In the film “The Way We Were”, Barbra Streisand sings the title song which includes the lines “Can it be that it was all so simple then, or has time re-written every line?”

The accepted wisdom is that life today is complicated in all sorts of ways, and that years ago things were much more simple. And therefore, by implication, much better.

Well yes, better for some. If you happened to be part of the majority, probably white, male, well-off and not having to deal with too many problems of difference. So abused children, victims of domestic violence, the gay community, and many others went under the radar.

Were people even aware of transgender issues?

In 2017, the lack of understanding for victims of rape displayed by broadcaster George Hook on Newstalk was particularly insensitive.
The former rugby pundit suggested that girls “put themselves in danger”, and while he later apologised profusely for “perpetuating the stigma around rape”, Hook has exposed that there are still old simplistic attitudes to issues which die hard.

The emotionally explosive subject of rape or consent is being dealt with in a new ITV drama which started on Monday evening.

The character Laura is an attractive teacher who has recently split from her boyfriend, while surgeon Andrew’s wife died some time ago. The two go on a date, the next day Laura alleges that she was raped when Andrew came back to her house.

He is adamant that he didn’t force himself on her. “God, no!” he tells police.

Because we weren’t shown exactly what happened, we are left to make up our own minds.

As we watched it at home, I was asked “Who do you believe?”

“Her,” I replied instinctively. My reaction says a lot about us, we rush to judgement. Yet, this was the first of six episodes, and as the first unfolded, there were hints of Laura having a history of mental health problems, and we were made to wonder if she was losing the plot with the modern twist of her posting her accusations of rape online.

But next were suggestions that Andrew may have a dark past. And then we discover that Laura’s sister has been in a relationship with her ex-boyfriend.

I wonder where this one is going; but is it not typical of us that, like me, we easily jump to conclusions without knowing the full facts. And in this age of being bombarded with a wave of fact and opinion, we can’t tolerate or understand any other point of view?

There were three stories in the past week which illustrate the harsh, even aggressive, responses that meet opinions which are regarded as outside the norm. Jacob Rees-Mogg is a Conservative MP, who has been tipped as a possible party leader, and this was enough for Breakfast television to interview him. Former tabloid hack Piers Morgan asked the predictable questions, Rees-Mogg didn’t duck the issues and the MP said he believed abortion was always wrong, even after rape or incest.

The devout Catholic said his church’s teaching was authoritative on the subject, and furthermore he is opposed to gay marriage.

Years ago, when life was simple, his views were the norm – even after the 1967 Sexual Offences Act meant homosexual acts were no longer illegal, or the enshrining in law of the woman’s right to choose an abortion.

They’re not “normal” any more, and there was outrage at what were described as his “incendiary” remarks, with one contributor to a local radio station describing him as “intolerant.”

Yet, Rees-Mogg accepts that these are only his views and there will be no change in these laws. He says he’s entitled to his opinion, and surely he is?

Look, I’m about as far opposite to Rees-Mogg as I can be. The Eton-educated Tory from a privileged background, with a cut-glass toff accent that’s virtually gone out of fashion and an ultra-conservative Conservative’s attitude to modern day social issues.

But just because I don’t agree with him doesn’t mean I should treat him like some sort of freak, or silence him.

I suspect Rees-Mogg would be more tolerant of those, even within the Catholic faith, who are opposed to him, and indeed the other side of the coin is that there are evangelicals and right-wing Catholics who would claim people like me don’t deserve to be call a Christian.

So, I liked a recent blog from someone called John Pavlovitz who wrote: “On the days when those supposing to represent Christianity, those claiming to be speak for Jesus in the world, begin spouting their venomous bile against people because of their gender or orientation or skin colour or faith tradition, an alarm goes off inside of me that screams, “This is not of Jesus and you need to remind people!”

Surely all our opinions are valid, or is comedian Frankie Boyle’s comment correct when he puts it rather colourfully, “Libertarianism seems to be the belief that you should use your freedom of speech to tell everyone else to shut the f**k up.”

We also had the row (rather manufactured, I thought) over the new Lord Mayor of Belfast, Nuala McAllister who didn’t ask for Grace before meals to be said before her inauguration dinner. She is an atheist.

It seemed perfectly reasonable to me, in a secular setting, especially as people at individual tables gave their own thanks for the food.
However, she was attacked by columnist Alf McCreary who said he couldn’t think of a (literally) more graceless start to her term of office, accused her of a lack of tolerance and went on to criticise the Alliance party’s stance on gay marriage.

He, in turn, was accused of illogically accusing her of being illiberal for being liberal, and worse was labelled in one online article of being a “d**k” and an “a**hole”. Charming – and very tolerant.

And on the Isle of Wight, parents Nigel and Sally Rowe have withdrawn their two boys from the Church of England school, claiming there is an ‘agenda overriding our beliefs’.

They believe it is wrong that young children have to confront the complex issue of transgenderism, and took action after their six-year-old son came home ‘confused as to why a boy was now a girl’.

This debate was trivialised, with the media reducing it to the issue of boys being allowed to wear skirts. It seemed much more complicated than that, and both sides of the argument deserved to be heard, rather than megaphone insults. No, life isn’t so simple now; but at least more complicated voices and issues are being heard.

It’s just that there is a bit of a control freak in all of us and rather than think things through we make snap judgements and then try to win the arguments by branding those with a different opinion as intolerant and even deranged.

That’s my opinion anyway; you’re entitled to yours.