Dear Rowan Williams...

Dear Rowan Williams,

As I'm sure you know, you have just over six months left as Archbishop of Canterbury and I'd like to suggest a couple of things that you could do that could transform your time as Primate of All England from a disappointing waste of time and opportunity to One of the most important periods in the history of the Church of England.

First. I think it's time to state categorically that homosexuality is natural and to prejudice against anyone who is homosexual is ill-informed, ignorant bigotry and has no place in any part of modern society, and that includes within the Christian church.

Second. It's time that the Church of England decided to come clean about its wealth, its finances and, in particular, it's tax status. If, as many if us suspect, the church has been avoiding, and, indeed, evading paying its fair share if tax then things need to be changed. A good Christian, and a good Christian church, should be proud to pay its taxes and contribute to the wider society.

Third. It is vital that you go on the record to say that the Pope's anti-condom statements are wrong and dangerous. You need to say that he, and his predecessor, are responsible for many thousands of deaths, particularly in Africa, that make the Church in Rome as evil as many dictators and oppressive regimes.

Fourth. I think it is time that you accepted that charging admission to historic buildings, most of which have received substantial grants and benefits from tax payers, is just wrong. Historic buildings belong to us all - unless you are prepared to pay full rates and taxes related to them being businesses.

Fifth. It is time to end the nonsense of having over seventy unelected bishops in the House of Lords. In a democracy Christians are as free to stand for election as anybody else. To have such a substantial number of votes reserved for one sect of one religion is unfair and unreasonable, and it is unrepresentative of our modern society. Why no reserved seats for Muslim leaders, or Hindus, or Seikhs. And let's not forget that, in practise, the majority of modern society are either agnostic or atheist - maybe the British Humanist Siciety should have guaranteed votes in the House of Lords, or the National Secular Society?

Sixth. I call on you to end the nonsense about "militant atheism" or "creeping secularism". I know it has helped you, and the likes of Baroness Warsi (really, you should choose your metaphorical bed partners rather better) to gain easy headlines but the truth is that religions are failing because education has shown them to be inaccurate and, basically, a pack of lies. You, as an intelligent man, and one going into academe as your next step, should be pleased that education is gradually winning over and that common sense and reason are winning through.

Seventh. Although it has served the Church of England well over the centuries, we both know that an established church is just daft in the 21st century. I guess the legislation would take longer than the amount of time you have left in Lambeth Palace, but you really should set the wheels in motion for the disestablishment of the Church. To give privilege and power to one faith group, particularly when only a small percentage if the population are actually practical adherents to that faith, needs to end.

Eighth and final. I realise this will be the hardest for you to do, but, if you want to be taken seriously in the academic world, and you want to be seen as having any intellectual integrity, you need to make it clear that there is, in fact, absolutely no contemporaneous evidence for any of the Bew Testament stories about Jesus, that the stories weren't written down for at least two generations and then by non-eye witnesses in different parts if the world, and that, with very little research, it is easy to see where the various stories have all been borrowed and stolen from. Fine, if you still want to believe they are true that's your choice, but, please, tell the truth about the historicity of the New Teatament stories.

Anyway, I realise it'll be a busy six months for you, what with the Jubilee, Olympics (did you get any tickets?) and starting to pack up your ornaments and nick backs ready for the removal firm, but still, please, seriously consider my suggestions of ways to improve British society and, if such things matter to you, make yourself a bit of a name.

Thanks, and have a great time in Canbridge,

Rob Steadman

OPINION: The Firebombing of Charlie Hebdo

The firebombing of the French satirical magazine Charlie Hebdo in the early hours of this morning should send a shiver down the spine of all right-thinking and responsible people.

The editorial team had decided to make the next edition of the weekly magazine an "Arab Spring Special Edition" - to celebrate the new freedoms countries like Tunisia now had. The cover cartoon mocked the fact that Tunisia's new "freedoms" included the imposition of Sharia Law and had a cartoon of the prophet Muhammad saying: "100 lashes if you don't die of laughter".

The "Arab Spring Special Edition" hadn't even hit the newsstands yet.

Of course, cartoons of the prophet have been known to cause controversies before; the Jylands-Posten cartoons of 2005 caused no end of trouble with death threats, etc. The editors at Charlie Hebdo could, perhaps have thought things were different in France where, in 2007, their right to re-publish the Danish cartoons was upeld.

The Quran does not explicity outlaw images of Muhammad.

In fact, it is only in some supplementary teaching, called hadith, that Muslims are forbidden from making visual images of figures. Somehow, though, the fundamentalist and fanatical Muslims have decided that images of the prophet are a bad thing and to make such an image makes you a target for violent retribution.

Any sane person can see this is a nonsense. Can you imagine a ban on images of Jesus or the Buddha? Those religions not only allow for artists to create imagery of their religious figures but cope when those images are used to mock their religion. Why can't Islam be the same? Is Islamic belief that fragile?

And why make up extra rules that aren't in the Quran? It's not like art wasn't around before Muhammad had his revelations.

The Christian church has been worryling quiet about the Charlie Hebdo firebombing today. I realise that Rowan Williams is a bit busy trying to dig himself and St. Paul's Cathedral out of the huge hole they have created for themselves with their tepid response to the Occupy London protesters (and the huge finiancial investments and links the catherdal has with the City of London), and the Pope, well, he's always busy trying to cover up the wrong-doings of his clergy - but, surely, they should have stood strong and spoken out against this evil and dangerous fundamentalism?

Let's hope that politicians can stand up to this aggressive bullying by lunatics. No one should be in fear of their life because they draw or published a cartoon. No society should tolerate these extremists.

The story of the Arab Spring is yet to unfold - let's hope it is not the story of how fanatical lunatics took over a large amount of the world.