In view of the personal attack on me by the Daily Telegraph on Saturday, I have replied to them as follows:
As you made a personal attack on me in your editions on Saturday, I hope that you will allow me space to reply. Your article accused me of being “controversial”. Personally, I do not think there is anything wrong with being controversial, but as it happens my views are not at all controversial. They are traditional, which is the opposite. If one believes in Christianity, that is not controversial, but if one supports same-sex marriages, that is very controversial, as the recent riots in Paris have shown.
You bring up the fact that I do not approve of women wearing trousers. But what you do not say (although I explained it to your reporter) is that the Bible says (in the very beginning) that anyone who wears the clothes of the opposite sex is “an abomination”. Is it controversial to accept the Bible? Indeed, for thousands of years, wearing the clothes of the opposite sex was considered a crime throughout the civilised world, with severe penalties. Several years ago, the Pope said in a speech, “The blurring of the genders is more dangerous to the world than the destruction of the all rain forests.” In short nothing has changed. Is it controversial to agree with the Pope?
You also mention that I consider unwed mothers as “naughty girls”. Of course I do — have they not been so considered since time immemorial? Furthermore, today they are much more naughty than in the past. We live in an era where contraception is easy and cheap, and most of the unwed mothers today have become pregnant deliberately, in order to get their own house, and not to have to live with their parents. But today they are even naughtier than that, because they are also cheating the Government. According to the law, they are only entitled to benefits if they are living alone. But few of them are alone, they all have a man living with them, who disappears the one day a month when the social worker comes. Is it controversial to consider them “naughty”?
Finally what I said about rape was that the rules are the same wherever it happens. There are no special rules for a “date”, so there is no such thing as a “date rape”. There is only rape.
My ideas are traditional ideas over thousands of years. No one is obliged to agree with me, but what is certain is that, by definition, my ideas cannot be controversial – they are the traditional views that have prevailed since time immemorial. It is those who oppose traditional ideas whose views are controversial.