A furore has broken out regarding the boxer Tyson Fury. It turns out he holds abhorrent views on women and homosexuals and this is causing quite the storm amidst liberal elites and media darlings. For this reason there are calls for him to be removed as a candidate from BBC Sport’s Personality of the Year. I find this beyond bizarre and symptomatic of all that is currently wrong with society. Whatever happened to freedom of belief?
Don’t get me wrong. Mr. Fury has taken one too many punches to the head or was deeply ignorant to begin with. His suggestion that a woman’s place is on her back is deplorable; a denial of the Christian belief in the equity and worth of women. God may have created males and females with intended difference but both are sacred beings worthy of the utmost dignity. How could either be viewed as mere breeding machine? His views on homosexuality are equally vile for he equates all gay people with pedophilic tendency. A viewpoint so moronic as to be funny were it not serious. So let us agree- his views stink. But what of it? Why should this impact on his credibility and merit as a boxer?
Two questions arise. First why should his views cost him a place as candidate for Sports Personality of the Year? At what point did a man’s private belief reflect his sporting achievement? If we say that only supporters of LGBT can be sportsman of the year then surely the whole thing descends into total farce. We stop evaluating genuine achievement and begin judging values instead. And thereby enter a world in which people are blackballed unless they toe the party line. A dystopian move that can only create a melting pot for disillusionment by the disenfranchised and further radicalisation. It is all rather reminiscent of Soviet Russia at its worst….which is increasingly true of much of Britain today.
This leads to the second point. Why on earth has this saga led to Mr. Fury being investigated by the police? Eh? What crime has he committed? What a frightening Orwellian State we have become if somebody is in danger of a visit from the boys in blue simply for holding a certain viewpoint….what is that but thought policing? At this point discussion is closed down forever. Personal freedom evaporates as people are scared into accepted the party line. Fear rises amidst the population lest they are cast out for what they believe.
True liberality is not like this. It accepts that people will hold different views in life and, so long as nobody is a menace to safety, encourages people to live alongside one another with respect despite these different views. True liberality is grown up enough to be offended but remain polite. It does not shrink from what challenges it but sees the freedom in allowing people to passionately provide alternative views in life. It trusts in wisdom and truth knowing these are always more convincing than error. Therefore it sees little need to smash down opposition. Which leads to a gracious society in which we may applaud a chap for boxing well, even if his viewpoints stink.
But of course here is the rub. If society itself has abandoned truth and wisdom, say in regard to the natural law, it will not be secure enough to adopt a genuinely liberal position. It will grow increasingly insecure and like Mr Fury fall into deep ignorance. Then, when its arguments seem shaky, it will turn to the law to enforce its viewpoint. It will soon seek to smash down dissent for fear that truth might get out. It will insist on the party line and zealously close down all alternative viewpoints. For example not allowing the populace to vote on changes in the definition of marriage, etc…
Hmmm makes you think doesn’t it? But be careful; thinking might lead to a change of belief. And beliefs are increasingly dangerous in Soviet Britain today. A land in which Christian freedom gives way to Big State worship, where the divide between proletariate and elites widens and where the corridor of acceptable belief is closing by the minute. Big brother certainly seems to be watching. And I personally find that far more concerning than a loopy boxers potty views.
Hear, hear. I totally agree. There is no freedom in Britain to hold certain beliefs, and the sooner we can persuade the thought police and PC brigade to have a rethink the better.
The trouble is that the human tendency is to ban them from holding their beliefs – then we are back where we started!
but he didn’t “equate all gay people with pedophilic tendency”.
RE. TYSON FURY:
..like Pope Francis’ statement, (re. if anyone hit the Pope’s own mother) I hope you’re not going to go and punch Tyson Fury, Fr Ed?! (Pembury could end up missing their priest over Christmas..)
On a more serious note; I readily concur with you re. today’s “liberal (dictatorships) think-tanks.” Their ‘enlightened’ views of UK Society MUST be taken into full consideration by everyone: “they know, you know.” However, should you end up expressing your own opinion; one disagreeable to their norms, their fury is soon vented upon you a la 1930’s Brownshirts style.
Mein Gott in Himmel!
By way of contrast – I cite Wogan’s TV interview with David Icke many years ago, we seem to have forgotten to simply laugh at misfit & eccentric characters -and can no longer simply state we disagree – and move on. And I do NOT need any of the ‘cultural enlightened luvvies’ to tell me how to think, thankyou. I too had an education.
I expect very shortly, the usual secular heap of ridicule will be thrown re. “a Christian Christmas” (which I think still stands for “The Mass of Christ” and not ‘Winterval?’) When they’ve done knocking the Church (and the dear old CoE is a prime target), I ask “Will they make exactly the same argument for say banning Ramadan, Deepavali and Rosh Hashanah?? I think not – the hoary argument of “preserving cultural rights” will then be flagged-up, (“but not for you Christian lot..”)
Not deplorable so much as displaying a woeful lack of sexual imagination!
A most edifying comment ( not) from someone who is ostensibly a Christian minister
What on earth is “sexual imagination”?
Something in Middy’s strange brain?!
I’m a great believer in freedom of speech. For a start, it makes it far easier to spot the nutters in society.
However, yet again, rights come with responsibility. Just because you have the right to say what you like, it doesn’t mean you should.
There is only one thing that this man proclaims that is utterly unacceptable to the few in control, this is that Jesus Christ is his Lord and Savior. He proclaims it loudly, he proclaims it repeatedly, he proclaims it powerfully. Everything else quoted by him will be twisted to suit the agender of the few in control who are now starting to panic because they are loosing their grip, and they will continue to loose it until Christs return in the Spirit. Christ is bringing to light all that is darkness and He will bring forth more souls who are willing to proclaim Him as He should be proclaimed. Nothing will stop Him. He is the Lord our God. When one considers that 6 million muslims convert to christianity every year they need to be worried and these figures will never be reported by the darkness. It does not matter though, Jesus is the light of the world and satans days are numbered. Tyson Fury might be a base man but he knows where his loyality is. It is in the Lord Jesus Christ and as he repeatedly says… believe in the Lord Jesus Christ and you will be saved.
You say that you find Fury’s views on women and homosexuals are unacceptable and also believe that he has had a major sporting achievement, I agree with the first and take your word for the second. The problem arises as to how we can reconcile his abhorrent views with his athletic ability which some want to acknowledge by making him a candidate in the BBC Sports Personality of the year contest. I believe that it is very difficult to do as you seem to want and separate these two aspects of Fury. The Sports Personality of the year award is about more than just sports ability, looking at the person in the round and also makes and puts forward the winner as a role model, given this aspect of the award is it not unreasonable to suggest that Fury is an unsuitable candidate?
I am neither a member of the liberal elite or a media darling and your response strikes me as intolerant of those who disagree with you using their reaction to Fury as an excuse to attack them. Your last last paragraph is verging on hysteria.
i didn’t respect tyson fury for a long while and had a nasty spot for romany gypsies because of my dads wife. but i have to realise each person is an individual regardless of their inheritence.
tyson fury proved against klitschko he is the best. i mean, he took the piss out of klitschko the whole fight he totally an utterly battered him so fair play to the man he can walk the walk too. i dont like his views on women though women get a hard enough deal as it is but like i said i didn’t like romany gypsies because of my experiences of my dads wife but we all learn hopefully.
the division is brilliant now so exciting with haye looking great, wilder in the states, and joshua here. it really is “lets get it on” times again. prejudice is usually based on childhood trauma like mine was but we all learn as we grow to take people as we find them not generalise.