The second paragraph reads:
Instead, any discussion of values should be kept 'light' to encourage teenagers to form their own views, according to the brochure, which one critic has called "amoral".Last night I listened to The Moral Maze in the car coming back from the Cotswolds. The subject was something like 'Do we need religion to guide our morals' and the two Christians called as witnesses - what, two whole Christians? not a Buddhist and a Muslim? wow! - were McGrath and Bishop Butler, two excellent thinkers who made their points solidly and spoke about Jesus. The point I particularly remember was that we in this country have been recently making an unprecendented experiment in not replenishing our moral stock, as it were, from our Christian heritage, but seeing how long we can go before the supply runs out. We are now, one of the regulars said, running on empty.
The two atheist witnesses had nothing constructive to say, beyond that we get our morals from our 'humanity', which is a meaningless statement, as a questioner pointed out. They were more concerned with attacking 'religion' in general. Others pointed out that religions were not all the same and can't be lumped together. What Christians believe and try to practise is very, very different from Islam in any of its various manifestations. Although it's unfashionable to say so, religions just as much as anything else are subject to basic logic - if one says one thing, and the next one contradicts that entirely, they can't both be right.
My belief is that Jesus Christ is right. Therefore ....
So what about that government leafet. It fits together with the terrible woolliness of Gordon Brown's government, which seems to be at the end-point of this moral experiment, and is running on empty.
The question is, where shall we find a leader of conviction, preferably Christian conviction, who can begin the long road back to integrity?