The ArgusChristina Summers: she's no bigot (From The Argus)

Get involved: Send your news, views, pictures and video by texting SUPIC to 80360 or email us.

Christina Summers: she's no bigot

Three cheers to Christina Summers for taking on the role of faith champion (The Argus, October 27).

No doubt she will receive rather thoughtless jibes from the many “bigots” against people of faith out there. I use the B-word, sadly, as she has already been labelled as such by a Green councillor on Twitter, as per your news report.

To clarify, her role is not to preach but to encourage and represent many who have faith and are involved in their community.

Too often people have half-baked, ill-informed ideas about religions and what motivates a person with faith. There is a large spectrum of positions, opinions and styles among faiths. They follow deep, personal convictions which should be respected if not agreed with.

I recall a meeting between faith reps and health service officials where there was an obvious incredulity among some that they should be taking the time, energy and money to be concerned about religious styles and beliefs.

I pointed out that faith membership was not just an intellectual position but touched on deep matters of identity and belonging and that respecting such things would help personal peace and wellbeing, and that this can only promote good health.

To call Christina Summers a bigot for her stance against gay marriage is unfair and disrespectful. She signed up to the Green pledge in favour of equality; she is not homophobic and supports tolerance and rights for gay people.

You can hold these views and believe, traditionally, that marriage is pair-bonding between opposite sexes intrinsically open to life. The Greens interpreted and redefined equality to include the concept of gay marriage at a later date. They moved the goal posts.

Fr Kevin O’Donnell, Horsham Avenue, Peacehaven

Comments (5)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

10:23am Thu 31 Oct 13

fredaj says...

I couldn't give a monkey's what nonsense you choose to believe in but to campaign against equal rights for particular groups of people on the basis of that nonsense is bigotry.

Plain and simple.
I couldn't give a monkey's what nonsense you choose to believe in but to campaign against equal rights for particular groups of people on the basis of that nonsense is bigotry. Plain and simple. fredaj
  • Score: 2

2:22pm Thu 31 Oct 13

From beer to uncertainty says...

Most charities are scams.
Most charities are scams. From beer to uncertainty
  • Score: -4

3:04pm Thu 31 Oct 13

anubis says...

Kevin O'Donnell is talking absolute nonsense when he tells us that, in principle, peoples' "personal convictions' should be respected, even if they are not believed by others. On the contrary -- nobody's 'personal conviction' deserves respect, whatever that 'conviction' might be; all 'people' deserve respect, and their right to believe as they choose, must find support in a free society -- but 'convictions', by definition, are ALWAYS a matter of opinion. Respect people and their right to their 'opinion' ... but to demand we must report their opinion, no matter how absurd, is a nonsense.

I have no reason to disbelieve Adolf Hitler genuinely believed that he was 'doing the Lord's work' when he sought to exterminate the Jewish race (as he said, quite bluntly, in a platform speech as early as 1923). Like everybody else, he was entitled to his viewpoint (unfortunately for some weird reason the prevailing 'system' didn't provide him with the appropriate therapy, there and then) ... like all those with mental health problems, he was deserving of respect, but to suggest that just because it was a genuinely believed 'opinion', it was 'worthy of respect' is EXACTLY the same illogical 'principled argument' offered by the Rev. Father!
Kevin O'Donnell is talking absolute nonsense when he tells us that, in principle, peoples' "personal convictions' should be respected, even if they are not believed by others. On the contrary -- nobody's 'personal conviction' deserves respect, whatever that 'conviction' might be; all 'people' deserve respect, and their right to believe as they choose, must find support in a free society -- but 'convictions', by definition, are ALWAYS a matter of opinion. Respect people and their right to their 'opinion' ... but to demand we must report their opinion, no matter how absurd, is a nonsense. I have no reason to disbelieve Adolf Hitler genuinely believed that he was 'doing the Lord's work' when he sought to exterminate the Jewish race (as he said, quite bluntly, in a platform speech as early as 1923). Like everybody else, he was entitled to his viewpoint (unfortunately for some weird reason the prevailing 'system' didn't provide him with the appropriate therapy, there and then) ... like all those with mental health problems, he was deserving of respect, but to suggest that just because it was a genuinely believed 'opinion', it was 'worthy of respect' is EXACTLY the same illogical 'principled argument' offered by the Rev. Father! anubis
  • Score: 4

3:04pm Thu 31 Oct 13

anubis says...

Kevin O'Donnell is talking absolute nonsense when he tells us that, in principle, peoples' "personal convictions' should be respected, even if they are not believed by others. On the contrary -- nobody's 'personal conviction' deserves respect, whatever that 'conviction' might be; all 'people' deserve respect, and their right to believe as they choose, must find support in a free society -- but 'convictions', by definition, are ALWAYS a matter of opinion. Respect people and their right to their 'opinion' ... but to demand we must report their opinion, no matter how absurd, is a nonsense.

I have no reason to disbelieve Adolf Hitler genuinely believed that he was 'doing the Lord's work' when he sought to exterminate the Jewish race (as he said, quite bluntly, in a platform speech as early as 1923). Like everybody else, he was entitled to his viewpoint (unfortunately for some weird reason the prevailing 'system' didn't provide him with the appropriate therapy, there and then) ... like all those with mental health problems, he was deserving of respect, but to suggest that just because it was a genuinely believed 'opinion', it was 'worthy of respect' is EXACTLY the same illogical 'principled argument' offered by the Rev. Father!
Kevin O'Donnell is talking absolute nonsense when he tells us that, in principle, peoples' "personal convictions' should be respected, even if they are not believed by others. On the contrary -- nobody's 'personal conviction' deserves respect, whatever that 'conviction' might be; all 'people' deserve respect, and their right to believe as they choose, must find support in a free society -- but 'convictions', by definition, are ALWAYS a matter of opinion. Respect people and their right to their 'opinion' ... but to demand we must report their opinion, no matter how absurd, is a nonsense. I have no reason to disbelieve Adolf Hitler genuinely believed that he was 'doing the Lord's work' when he sought to exterminate the Jewish race (as he said, quite bluntly, in a platform speech as early as 1923). Like everybody else, he was entitled to his viewpoint (unfortunately for some weird reason the prevailing 'system' didn't provide him with the appropriate therapy, there and then) ... like all those with mental health problems, he was deserving of respect, but to suggest that just because it was a genuinely believed 'opinion', it was 'worthy of respect' is EXACTLY the same illogical 'principled argument' offered by the Rev. Father! anubis
  • Score: 0

11:09pm Thu 31 Oct 13

anubis says...

Incidentally -- as an afterthought -- I often write to EVERY councillor on Brighton & Hove Council. Only about half a dozen of them respond ... but among that half dozen, Christina is one of them!

I disagree with most of her views -- but that's irrelevant; she's the sort of person we should be voting for . Whatever her failings, she's NOT a bigot!
Incidentally -- as an afterthought -- I often write to EVERY councillor on Brighton & Hove Council. Only about half a dozen of them respond ... but among that half dozen, Christina is one of them! I disagree with most of her views -- but that's irrelevant; she's the sort of person we should be voting for . Whatever her failings, she's NOT a bigot! anubis
  • Score: 0

Comments are closed on this article.

click2find

About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree