14:06. > :14:10.cannot be at the expense of police legitimacy. You need a diverse
:14:10. > :14:14.workforce to reflect the diverse community. The better you treat a
:14:14. > :14:21.diverse personnel, the more equipped to love to serve the needs
:14:21. > :14:29.of a diverse community. -- equipped you are. It is important the
:14:29. > :14:39.organisation needs to put that as a priority. How far does this go?
:14:39. > :14:39.
:14:39. > :14:44.Should baby -- should they be predominantly Asian recruits in
:14:44. > :14:54.Leicester? Should White People be going into white neighbourhoods?
:14:54. > :14:57.
:14:57. > :15:05.The police force should represent the diverse community will --.
:15:05. > :15:11.Black people, in order to get Equality, we will have to wait 100
:15:11. > :15:16.years, 350 years. We want equality in our lifetimes and our children's
:15:16. > :15:20.lifetimes. Too many speeches by chief constables constantly. The
:15:20. > :15:26.Home Office - Home Secretary is come and a block. They put the
:15:26. > :15:36.brakes on. They block the promotion of the Black Police Force. They
:15:36. > :15:37.
:15:37. > :15:44.need to wake up and smell the I'm shocked Tim hasn't witnessed
:15:44. > :15:49.racial abuse. I agree with officer Leroy. We don't need more black and
:15:49. > :15:54.Asian officers. We need less racist officers. We had a house on a
:15:54. > :15:58.consill estate and we witnessed, especially after 2001, a lot of
:15:58. > :16:01.racial abuse, things throne at our house, abuse when we left our house.
:16:02. > :16:08.We were hiding in our house for a good two years. When we asked the
:16:08. > :16:13.police for help, we got nothing. A baby, I was a baby. That's a
:16:13. > :16:18.terrible story, really, people will feel for you. The police gave you
:16:18. > :16:21.nothing? What do your parents say about that? We asked for help and
:16:21. > :16:24.they said, there's not much we could do. We had to get enough
:16:24. > :16:28.money to move house. What if we couldn't afford it? Since I was
:16:28. > :16:33.eight years old I was afraid of all white men.
:16:33. > :16:37.That's a fascinating points. Because we have these statistics,
:16:37. > :16:43.right now, there are seven times more black and Asians stopped and
:16:43. > :16:47.searched per thousand of population. There are ten times greater chance
:16:47. > :16:54.for a black and minority ethnic people to die in police custody. If
:16:54. > :16:59.there were more, let me ask you, if there were more black and minority
:16:59. > :17:03.ethnic police, would those statistics be the same? Would that
:17:03. > :17:07.improve? Not necessarily. You also have to remember, it's not about
:17:07. > :17:11.numbers. It's also around the organisation recognising the
:17:11. > :17:20.importance of having diversity, supporting and nurturing all
:17:20. > :17:23.personnel, police officers and police staff, so that if there is
:17:23. > :17:27.inefficiency internally or in service delivery, it will be
:17:27. > :17:31.addressed. Just like we see at the moment, certain racist cases are
:17:32. > :17:37.increasing. The reason being, I think, it's around the Stephen
:17:37. > :17:42.Lawrence group that used to hold chief scone stabls to account with
:17:42. > :17:46.performance indicators about service delivery. The Home
:17:46. > :17:51.Secretaries got rid of it and as a result, Chief Constables were not
:17:51. > :17:56.held to account. If it's not measured it's not done. The other
:17:56. > :18:01.argument is, the argument against it is if you got fired you don't --
:18:01. > :18:05.if you have a fire, you don't care about the colour of the firefighter.
:18:05. > :18:09.I want to make two points. First is the case of what does society want?
:18:09. > :18:14.Me personally, it would be the case of I want to feel safer or be safer.
:18:14. > :18:18.I'm not too bothered about who is doing. It second poipbtd is the
:18:18. > :18:22.case of the officer needs to have the right skills. It will come
:18:22. > :18:26.through diversity at the same time. I would question in terms of the
:18:26. > :18:29.funnel effect, so how many people from the ethnic minority group are
:18:29. > :18:34.coming forward to go into the police force? I would assume that
:18:34. > :18:40.white people are coming forward more than the ethnic diversities.
:18:40. > :18:46.There can be as well hostility from some black communities towards some
:18:46. > :18:49.black police officers? They use abusive terms like black on the
:18:49. > :18:53.outside white on the inside. When I joined in the early 80s I had
:18:53. > :18:55.experience of that. It was understandable considering the
:18:55. > :19:00.relationship between the police and people like myself and Leroy were
:19:00. > :19:04.in the middle of it. We were working very hard. I want to make
:19:04. > :19:09.one thing clear, nobody, I'm certainly not saying it, hopefully
:19:09. > :19:12.Maxi is not saying it, that we want people who are unqualified being in
:19:12. > :19:16.the Police Service. There's a different between affirmative
:19:16. > :19:20.action and positive discrimination. The other point I would like to
:19:20. > :19:23.make, it's not just about the business imperative about it, but
:19:23. > :19:29.the operational needs too. Because nothing worse than you get an
:19:29. > :19:33.officer goat a scene, meeting members of the -- get to a scene,
:19:33. > :19:37.meeting the public and they can't speak the language. We need. That
:19:37. > :19:42.How far do we go, Jewish police in North London, Muslim police in East
:19:42. > :19:45.London mosque, how far do we go? think positive or negative
:19:45. > :19:49.discrimination one way or the other is always wrong. Equal opportunity
:19:49. > :19:55.is the cornerstone of society. What is critical to consider over here
:19:55. > :19:59.is that there is a certain blatant distrust between authority in
:19:59. > :20:01.various different ethnic minorities. In fact that was probably part of
:20:01. > :20:05.the trigger of the London riots as they happened because there was a
:20:05. > :20:08.black man who was shot by white police and that triggered
:20:08. > :20:12.everything off. What has to happen is there needs to be more
:20:12. > :20:15.recruitment drive in the black comuepbtd, within the Jewish
:20:15. > :20:16.community and all those who are recruited should be given equal
:20:16. > :20:25.opportunity to make their way through the ranks.
