Mustard wrote: Cursuswalker wrote: Mustard wrote:
I agree. I just wish that they'd focused on the issue of damage rather than the issue of religious offence, which I think is a major distraction since no religion has a claim to these sites.
We have focussed very much on both, especially in the local press.
But the issue that appears to have been (perdictably) seized upon is the issue of "offence". Out of curiosity, would you still object to this TV stunt if zero damage had been done?
Yes, but not as much. It would then be at the level of the Uffington debacle for me.
But, then, I'm a recently de-converted atheist.
|