This guy gets it. It's not an anti-religion thing, as he explains very well.
(Published in Faith and Philosophy 2011. Volume 28, Issue 2, April 2011. Stephen Law. Pages 129-151) EVIDENCE, MIRACLES AND THE EXISTENCE OF JESUS Stephen Law Abstract The vast majority of Biblical historians believe there is evidence sufficient to place Jesus’ existence beyond reasonable doubt. Many believe the New Testament documents alone suffice firmly to establish Jesus as an actual, historical figure. I question these views. In particular, I argue (i) that the three most popular criteria by which various non-miraculous New Testament claims made about Jesus are supposedly corroborated are not sufficient, either singly or jointly, to place his existence beyond reasonable doubt, and (ii) that a prima facie plausible principle concerning how evidence should be assessed – a principle I call the contamination principle – entails that, given the large proportion of uncorroborated miracle claims made about Jesus in the New Testament documents, we should, in the absence of indepen
Comments
Regards, Paul.
(Oh and thanks for The Philosophy Gym which is the reason I'm here now)
You should know that the reason why he is talking so openly about "imposing morality" on sexual issues is because he came out as gay and has been a LGBT advocate:
http://www.lgbtran.org/Profile.aspx?ID=294
He's too personally involved to speak of certain issues as if he was trying to be impartial; he has his own agenda.