:20:25. > :20:29.APPLAUSE As a British Indian, let's put this
:20:29. > :20:32.in perspective, the British police do a fantastic job even compared to
:20:32. > :20:36.the French and Germans, we have lower ratios of policemen to
:20:36. > :20:41.population as well. That doesn't mean we rest on our laurels. I went
:20:41. > :20:47.to Stratford-upon-Avon when I was a youngster and I was told to go back
:20:47. > :20:52.to where I come from, by police officers. They didn't do a great
:20:52. > :20:55.job there for that lady. If you are black, you're 27 times more likely
:20:55. > :20:59.to be stopped by the police and arrest and humiliated. If you are
:20:59. > :21:02.black, you're more likely not to receive a caution. If you are black,
:21:02. > :21:07.you're more likely to be referred to the court. If you are black,
:21:07. > :21:13.you're more likely to be given custodial sentence. Tell me, that
:21:13. > :21:18.amount to systematic institutional racism. Is that what it amounts to?
:21:18. > :21:22.I'm sure there are difficulties within the police force. A more
:21:22. > :21:24.general picture, what is being said is that the police force are doing
:21:24. > :21:28.a great job, though I accept there's some difficult
:21:28. > :21:32.circumstances, difficult situations that have not been doplt with well.
:21:32. > :21:35.We need to encourage more people to join the police force. That should
:21:35. > :21:41.be done by giving them more money. We're not going to help people to
:21:41. > :21:45.come forward to the police force by cutting salaries, regulation A19,
:21:45. > :21:51.where we're throwing away experienced officers. Thank you all
:21:51. > :22:01.very much for taking part. Thank you for your thoughts.
:22:01. > :22:02.
:22:02. > :22:05.Now if you'd like to add to that debate log on to bbc.co.uk/
:22:06. > :22:09.thebigquestions. Follow the link to where you can join in online.
:22:09. > :22:13.Follow us on Twitter as well. We're debating live from Leicester this
:22:13. > :22:18.morning, is criticism of Israel anti-Semitic and should gay
:22:18. > :22:24.coupleser allowed to marry? Tell us what you think. Send us your ideas
:22:24. > :22:27.for future debate ond general comments about the programme.
:22:27. > :22:31.When Mrs Thatcher was Prime Minister she was the butt of some
:22:31. > :22:35.vicious political satire. Though she was donned in a man's suit on
:22:36. > :22:39.Spitting Image people did not see those attacks on her as sexist.
:22:39. > :22:43.They were anti-her Government and its policies. Is it the same with
:22:43. > :22:52.Israel? Journalists, broadcasters and commentators all know they can
:22:52. > :22:57.risk being labelled anti-Semitic if they criticise Israeli policies
:22:57. > :23:00.towards Palestine as the cartoonist Gerald Scarfe found last Sunday and
:23:00. > :23:10.David Ward a few days before that. No-one should forget the horror of
:23:10. > :23:16.the Holocaust. The previous century has its share of persecution. But
:23:16. > :23:20.is criticism of Israel anti-Semitic. You did a very strong tweet on this
:23:20. > :23:24.after the event, which although it was in the heat of the Twitter
:23:24. > :23:27.moment, no doubt, tells us how angry you are. Any Jew who
:23:27. > :23:33.continues to buy the Sunday Times after today's blood libel cartoon
:23:33. > :23:40.is a traiter to their people. Why was it so offensive? It has to be
:23:40. > :23:44.said, it goes without saying, that criticism of Israel it's absurd to
:23:44. > :23:48.suggest it's anti-Semitic. It would be absurd to suggest that anti-
:23:48. > :23:54.semites don't use Israel as the whip to lash out against Israel. As
:23:54. > :23:58.such the lines become very blurred. You end up with a situation where a
:23:58. > :24:02.two-bit MP David Ward uses the Holocaust, which goes to the very
:24:02. > :24:11.core sensitivity as a means of being able to attack Israel. Do you
:24:11. > :24:15.mind if I read that quote out.? visited Auschwitz twice. I'm
:24:15. > :24:19.saddened that the Jews who suffered unbelievable levels of persecution
:24:19. > :24:22.during the Holocaust could within a few years of liberation from the
:24:22. > :24:30.death camps be inflicting atrocities on Palestinians in the
:24:30. > :24:36.new state of Israel and continue to do so on a daily basis. In your
:24:36. > :24:42.mind pure anti-Semitism. Purely. The Holocaust goes to the core of
:24:42. > :24:45.Jewish sensitivity. It was about annihilating all Jews to. Use that
:24:45. > :24:50.as an example to attack a particular government policy is
:24:50. > :24:54.anti-Semitism. APPLAUSE
:24:54. > :24:58.I made it clear from the outset, it's absurd to suggest that
:24:58. > :25:02.criticism of Israel is anti-Semitic. When you start using the Holocaust
:25:03. > :25:07.as one example, when the CNN veteran journalist Helen Thomas was
:25:07. > :25:12.asked about Israel and said, let all Jews go back to Poland and
:25:13. > :25:18.Germany, that's anti-Semitic. good thinking people would object
:25:18. > :25:19.very strongly to that. I think there is a legitimate case for
:25:20. > :25:24.criticising Israeli policy towards Palestinian people and what is
:25:24. > :25:28.happening to them. Do you think that David Ward quote is anti-
:25:28. > :25:33.Semitic? I think it's unfortunate that he made that link. It's not
:25:33. > :25:39.something I would ever made. I just think it's a very unfortunate link.
