Pages

Sunday, 28 February 2010

The freedom to restrict freedom

“The Roman Catholic Church will wade into the general election campaign next week with a controversial document condemning the loss of virtue in public life,” trumpets yesterday’s (London) Times.

The Times is calling this a pre-election manifesto, as if these damnable people were a political party. It’s one thing wishing to make a difference, and we all try to do that every time we write to our MP, help with some leafleting or just talk up our favoured political party in conversations in the pub.

But the influence Catholic bishops want to impose comes from Rome. I thought Henry VIII did away with that nonsense in the sixteenth century.

The Times goes on:

In their pre-election manifesto, Catholic bishops are expected to take a line that is economically to the left of centre but conservative on social issues such as marriage, education and care for the elderly.

Surprise, surprise!

They will argue for the right to religious freedom at a time when secularist campaigning is on the rise as never before. The document will also be interpreted as a warning to the Conservatives that their more liberal attitude to certain social issues, such as homosexuality, threatens to alienate a core block of swing voters in an election where the religious vote is regarded as crucial to the outcome.

Well, I think we’ve rehearsed all the invective sensible people want to throw at these pillocks a thousand times over.

You’ll note that they talk of freedom – freedom to impose restrictions on others, of course. They’re so infatuated by their imaginary friend that the irony completely bypasses them.

No comments:

Post a Comment

We welcome lively and challenging comments. However, please try to stay on topic, be polite and do not use abusive, racist or sexist language, and do not incite your readers to violence or other antisocial behaviour, or your comment will be deleted. This isn't censorship: it's a case of staying within the bounds of decency and having an eye to the law, although we realise the law will be different in different countries.

We do not bar anonymous comments at the moment, but we would prefer that those commenting play fair and use their name or at least a regular nom de plume. It does show a confidence in your convictions. We know, too, that it's easy to use a false name and be effectively anonymous, but, again, we appeal to your sense of good practice. Even a wacky nom de plume is better, since at least readers will come to know that contributor and maybe remember her or his previous comments.

Blatant commercial advertising will be removed.

Comments should not be construed as necessarily the policy or opinion of the Pink Triangle Trust.

Note: only a member of this blog may post a comment.