Comments on: Unchristian comments about BBC’s new head of religion?

By: Jason

Jason — Thu, 25 Jun 2009 08:52:14 +0000

The appointment of Ahmed is simply a “visible” means for the BBC to demonstrate that it complies with the law.The 2002 amendments to the Race Relations Act require that all public service organisations will “actively promote diversity”. The amended legislation does not specify how this should be done but places the burden of demonstrating compliance with the law on the persons responsible for those organisations.The way in which they do this varies from (technically illegal but tacitly accepted) positive discrimination in employment to achieve informal quotas of employees from minority groups, to the commonly perceived “loonie” actions of public authorities in banning the display of the national flag, etc on the grounds that such displays are not “inclusive”.Employing Ahmed and similar figures places the BBC firmly in the “compliance zone” of the legislation. Hence the BBC’s diverse collection of TV presenters intended to represent and promote acceptance of all colours, faiths, etc, etc in British society.

By: Andrew

Andrew — Wed, 24 Jun 2009 23:12:18 +0000

As a bekiever in the Christian faith I have no concerns about the appointment of Mr Ahmed, as long as he uses an impartial approach to the scheduling and programming of events.In the services we have multi faith services and i have not experienced any problems, so let us show a bit of common sense and let Mr Ahmed settle intp his job, and then if the guidelines are not impartially applied we can apply for redress.

By: Michael Ham

Michael Ham — Wed, 24 Jun 2009 19:07:52 +0000

Do people still take the Bush and Blair Corporation seriously?

By: Folklight

Folklight — Wed, 24 Jun 2009 16:39:55 +0000

Governments have long “used” religion as a stabilizing force in society as the moral tenets of the 3 major faiths assist followers in developing wholesome and desirable character traits which can promote the common good.When any religion attempts to use government to promote a specific agenda it will cause division.To extol the virtue of religion is expected and useful, to do so at the expense of other faiths is neither wise nor godly. Religion is a personal matter but not a private matter as ones faith typically encounters various belief systems, secular and spiritual on a daily basis, which require a response or a “choice”. The heart of tolerance is in understanding that “choice” is born of God given volition (ie a right)!In the arena of ideas and Ideals there are various voices espousing philosophy. This is a healthy interaction so long as it does not make a target of those who may disagree. To persuade requires trust and trust must be earned. Not every voice has a right to speak into your life.– Pray for Peace –http://allaboutgod.com/

By: Flisspops

Flisspops — Wed, 24 Jun 2009 12:43:34 +0000

Well what a surprise … the Government’s favoured mouthpiece – the BBC – has done what it was told! No disrespect to Mr Aaqil Ahmed – he’s probably more than qualified with the relevant experience. What annoys me is WHY the BBC has appointed this chap … namely the vile politically-correct dogma that this Government is intent on ramming down our throats. I agree with other contributors that religion SHOULD be a personal matter and apolitical. But, as usual, this Government wants to control every aspect of our lives. Roll on the next Election!

By: Andrew

Andrew — Wed, 24 Jun 2009 07:58:14 +0000

Ian, by unifying you end up fragmenting just like it says in the bib1e

By: Alexi

Alexi — Tue, 23 Jun 2009 22:03:55 +0000

There’s far too much religion on the BBC. Thought for the day, and prayer for the day are particularly annoying on Radio 4 in the mornings.

By: Nikkei 225

Nikkei 225 — Tue, 23 Jun 2009 14:10:27 +0000

If he’s the best qualified candidate, then he should get the job. He probably knows that he won’t last long if his work is biased as the BBC is respected for its objectivity.

By: Ian Kemmish

Ian Kemmish — Tue, 23 Jun 2009 11:23:39 +0000

Andrew (if that’s your name), I’m curious. If you believe that religion is a unifying force, then how can you simultaneously believe that promoting any particular religion can fragment a community? The two views are mutually incompatible.

By: Andrew

Andrew — Tue, 23 Jun 2009 10:47:42 +0000

The BBC is simply following its instructions from the government. Religion is a unifying force and Socialist theory sees it as an obstacle to party loyalty which must be undermined. Christianity is the majority religion in the UK, so promoting minority religions is a means of devaluing Christianity and fragmenting the religious community.