:25:39. > :25:44.Yes or no? It's a disrespectful link. It's a comment like yours
:25:44. > :25:47.that is differentiating the comment to say it's unfortunate but not
:25:47. > :25:52.anti-Semitic. It is precisely that which is blurring the liends.
:25:53. > :25:58.don't think it is anti-Semitic. What about what the Chief Rabbi
:25:58. > :26:06.said about the cartoon Tony Greenstein, founding of Palestine's
:26:06. > :26:11.Solidarity Campaign. Jonathan sacks said that Jews, victims of the
:26:11. > :26:15.holkausts are now perpetrators of Palestinians. This was a wholey
:26:15. > :26:21.artificial controversy. There was nothing anti-Semitic in that
:26:21. > :26:25.cartoon. It showed Netanyahu with a crown dripping with blood. Four
:26:25. > :26:29.times in the last two weeks Palestinian civilians, who are
:26:29. > :26:34.unarmed, have been fired on and killed. A young girl, 16 years of
:26:34. > :26:42.age, a teenager, 19 years of age, shot outside their college. That,
:26:42. > :26:46.to me, is legitimate criticism and for rabbi to say you can't use the
:26:46. > :26:49.Holocaust, I'm sorry, Israeli politicians and Zionists have
:26:49. > :26:56.continually used the Holocaust to continually support what they're
:26:56. > :27:00.doing. You can't have your cake - no, I didn't interrupt you. You
:27:00. > :27:03.can't have your cake and eat it. You're trading on the past
:27:03. > :27:07.oppression of Jewish people in order to justify the present
:27:07. > :27:12.oppression of Palestinians. Racism is wrong whether it's committed by
:27:12. > :27:17.Jewish people or non-Jewish people. If You Can Get It were living in
:27:17. > :27:21.Israel and you were a Palestinian - - if you were living in Israel and
:27:21. > :27:30.you were a Palestinian you might understand racism. I challenge you
:27:30. > :27:33.to give me any example - I thought you don't interrupt me. You're
:27:33. > :27:39.inconsistency in interrupting me is no different to the lies you're
:27:39. > :27:43.pedalling here. Give me one example of a politician that used the
:27:43. > :27:49.Holocaust by which they're basing whatever it is that they're doing
:27:49. > :27:53.there. I challenge you to demonstrate any example and cite
:27:53. > :27:59.source of any politician who has used the Holocaust as that excuse.
:27:59. > :28:05.For you to use the Holocaust by a means to attack Israeli policy is
:28:05. > :28:15.for you to dance on the graves of the many who died in that atrosiate.
:28:15. > :28:24.
:28:24. > :28:27.Netanyahu has skpaird -- compared Ahmidinejad... I think it's clear
:28:27. > :28:32.that the European Union agency published a document stating when
:28:32. > :28:41.criticism is based on legitimate criticism, rational anal siz of --
:28:41. > :28:44.analysis of the government, and when it's rooted by deep anti-
:28:44. > :28:52.Semitic beliefs, one must differentiate by the criticism at
:28:52. > :28:59.the stable -- state of Israel, but is uncovered by the umbrella of the
:29:00. > :29:03.state of Israel. The can -- cartoon not only publishing on the
:29:04. > :29:08.Holocaust Memorial Day, this crosses a clear line between
:29:08. > :29:15.criticism... Because Gerald Scarfe is an equal opportunities offender.
:29:15. > :29:20.He's vicious about everybody across the board. You wanted to come?
