As a journalist, I strongly support freedom of speech. This does not mean that I do not recognise the damage that ignorant, malicious speech can do. As a society, we have a responsibility to challenge homophobia and the spreading of homophobic myths, so that all of our citizens can enjoy equal respect and opportunity. The university's award to Archbishop Conti implies academic support for views directly contradicted by the academic evidence. This not only damages the position of lgbt people in society and makes us feel unwelcome at the university; it makes a joke of the university's esteemed academic reputation.

As Lord Justice Laws said in his recent ruling, religion cannot be used as an excuse for prejudice that would not be considered justifiable on any other basis. To grant it special privileges in that way is a move toward theocratic, autocratic principles of which a liberal academic institution ought to be ashamed. I hope the archbishop understands that, whatever the senate may think of him, he is as unwelcome among many of its students, researchers and staff as he has made others feel in wider society.

Further, by conferring this honourary degree, the University has clearly not considered that the impact of the teachings of the Catholic church in regard to contraception, particularly in Africa, does untold damage to the health of those at risk of HIV and other STIs; The Pope recently urged Catholic Bishops in the UK to oppose the Equalities Bill with 'missionary zeal', a statement that drew condemnation from many in politics across the UK. The catholic church across the world is begining to face up to its role in covering-up for priests, nuns and bishops who abused, both physically and sexually, children in their care. Is it right that the University honours the Rev Kathy Galloway, a christian voice for an end to inequality, beside a man who's organisation propagates and opposes equality at every step? I do not expect the University to act as a political vessel and publicly condemn the church, however, a passive statement of disagreement (by not allocating this significant honour) would have been desirable.

Mario Conti, i am sure, has many laudable qualities and achievements. His work in establishing links between the church and the university and for his work in fostering greater understanding between religions is, for some, worthy of praise. It is not, in my opinion, worthy of validation from one of the great seats of learning in the UK.