Iris and the Cardinal
In case you missed this on last week's ´óÏó´«Ã½ Hearts and Minds programme, here's my colleague Malachi O'Doherty reflecting on the Iris Robinson Affair and asking if it's a little "suspect" that so many people have been angered by Mrs Robinson's comments when her views represent the basic teaching of the Catholic Church on the theological status of same-sex sexual activities.
Some might respond that this public debate is not actually about religion and sexuality. No one has challenged the right of faith groups to maintain their own moral and religious views. The debate is about language (how a particular moral view is articulated) and it is about a the relationship between religion and politics (and whether politicians need to be careful to distinguish their public role as political leaders from their personal beliefs as private citizens).
Comment number 1.
At 18th Jun 2008, gveale wrote:William
Thanks for drawing attention to Malachi. And I absolutely agree with you that we need to debate HOW we express our views. Iris did not promote civil debate, and I think we ALL need to start asking questions about her motives.
Graham Veale
Complain about this comment (Comment number 1)
Comment number 2.
At 18th Jun 2008, Les-Reid wrote:Excellent video. The baleful influence of religion on our society is clearly demonstrated and the supine acquiescence of our politicians is also criticised. One of the most direct commentaries on NI's noxious mix of religion and politics that I have seen. Malachi will make a fine Humanist if he keeps going in this direction.
However, I find the note of suspicion at the end unnecessary. The suggestion is that all the fuss about Iris Robinson's remarks has diverted attention from larger problems. I think that Malachi creates a false antithesis. We can surely say that homophobia is a real issue and that it deserves our outrage. That does not prevent us from being equally vocal and annoyed about those other problems as well.
Perhaps Robinson has stirred up more fuss than the Cardinal, even though their views are the same, because she was brutally callous in the terms she used. I have never heard the Cardinal speak on the issue. If so, then Robinson has done us a favour, by dragging into the glare of publicity intolerant, illiberal views which should be challenged wherever they are expressed.
Complain about this comment (Comment number 2)
Comment number 3.
At 18th Jun 2008, The Christian Hippy wrote:But chiefly them that walk after the flesh in the lust of uncleanness, and despise government. Presumptuous are they, selfwilled, they are not afraid to speak evil of dignities.
Complain about this comment (Comment number 3)
Comment number 4.
At 19th Jun 2008, U11831742 wrote:Puritan, I am begging you. Please stop throwing in this Kings James Version Bible quotes without context. If you want to make a point, by all means quote the Bible in you comment, but the way you are using the Bible here will just alienate non-believers. I treat the Bible very seriously, I am defending the Bible's reputation when I ask you to stop using it for these slogans. Please!
Complain about this comment (Comment number 4)
Comment number 5.
At 19th Jun 2008, The Christian Hippy wrote:You shall not muzzle an ox when it is treading out the corn.
Complain about this comment (Comment number 5)
Comment number 6.
At 19th Jun 2008, jovialPTL wrote:Priceless, Puritan!
Complain about this comment (Comment number 6)
Comment number 7.
At 20th Jun 2008, Les-Reid wrote:Another aspect of the case (that Iris Robinson is receiving more stick than the Cardinal for expressing the same views) is that the Catholic church has been denounced regularly by its Protestant opponents for years and some of that criticism has been based on crude Biblical literalism. The result has been that a lot of perfectly sound critiques have been swept aside as just more Paisleyite rant.
Indeed, could it be the case that the media here are reluctant to publicise criticisms of the Catholic church in case they themselves are perceived as being Orange or Paisleyite as a result? That question could only be answered after a lot of media study and analysis, but I have the feeling that there may be a grain of truth in it.
Another issue that Malachi refers to in the video is the ban on Amnesty International groups in Catholic schools. I wonder how much outcry there was in the media about that? Given the scale of the event and the humanitarian work that AI does, it should have been a much bigger story than the Robinson gaffe, but (as I remember it) it was quite the opposite.
Perhaps there is a long-established habit of giving the big religious institutions the respect they demand, whether they deserve it or not.
Complain about this comment (Comment number 7)