:29:20. > :29:27.think anti-Semitism in all its forms is wrong, as is all kinds of
:29:27. > :29:33.President, fascism. It is important, this is a very sensitive point and
:29:33. > :29:38.I hope you'll give me time to make it as clearly as I can, as a young
:29:38. > :29:42.boy, I learned in history how the constant demonisation of Jews,
:29:42. > :29:48.especially through depictions in cartoons and all that dehumanised
:29:48. > :29:53.them. It made it possible for countless to be taken to the
:29:53. > :30:00.concentration camps and lose their lives nay horrible way. But, at the
:30:00. > :30:05.same time, we also learned how British colonisers utilised
:30:05. > :30:11.cartoons against the colonised people. The liberators used
:30:11. > :30:17.cartoons - these are powerful Toons in propaganda war. I had the
:30:17. > :30:21.privilege of visiting Auschwitz with the chief raby Lord Sacks and
:30:21. > :30:25.the archbishop Dr Rowan Williams. It was horrible to see what had
:30:25. > :30:30.been done to these people. I pray that it never happened -- happens
:30:30. > :30:33.to anyone on this planet, ever. After that, one of the members of
:30:33. > :30:38.the organisers was interviewing people and I was asked this
:30:38. > :30:42.question: How do you feel, having seen what you saw? It was heart
:30:42. > :30:48.wrenching. It was beyond expression. You cannot express how you feel,
:30:48. > :30:52.the horrible way in which people lost their lives. But, and I hope
:30:52. > :30:56.you will allow me, I'm trying to use very careful language. I think
:30:56. > :30:59.the use of language is important. Maybe our MP who tried to express
:30:59. > :31:06.his feelings about it might not have been able to find the right
:31:06. > :31:15.language. When I was asked this question, I felt, in my mind, that
:31:15. > :31:19.the people living in Israel today, the Jewish people, are all carrying
:31:19. > :31:22.the history of that. It must have been heart wrenching for the
:31:22. > :31:29.parents to tell the children the stories of what they have survived
:31:29. > :31:34.or what their ancestors had to go through. I felt that if that is the
:31:34. > :31:39.history of suffering and pain that you have endured, you would be in a
:31:39. > :31:44.position to be able to understand what it's like because your
:31:44. > :31:48.ancestors have been there. It's not saying that anti-Semitism is
:31:48. > :31:53.justified or I'm saying that I'm equating the Holocaust to any other
:31:53. > :31:56.atrocity. You don't think they adequately understand the pain of
:31:56. > :32:06.the Palestinians? The pain of every human being we have to try and
:32:06. > :32:13.
:32:13. > :32:23.$:/STARTFEED. Is that legitimate? We are concerned with what is
:32:23. > :32:25.
:32:25. > :32:29.happening with the Palestinians. David Ward said Jews have not
:32:29. > :32:36.learned the lesson of the Holocaust. I would argue that people like
:32:36. > :32:42.David Ward have not learned the lessons. We will not remain silent
:32:42. > :32:46.when comments like this have been made. The problem is, this is a
:32:46. > :32:53.visual image. Like all visual images, they can be misunderstood
:32:53. > :32:58.and misinterpreted. We do not know if Gerald Scarfe - and he said he
:32:58. > :33:04.did not - intended to make a connection. This happened 10 years
:33:04. > :33:10.ago. A similar cartoon by Dave Brown with aerial sure aren't
:33:10. > :33:17.eating a Palestinian baby. It appeared by a perverse coincidence
:33:17. > :33:23.on Holocaust Memorial Day. Many Jews do not know about this. Far
:33:23. > :33:28.more non-Jews who do not know about it. I do not think they brand new.
:33:28. > :33:34.Unless we knew what was going on in the head of Gerald Scarfe, we
:33:35. > :33:39.cannot say he meant a connection. The blood libel is? The idea years
:33:39. > :33:43.ago of the suggestion that Jews were taking the blood of Christian
:33:43. > :33:49.babies and what not and using it for all kind of religious ritual.
:33:49. > :33:57.It was used as a means of being able to launch attacks against the
:33:57. > :34:01.Jews. It won an award as cartoon of the year, didn't it? It did. It was
:34:01. > :34:11.taken out of context. I would not suggest that was as anti-Semitic as
:34:11. > :34:13.
:34:13. > :34:23.the blood libel depiction in the paper last week. It is a complete
:34:23. > :34:24.
:34:24. > :34:28.lie. Rabbi Schochet is speaking and then I will come over to you. I
:34:28. > :34:34.will come to you free of perspective in a minute. I would
:34:34. > :34:39.suggest to you, the idea of using the blood libel depiction would
:34:39. > :34:44.evoke the sensitivity. If he did it in all perfect innocence, so be it.
:34:44. > :34:50.He apologised and the editor of the paper apologised. How often does
:34:50. > :34:54.Rupert Murdoch do that? He apologised as well. At best, they
:34:54. > :34:58.were grossly naive about the depiction. Coming back to the
:34:58. > :35:03.general references of a Holocaust is to suggest that Jews are
:35:03. > :35:07.committed to the Final Solution of Palestinians and a blatant
:35:07. > :35:12.annihilation of all Palestinian people. There were sensitivities
:35:12. > :35:17.and dynamics of everything going on in Israel. The language of
:35:17. > :35:21.Holocaust strays into the area. does the Israeli government pursue
:35:21. > :35:31.policies that have been declared illegal in international courts and
:35:31. > :35:37.
