Sir, – Diarmaid Mac Aonghusa from Educate Together (Letters, May 3rd), finds Fr Paul Connell's view on non-religious schooling "deeply offensive". I don't agree with Fr Connell's view either, but I think he should feel free to express it.
Robust debate is part of a free and open society.
Many religious people fully accept that a moral life is possible without religion, but not all do.
Some believe that the idea of God is so central to morality that trying to define right or wrong in his absence is futile. They shouldn’t have to tiptoe around this belief, for fear of offending the non-religious.
Non-religious people believe that God isn’t real. Presumably this is a little unsettling for religious people.
Nor will all religious people find hearing the non-religious point out the moral contradictions and flaws they see in religious texts pleasant.
But once the religious and the non-religious enter the field of public debate, they are opening themselves to being engaged by opposing views, and must accept hearing things that they find unpleasant.
If we say that we find another’s views offensive, it follows that we don’t respect those views.
In this case we are not just saying that we disagree, we are saying that another’s views are so disagreeable that they ought to be suppressed.
There are very few views that are so offensive that they should not be spoken. It is not a label to be used lightly. It certainly shouldn’t become a debate tactic.
It shouldn’t allow us to win the point, without having to tackle the opposing view.
An organisation promoting education should give a better example of how to engage in an argument. – Yours, etc,
COLIN WALSH,
Templeogue,
D6W.