End of the day, for a change. Just back from town. The radio wittering on in the background about President Obama's coming out (ha!) in favour of gay marriage. One interviewee against - can't accept that his president believes in something that he doesn't - then another in favour. Two male voices, similar tone, diametrically opposite view, same duration. I suppose that counts as 'balance'. But there's never a synthesis after thesis/antithesis. I wonder how there could be. What will the world be, if this goes on?
I'm in favour of equal opportunity, I suppose, although I think I'm more in favour of letting people get on with their lives without having to know what I think. Somehow, just about anything - marriage, private life, whatever - seems to end up more ruined than resolved when it becomes subject to intervention by opinion-formers, policy-makers, hot-air generators. Radio off; music on.
I'm in favour of equal opportunity, I suppose, although I think I'm more in favour of letting people get on with their lives without having to know what I think. Somehow, just about anything - marriage, private life, whatever - seems to end up more ruined than resolved when it becomes subject to intervention by opinion-formers, policy-makers, hot-air generators. Radio off; music on.