:35:37. > :35:42.in contravention Nations revolution to United Nations resolutions? --
:35:42. > :35:46.to United Nations resolutions? Settlements are being pursued and
:35:46. > :35:49.they have been caught in the Gulf. When something is universal and a
:35:49. > :35:53.particular group of people are singled out. The President of
:35:53. > :35:57.Harvard University at the time said Jews were not allowed in here
:35:57. > :36:02.because they cheat. When it was pointed out that non-Jews cheap as
:36:02. > :36:09.well, he said, you are changing the subject. I do not need a lecture
:36:09. > :36:13.about racism and xenophobia. Israeli policies stand to be
:36:13. > :36:21.criticised in international courts. The going back to the cartoon, it
:36:21. > :36:28.is not the stereotypical image of an anti-Semitic Jew. The typical
:36:28. > :36:33.anti-Semitic image from the British, Australian press before the war,
:36:33. > :36:39.were showing a fat and bloated Jewish banker with a massive hook
:36:39. > :36:49.nose. This could not be further from the trees. It shows a Jewish
:36:49. > :36:53.
:36:53. > :36:57.Guide doing manual labour. Can you get further away? -- guy. Most
:36:57. > :37:06.people do not think this cartoon is anti-Semitic. The picture of blood
:37:06. > :37:11.does not mean blood libel. When a former Chief Rabbi in Israel has
:37:11. > :37:15.said, we have to annihilate all Arabs, that reminds me of the
:37:15. > :37:19.Holocaust. If the only purpose of Holocaust Memorial Day is to
:37:20. > :37:28.learned the lessons of the past to apply them to the present for
:37:28. > :37:31.whoever commits it and he never ate is the victim. It depends on
:37:31. > :37:36.sensibilities. If you are a survivor of the Holocaust or a
:37:36. > :37:41.child of the Holocaust survivor, you are going to be incredibly thin
:37:41. > :37:45.skinned and sensitive about such imagery. We should all be thin-
:37:45. > :37:50.skinned and sensitive about such an atrocity. All of the human family
:37:50. > :38:00.should feel about that. We would be talking about the cartoons of
:38:00. > :38:03.Gerald Scarfe every Sunday! Is it possible to be anti- Zionism, anti-
:38:03. > :38:12.settlement, and T Binyamin Netanyahu but in support of Israel
:38:12. > :38:18.as well? Of course cities. Have a cartoon criticising Israeli policy.
:38:18. > :38:28.-- course it is. Murdering Palestinian children is not a
:38:28. > :38:34.
:38:34. > :38:43.policy. Anti-Semitism has always been the dehumanisation based on a
:38:43. > :38:47.lie. I can totally relate to what Jews have gone through in the
:38:47. > :38:54.Holocaust. It does not take away from the fact that what the Israeli
:38:54. > :38:59.government is doing is wrong. It does not make it right or OK.
:38:59. > :39:04.are not going to get bogged down in a debate about Israeli policy and
:39:04. > :39:07.what have you. There are two points to consider. The first is the
:39:08. > :39:15.deliberate depiction of the Holocaust to be used as a battering
:39:15. > :39:21.ram against Israel. It is fundamentally wrong. Also, at the
:39:21. > :39:29.singling out of Israel and the constant deal of utilisation by
:39:29. > :39:34.Israel in anti- government buildings and so one. You do not
:39:34. > :39:38.know if the cartoonist intended that? Thank you for your
:39:38. > :39:42.contributions. If you have something to say, log on to the
:39:42. > :39:47.website. Follow the link to beat online discussions. Send us your
:39:47. > :39:53.views about our last big question. Should gay couples be allowed to
:39:53. > :39:59.marry? It you would like to be in a future audience, you can e-mail in.
:39:59. > :40:06.We are in Cardiff on 10th February, Northolt in west London on 17th and
:40:06. > :40:16.a week after that we are in Southampton. God is love. Those who
:40:16. > :40:17.
:40:17. > :40:22.live in love living God and God lives in them. Those words are also
:40:22. > :40:28.used by lesbian and gay Christians. At the moment, this is against the
:40:28. > :40:31.law. That could change on Tuesday if the House of Commons votes aye
:40:31. > :40:40.to the Marriage (Same Sex Couples) Bill. Should gay couples be allowed
:40:40. > :40:45.to marry? You want to get married. This is the argument we hit against
:40:45. > :40:51.it. Why isn't a civil partnership good enough with a blessing
:40:51. > :40:55.afterwards? It is not about being good enough. It is a different sort
:40:56. > :41:02.of institution. Any two people have the same gender, as long as they
:41:02. > :41:06.are not related, can do this. It denies the fact it is a sexual
:41:06. > :41:12.relationship. You do not have to make any fouls. It does not
:41:12. > :41:15.necessarily mean it is for life. There is no need for Fidelity. You
:41:15. > :41:19.cannot dissolve the civil partnership on grounds of adultery
:41:19. > :41:24.because you do not have to be faithful to your civil Palmer. It
:41:25. > :41:30.is not part of it. In marriage, all those things are there. It is about
:41:30. > :41:34.making a commitment for life. It is a covenant and not a contract.
:41:34. > :41:38.Especially a marriage in church. If you have your marriage solemnised,
:41:38. > :41:45.you are saying that God is central to this relationship. You will love
:41:45. > :41:48.it and emulate it with God. For me, as far as I'm concerned, God
:41:48. > :41:54.brought my palm and myself together and has been part of our
:41:54. > :41:59.relationship from the start. -- my partner. We want to make a
:41:59. > :42:04.commitment for life and say that we will be faithful to one another.
:42:04. > :42:08.Marriage is a sacrament. That is important. That is an outward sign
:42:08. > :42:12.of an inward grace. Love is the grace. We have been graced with
:42:12. > :42:18.love for one another and we wish to express that by going through the
:42:18. > :42:23.sacrament of them carriage. -- marriage. We're making this
:42:23. > :42:33.commitment and forsaking all others. That can only be done in marriage
:42:33. > :42:34.
:42:34. > :42:40.and not in a civil partnership. Love came from God? I do not doubt
:42:40. > :42:43.that. Marriage is not just about love and commitment. It is a
:42:43. > :42:47.biological union with the capability of giving rise to
:42:47. > :42:54.children who are raised by their birth parents. Is it not better
:42:54. > :42:59.that children are raised within marriage? Many children are being
:42:59. > :43:02.raised by foster parents, gay couples, single parents, divorced
:43:02. > :43:09.parents. They are bringing them up magnificently. That does not make
:43:09. > :43:15.it a marriage. The gold standard fault upbringing of children is to
:43:15. > :43:20.be raised by birth parents. Because of the benefits of that and we are
:43:20. > :43:24.talking about reform to civil marriage. It is a reform to civil
:43:24. > :43:29.marriage. Does it serve society to redefine marriage in such a way
:43:29. > :43:35.that same-sex couples can marry? If it means downgrading marriage to a
:43:35. > :43:43.mere domestic partnership between two people. If you committee
:43:43. > :43:49.downgrade the important -- the importance of marriage. Fewer
:43:49. > :43:54.people will get married. Secretary of State for education is
:43:54. > :44:03.a big supporter of theirs. 200 backbenchers do not. He says this
:44:03. > :44:09.will reinforce marriage. I will come back to you. I was just going
:44:09. > :44:13.to say, not often do I agree with Michael Gove, but on this he is
:44:13. > :44:21.right. Marriage Equality will strengthen the institution of
:44:21. > :44:28.marriage. I am not religious. I am not bothered about it from the
:44:28. > :44:32.average -- ate religious the point. Those of us who are gay just happen
:44:32. > :44:36.to want equality. I also believe that people who are heterosexual
:44:36. > :44:43.should be able to have civil partnerships. I defy anyone to say
:44:44. > :44:49.that we should not be allowed to be equal. Is this about equality?
:44:49. > :44:57.Another dog collar. Just to answer the question. We have had three
:44:57. > :45:03.questions today. The first, yes, the second, no, and this one is
:45:03. > :45:06.know as well. You asked a question about the civil partnership and a
:45:06. > :45:11.blessing. In the Western Church, this edition is the sacrament of
:45:11. > :45:15.marriage is affected by the couple themselves. They marry each other
:45:15. > :45:20.and the church is a blessing of that marriage. It is called the
:45:20. > :45:24.solemnisation of matrimony. There is confusion as to what is going on.
:45:24. > :45:29.The other point about children raises all sorts of interesting
:45:29. > :45:39.issues. What about people in the 60s and 70s? We assume if they get
:45:39. > :45:39.
:45:39. > :45:43.married and made cannot have children, is it not a marriage?
:45:43. > :45:53.There is a whole range of different scenarios and we confuse them all
:45:53. > :45:58.
:45:58. > :46:03.There is a series of prohibitions. The age of consent, pree Dom to
:46:03. > :46:08.amarry. Marriage discriminates by the fact that - let me finish, in
:46:08. > :46:15.the same wi that pensions discriminate against young people.
:46:15. > :46:21.To uphold a certain good,... pensions discriminate against young
:46:21. > :46:26.people, next week's big question. It doesn't discrimination, if you
:46:26. > :46:30.have to redefine marriage to allow same-sex couples... Wait a minute.
:46:30. > :46:38.Sharon's from the Coalition For Marriage, not to be confused with
:46:38. > :46:41.other coalitions. Sharon, what is the detriment? Can I just say, it's
:46:41. > :46:47.not actually discrimination to treat different things differently.
:46:47. > :46:53.Men are different to women. A same- sex union, while you can respect it,
:46:53. > :46:56.is not the same as a heterosexual union. That's prejudice. It is not
:46:56. > :47:02.saying that two things are different are prejudice. When you
:47:02. > :47:05.read all 55 pages, it treats same- sex unions different to
:47:05. > :47:09.heterosexual unions. I won't bore you with the details. Marriage goes
:47:09. > :47:15.back to the beginning of times. Lawyers didn't create it. The
:47:15. > :47:17.church didn't create it. It goes back 4.5 billion years. A long time.
:47:17. > :47:22.This Government has no right to tamper with something so
:47:22. > :47:25.fundamental. Not marriage as we know it today. I respect their
:47:25. > :47:27.views about religious freedom and tolerance, but what the Coalition
:47:27. > :47:32.For Marriage is hearing from is we're hearing from people up and
:47:32. > :47:35.down the country who say I'm in a senior position, I daren't say I
:47:35. > :47:41.believe in man-woman marriage because I'm scared of loseing my
:47:41. > :47:47.job. I believe in man-woman marriage. An old intolerance which
:47:47. > :47:51.was wrong is being replaced by a new intolerance... Tim's back.
:47:51. > :47:55.difference does it make to you or anyone else if two gay people want
:47:55. > :47:58.to get married? I tell you exactly what difference. It makes a
:47:59. > :48:03.difference to the civic liberties of those millions of people up and
:48:03. > :48:08.down the country who believe in man-woman marriage. Not at all.
