Crosswords0 min ago
Should experts who claim a link between paedophilia and homosexuality be surprised when Our government decide not to use them?
Or are Christians once again being thrown on the funeral pyre of political correctness.
Incidentally - can someone explain why this man's Christianity is an issue? Are his views a reflection of his religious beliefs? Is paedophilia even mentioned in the Bible?
Incidentally - can someone explain why this man's Christianity is an issue? Are his views a reflection of his religious beliefs? Is paedophilia even mentioned in the Bible?
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by sp1814. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
Seems quite clear to me he was given a job because of what he does, failed to disclose a report he authored, which talks about certain people in society.
If what he has written is unsubstantiated and surely if it was true, the legal situation in this country would be far different, so if he will discriminate against people why should he have the job? The fact that he is Christian has nothing to do with it, if you read it; it’s the Daily Mails spin on it.
I haven’t read the report, nor am I likely to.
If what he has written is unsubstantiated and surely if it was true, the legal situation in this country would be far different, so if he will discriminate against people why should he have the job? The fact that he is Christian has nothing to do with it, if you read it; it’s the Daily Mails spin on it.
I haven’t read the report, nor am I likely to.
<<<<<Should Experts Who Claim A Link Between Paedophilia And Homosexuality Be Surprised When Our Government Decide Not To Use Them?<<<<
Yes..........the above has nothing to do with his appointment on the drugs Advisory Committee.
The Government has "form" in dismissing scientists who do not "toe the Party line.
I have no idea what this has to do with religion either sp1814.
Yes..........the above has nothing to do with his appointment on the drugs Advisory Committee.
The Government has "form" in dismissing scientists who do not "toe the Party line.
I have no idea what this has to do with religion either sp1814.
Y'see - that's the confusing thing about the Daily Mail report. It seems to suggest that his Christianity is a key component of this story - and how could it be? I mean, it's not as if the panel didn't know he was a leading Christian beforehand.
Could this be the Mail stirring up another 'Christians vs. The Gays' story (after the Melanie Phillips, B&B owners stories which have proved so popular recently)?
Could this be the Mail stirring up another 'Christians vs. The Gays' story (after the Melanie Phillips, B&B owners stories which have proved so popular recently)?
political correctness is getting beyond a joke these days. some views maybe a result fo his religious beliefs, such as homosexuality as this is stated in the bible "that a man should not lie with a man the same as he does with a woman" paedophila however i do not think is mentionned in the bible maybe because as soon as a woman was able to re-produce they would be married off, at a very young age and there was no age for sex so how could underage sex occur?
I just think you should have an isolated view here.
Suppose he had authored a report that said " ALL drinkers are violent wife beaters" you would question his judgemne and also ask would he discriminate agains all drinkers? I'm not saying he would but that third partys would question it.
Its what he is saying here but about another strata of society. So if at a later date he argues against something or someone who happens to come from that strata do you say yes hes mad a good call or he only objected because of his opponent.
Suppose hes wrong but he gets his way, later on he would be pilloried. If your going to have prejudices you have to expect to have to stand by them as much as your beliefs, don't you?
Suppose he had authored a report that said " ALL drinkers are violent wife beaters" you would question his judgemne and also ask would he discriminate agains all drinkers? I'm not saying he would but that third partys would question it.
Its what he is saying here but about another strata of society. So if at a later date he argues against something or someone who happens to come from that strata do you say yes hes mad a good call or he only objected because of his opponent.
Suppose hes wrong but he gets his way, later on he would be pilloried. If your going to have prejudices you have to expect to have to stand by them as much as your beliefs, don't you?
i know that during Shakespeares time, as soon as a woman was able to she was married off, for example Juliett was meant to marry at the age of 14.. I can only speculate that this was common practice in the days of the Bible..
However i do not think that his beliefs should interefere with what his job entailed. many people have prejudices, its hard not to with the way media and etc portray people. and no disrepect to religious people but the staticness that these religions have..
However i do not think that his beliefs should interefere with what his job entailed. many people have prejudices, its hard not to with the way media and etc portray people. and no disrepect to religious people but the staticness that these religions have..
I don't think he was sacked for being a Christian - he was sacked for what is perceived as a lack of sound scientific judgement in terms of his stance on an imagined statistical link between homosexuality and paedophlia.
I would take it that the Mail is stirring here - i don;t think his faith was ever an issue - that has no bearing on his credibility as a scientist. However, his work on his 'link' and his apparent attempts to conceal it, leave he credibility as a scientist with no personal axe to grind, in shreds.
I would take it that the Mail is stirring here - i don;t think his faith was ever an issue - that has no bearing on his credibility as a scientist. However, his work on his 'link' and his apparent attempts to conceal it, leave he credibility as a scientist with no personal axe to grind, in shreds.
He was sacked because he seems to hold Christian beliefs higher that scientific evidence.
There is no evidence whatsoever to conclude that there is a link between homosexuality and paedophilia. In fact, if you look at the actual (conviction) figures it's far more likely that a paedophile is 'straight'... maybe he thinks that gays are better at covering their tracks...
… or maybe this individual was removed from his post because his religious convictions trumped his rational judgement and also reality?
There is no evidence whatsoever to conclude that there is a link between homosexuality and paedophilia. In fact, if you look at the actual (conviction) figures it's far more likely that a paedophile is 'straight'... maybe he thinks that gays are better at covering their tracks...
… or maybe this individual was removed from his post because his religious convictions trumped his rational judgement and also reality?
Related Questions
Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.