Bible Banning?

As reported by Huffington post, Aberystywth University is set to consider a proposal to remove Gideons Bibles from it’s student accommodation study bedrooms. This is following a survey by the Student Union in which found that only 4% of students believed that having the bible in their room was a “good idea.”

Well let me tell you now, I have never been so offended; so utterly outraged, by the response of Christian student Jessica Hearne, who used the excuse that the UK is a Christian country. The UK is in fact a country that guarantees freedom of religion to all; you are free to believe in whatever you choose or not believe in any of it. I am British and am not a Christian, nor am I Jewish, Muslim or any religion you could name. I find it completely it unacceptably rude for this young lady to suggest that my nationality has anything to do with any religion.

Her argument is also a colossal straw man. Let me sum it up basically “Only 4% of students living in university accommodation think that having a bible in their room is a good thing, so we’re going to consider removing them.”

“Well you can’t because we’re a Christian country.”

Do you see how irrelevant that response is? This isn’t about whether the UK’s national identity is intrinsically linked to one specific religion. This is about a survey that said, overall, students weren’t comfortable with a bible being put in their room without their consent. Also, in what way does removing the Gideons Bible from a student bedroom stop a devout Christian from practicing their religion. Seriously; I’ve never met a devout Christian who didn’t own their own copy of the bible.

The Christian Institute have also responded, stating that they find it hard to see how someone could be offended by a bible being in their room. This demonstrates a huge amount of arrogance on their part. Of course there’s no way that a symbol of our religion could possibly offend anyone; when has Christianity ever said or done anything offensive?

You want to be offended by the fact that your special book could be removed from student bedrooms; feel free. But don’t act like there’s a reason it shouldn’t be, especially in the face of evidence that only 4% of the people involved are behind you on that.

Broadchurch Series 2 Episode 5 Review.

So I was kind of right about the roots of the Knight and Bishop feud; still on the fence about the missing girl theory; as the furnace in this episode could just be a red herring.

So we’ve gone full on legal drama, with the main focus of this episode being Knight and Bishop dealing with their personal problems intersecting with the trial. Through this, we get some insight into their joint back story; with Bishop’s bitterness over Knight refusing to defend her son. Bishop completely drops her professional façade, when she finds out about her son being assaulted in prison. This is something she holds Knight responsible for, though Knight seems to be of the opinion that that case wasn’t worth defending. “A man died because of your son”  - this is a very effective piece of character development for both and finally shows Bishop reacting as a parent rather than a lawyer.

Bishop isn’t really shown in the best light however as her actions in the trial are now less for the benefit of her client and more for the sake of humiliating Knight. While effort is made to show Knight’s lack of empathy with parents, it’s Bishop who comes out worse off in terms of audience reaction (from me at least).  While Knight is taking pot shots at Bishop it’s not really over anything personal. Bishop (or rather her junior) makes an amateur mistake in calling an unreliable witness during their defence. This is the source of Knight’s mockery, while Bishop’s motivation is both personal and unprofessional. Bishop seems to be projecting her own screw-ups and her son’s peril onto Knight.

In the B story, the suspects for the Sandbrook murders are stacking up. It seems like the neighbours may have been involved in some sort of wife swap situation…erm ok…

Other than that, the big development is Miller and Hardy finding what could be the place where the missing body from the Sandbrook could have been burnt. Other than that everything else in this episode didn’t really interest me. Bishop trying to coerce Paul into being a character witness. She doesn’t seem to be aware that he’s not Rory any more so won’t be so much of a push over.

This episode is alright  - the legal drama is taking over, which I can see being a problem for some people. The problem is that everything else happening (with the exception the Sandbrook investyigation) doesn’t seem to be very interesting.