:48:08. > :48:12.2011 a housing officer lost his job... We argued for that to be
:48:13. > :48:16.given back because that was religious. He put on Facebook that
:48:16. > :48:21.he believed in man-woman marriage. He has sever received compensation
:48:21. > :48:30.or his job back and that's where the bill goes into law. What will
:48:30. > :48:33.this mean for gay Muslims? If I was approached by two gay Muslim men
:48:33. > :48:37.asking to be married, I would refuse to marry them because they
:48:37. > :48:41.do not meet the terms and conditions of marriage. Marriage
:48:41. > :48:45.within Muslim law is a contract between a male and a female. So
:48:45. > :48:49.that's a non-starter to start with. If they wish to be recognised as
:48:49. > :48:53.partners together in the eyes of the law, they have access to the
:48:53. > :48:58.civil partnership if they wish to do so. They are free to do that.
:48:58. > :49:02.Civil partnership should be enough? If that's what they're seeking. If
:49:02. > :49:06.they're seeking legal recognition, that is fine. For Muslims, the
:49:06. > :49:10.definition of marriage is one between a man and woman. I would
:49:10. > :49:14.continue to teach that to my children, my pupils, my stuents. I
:49:14. > :49:19.do not want to fall on the other side of the law where because I
:49:19. > :49:24.believe that this is what marriage is all about that it becomes an
:49:24. > :49:28.arrestable offence for example. It's absolutely right you should
:49:28. > :49:31.continue... Do you respect that? absolutely do. Why? Because if this
:49:31. > :49:35.Government was going to bring in a law that said everybody had to do
:49:35. > :49:41.something that was against their conscience I would be absolutely
:49:41. > :49:45.opposed to it. If anyone else expressed it who weren't religious
:49:45. > :49:49.you would say they were homophobic. No, if they believe marriage is
:49:49. > :49:53.between a man and woman and don't wish to conduct a same-sex marriage,
:49:53. > :49:57.that's fine. That's their belief. I don't want them to. I want the
:49:57. > :50:01.ability to enter into a marriage myself and as somebody who is
:50:01. > :50:05.ordained to be able to perform and conduct those some emisations for
:50:06. > :50:10.the people I know wish to be married as a same-sex couple.
:50:10. > :50:13.That's what I like about the law proposed is it gives us all that
:50:13. > :50:16.freedom. The Government has regularly changed the laws around
:50:16. > :50:20.marriage over the years. This is nothing new. It's nothing different.
:50:21. > :50:24.What we are doing is seeing a move towards greater equality. It is
:50:24. > :50:28.taking nothing away from opposite- sex couples and their marriage. If
:50:28. > :50:31.you're married today, you will be married in exactly the same way,
:50:31. > :50:36.your relationship will be exactly the same the day after this comes
:50:36. > :50:42.into legal being than you were the day before. That is simply not true.
:50:42. > :50:46.It is true. As soon as one gay couple gets married, you are then,
:50:46. > :50:52.by definition, saying gender is irrelevant to marriage law. You
:50:52. > :50:55.change the law for everybody. irrelevant. It is not. Marriage is
:50:55. > :50:59.a gendered institution. It is the only union... Only because we have
:50:59. > :51:04.legislated that in the past. It's the building block of society that
:51:04. > :51:08.is not just... But if it's about children, there are many children
:51:08. > :51:13.who are many different types of relationships. Is it not better if
:51:13. > :51:17.a gay couple have children, would you not prefer that couple had that
:51:17. > :51:22.sign that they were married. That's a completely different question.
:51:22. > :51:27.We're talking about redefining marriage. You brought in children.
:51:27. > :51:31.I tell you a poll this weekend says that a quarter of the gay and
:51:31. > :51:37.lesbian community say yeah, one redefinition, the next one's fine
:51:37. > :51:40.as well. If you redefine... What will the next redefinition be?
:51:40. > :51:45.say they would be happy with polyamorous unions being recognised.
:51:45. > :51:50.Who said that? A quarter of the poll this weekend. You talked about
:51:50. > :51:54.the process of children, 98.9% of children in the UK who are
:51:54. > :52:02.physically, sexually and emotionally abused happens in
:52:02. > :52:11.heterosexual set ups. Two women a week die at hands of their former
:52:12. > :52:15.or current partner in heterosexual partners. Are you saying there's
:52:15. > :52:19.some specificity about heterosexuals? Absolutely not. This
:52:20. > :52:27.isn't about other than equality in the eyes of the law. We have to be
:52:27. > :52:31.fit for the 21st century. You are in a partnership, do you want to
:52:31. > :52:34.get married? Yes, we have been together 19 years. We have been in
:52:34. > :52:39.a civil partnership for three. I would love to marry, when the time
:52:39. > :52:43.is right for us. Why is marriage so important? It brings added value.
:52:43. > :52:53.It doesn't detract from the sapbgtity of marriage. It adds to
:52:53. > :52:54.
