If you're out the loop, Tim Farron last week got himself in a bit of a bind. Four or five times in an interview with Channel 4 news, he refused to state whether or not he thought being gay was a sin.

Later on The Guardian's David Shariatmadari went on to say "I don’t care what he considers sinful, so long as it doesn’t translate into policy." Unfortunately, this seems to be an opinion growing in popularity. It's a nice way to turn a blind eye.

Whilst I don't share Farron's (suspected) views, the idea that one's opinion shouldn't affect their policy as loathesome as is it unrealistic.

It's a suggestion that politicians ought to - no, must - lie when forming their policy to maintain their position.

In reality, the reason people "get into" politics is because they have a view which they think is superior to those already out there. It works on the public's ability to find a politician that represents them.

As you can imagine, the whole ordeal exploded on social media with many people saying that - or words to this effect - that Christian politicians were always being persecuted for holding various beliefs.

Indeed Rod Liddle wrote an article claiming that Tim Farron is being discriminated against because of his faith. How dare he hold his Christian view?

The problem that Liddle's article fails to address however, is not in Tim Farron's beliefs being Christian or religious in nature but in the idea that because of his faith Farron's views cannot be challenged.

I'd much rather have the kind of politics where our representatives stood up for what they believe and showed it in their policy than one where Guardian's journalists were able to bully them into hiding their views.

At least then we might get a realistic idea of what our politicians stood for so that we - the public - can choose them ourselves.

We currently have a climate of the opposite that allows fake news and professional bullshitters to triumph.

Sam Littler