:52:54. > :52:58.it. -- sanctity. How does the term "marriage" add value. It gives me
:52:58. > :53:05.full equality. You don't feel you're in a legitimate relationship
:53:05. > :53:09.now? We tolerate the trains being late, do you not realise how
:53:09. > :53:13.patronising being "tolerated" is. All my life I've had that. What is
:53:13. > :53:17.patronising, I don't have a problem with civil partnerships and with
:53:17. > :53:21.people choosing a particular life styles that they want, but...
:53:21. > :53:27.don't choose. Living the way they are living, but my real points is
:53:27. > :53:30.that as far as I'm concerned I think it is wrong when one group
:53:30. > :53:33.type comes along and looks to undermine or redefine something
:53:33. > :53:40.that's already been around for so long in order to build something
:53:40. > :53:48.new. We don't want to go back to the Holocaust in the gay marriage
:53:48. > :53:51.debate. Gay people were persecuted by the very people who suffered the
:53:51. > :53:57.most horrendous thing in history. In those camps gay people were
:53:57. > :54:04.punished in a way that we never described. You airbrush that out.
:54:04. > :54:10.It's a superb play by Martin Cherman... Women and Ronany
:54:10. > :54:13.travellers are the same thing. asking you not to redefine the
:54:13. > :54:18.whole principle of marriage, as it always has been. Ladies and
:54:18. > :54:25.gentleman, we're going to hear from this member of the audience. I say
:54:25. > :54:28.good morning to you. Good morning. We've got a littlement will of --
:54:28. > :54:32.little element of calm. If you allow gay marriage there's a danger
:54:32. > :54:36.of that opening the flood gates for marriage to be redefined in
:54:36. > :54:43.different ways. Instead of just being two people, then could it be
:54:43. > :54:46.between a man and two women or women and three men. Nobody is
:54:47. > :54:50.suggesting that. Last year in Brazil, a man got married to two
:54:50. > :54:56.different women in the same ceremony. No-one's suggesting that
:54:56. > :55:02.here. People say that all right if you can redefine marriage...
:55:02. > :55:10.should I not be equal? If David Cameron thinks he's got a backbench
:55:10. > :55:13.revolt now, think about that. should marriage be redefined...
:55:13. > :55:19.your reason... Your reason for me not being able to marry is because
:55:19. > :55:22.of what ifs? No. It's actually happened. People will say, why is
:55:22. > :55:27.it that homosexuals are given special rights that we've got to
:55:27. > :55:30.redefine. I look at it from a Christian point of view.
:55:30. > :55:35.looking at it from a Christian point of view as well. It's not
:55:35. > :55:42.about special rights. If she's Christian she would know that God
:55:42. > :55:47.says that homosexuality... Jesus never mentioned homosexuality.
:55:47. > :55:55.Jesus said... Not once. They say that the gos pels that came before
:55:55. > :56:02.him are true. Where does their love come from? It's not from God. It
:56:02. > :56:06.must be from satan. That's outrageous. God is love. Does your
:56:07. > :56:14.not say the same? My Bible says that homosexuality is a sin. No it
:56:14. > :56:19.doesn't. Wait a minute. Sharon, do you have a scriptural problem in
:56:19. > :56:26.your arguments with the old testament where it's quite or is it
:56:26. > :56:30.explicit? No, it isn't. This debate isn't actually, we're not here to
:56:30. > :56:33.debate whether homosexuality is a sin. There's a lot of theological
:56:33. > :56:36.debate in how we understand the text from a cultural perspective
:56:36. > :56:42.and putting them back into their correct context. I don't want to
:56:42. > :56:46.actually get into that. What I do want to say is that Jesus did say
:56:46. > :56:50.that divorce was wrong. He says that explicitly. He never, ever
:56:50. > :56:54.says anything against same-sex relationships. But he says that
:56:54. > :56:59.divorce is wrong. Yet, we have managed to redefine all our
:56:59. > :57:05.marriage laws to accommodate divorce. We have redefined marriage
:57:05. > :57:10.laws many times over the centuries. Centuries. We have changed the age
:57:10. > :57:15.of consent, we've changed the law to what women are entitled to and
:57:15. > :57:18.stopping women being chattel. We have redefined marriage in many
:57:18. > :57:21.ways. It is nothing new to redefine marriage. It is not undermining
:57:22. > :57:29.marriage. It is actually saying marriage is so good that we all
:57:29. > :57:32.want. It The lady back there. Good morning.
:57:32. > :57:36.In society marriage between a man and woman and to compleetly
:57:36. > :57:41.redefine that is, I agree with the man over there, it would open the
:57:41. > :57:47.flood gates for different sorts of unions like polygamy and stuff like
:57:47. > :57:52.that. In history the Christian church has reformed all the way
:57:52. > :58:00.through. When Henry VIII got bored of his wife, he got divorced. Why
:58:00. > :58:04.can't people like Sharon get married. Tony? I've been married
:58:04. > :58:10.for over 20 years. I do not understand how my marriage to a
:58:10. > :58:16.woman is undermined in any way by two people the same-sex marrying. I
:58:16. > :58:20.do not understand. On Wednesday morning, when the legislation has
:58:20. > :58:25.been passed, we will wake up and the world will still be there.
:58:25. > :58:29.Heterosexuals who are married will continue to have a happy marriage.
:58:29. > :58:35.Do you salute David Cameron, this is going to be hard for you? It is
:58:35. > :58:41.very hard. I just think... Bite your lip, go on. I think the Steve