Life, death, and persuasion!

It’s a fifth Sunday so, normally, I would be promoting one of the books that I have written. However, with the UK General Election now just days away, I feel it incumbent upon me to comment thereon! I am dealing with only those political parties who have candidates in the new Motherwell, Wishaw, and Carluke Constituency – but others may wish to check out their own list of candidates, with most of the parties represented in the MWCC being also represented in other parts of the UK. With a total of nine candidates, I do not have the time to deal with those who, in all likelihood, will have very little support! That, I confess, is a subjective decision on my part!

What I do not have any intention of doing is telling others how they should vote. That is a matter for the individual conscience and, for those of us who claim to be disciples of Jesus, a matter of prayer for the promised guidance of God the Holy Spirit. However, I would urge that each of us who is entitled to do so, exercise our right to vote – a right that was gained for us by the hard work and persistence of generations now long gone! I realise that there are some (perhaps many!) who are unable, in all conscience, to support any of the current political parties. I understand! To any such I would make but one plea – Use your vote! It may be that you will just draw a big X over all of the names; you may wish to write “None of these!” across the ballot paper or, at the bottom: “None of the above”. Such actions will ensure that no candidate benefits from your having voted – and, more importantly, it will show as a “spoiled vote” and, if there were enough of those, the various political parties might even reconsider their selection criteria!

So what is this post all about? Well, what I want to do is to look at what each of the political parties has to say, in their manifestos, with regard to matters that are more of a moral nature than a social or financial nature. I refer, of course, to matters that are, quite literally, matters of life and death, and to one other that has a distinctly Christian aspect.

I did undertake the responsibility of actually reading through the manifestos of the main parties, and I will also refer to personal replies to a couple of e-mails that I sent to each of my own Constituency Candidates for whom an e-mail address was provided. This, I hope, will remove any concern that I am simply about to “bang my own drum”! I already know the party for whose candidate I shall vote.

Okay – first issue. Life. I refer to both abortion and to assisted dying/suicide. I found little information in any of the manifestos. However, both my Lib Dem and SNP candidates have, in e-mails to me, made clear that there support for both of these issues is in accordance with Party policy. In the case of the SNP response, it was clearly a pre-produced response, as Marion Fellows states “… the SNP … is committed to working with Gillian Mackay to support her member’s bill …” – a Bill that was passed a couple of weeks ago! Only John Mason (SNP) in the whole of the assembly had the courage to oppose it. Ms Fellows appears to follow the Party line with regard to assisted dying, but would not vote on it as this is a devolved matter. Previous correspondence with her indicates that she also follows the Party line with regard to abortion. The other response was from Gordon Miller who, at the time, was named as the LibDem candidate. He only responded to the “End-of-life Protection Pledge”. He claims a “Christian faith”, and that he has prayed much about such issues. However, his e-mail is, to me, less than clear. He states that “… my position on assisted suicide or euthanasia is rooted in my commitment to ensuring that any policy we support truly respects the most vulnerable and respects the dignity of all individuals.” His Party manifesto states that it seeks to “Give Parliament time to fully debate and vote on legislation on assisted dying for terminally ill, mentally competent adults with strict safeguards, subject to a free vote.” It makes no mention of the easily verifiable point that even the strictest of safeguards can quickly be watered down – if not disposed of altogether! However, I would also note that the final list of candidates names Hayley Bennie as the Lib Dem candidate. I have no idea as to why this apparent change was made – but there have been other instances reported of candidates being dropped because of their professed Christian faith!

The Conservative manifesto states that they “… will maintain the position that assisted dying is a matter of conscience, and will respect the will of Parliament. Debates on assisted dying should never distract from the importance of delivering high-quality palliative care services, and we will continue to support children’s and adults’ hospices.” It has no specific mention of abortion, but does state that “We will expand our international campaign on girls’ education, women’s rights, and reproductive rights.” Previous statements show that ”reproductive rights” include abortion. The party has a track record of providing funding for programmes that promote abortion overseas.

The Green Party manifesto states that “Elected Greens will support a change in the law to legalise assisted dying for people suffering from terminal disease who wish to avoid prolonged unnecessary suffering if this is their clear and settled will. Proper safeguards would be put in place.” There is no mention of abortion, but their single MP (standing down this time) consistently voted in favour of abortion.

The Labour Party, in their manifesto, make no reference to assisted dying/suicide. However, its leader has stated that “I’m personally in favour of changing the law … I think we need to make time (for a parliamentary debate). We will make the commitment … I will give you that commitment right now.” [conversation with Esther Rantzen]. The manifesto makes no mention of abortion, but does state that it “believes all women must have access to the full range of reproductive services, irrespective of where they live”.  Of course, as with other parties, it makes no reference to the health of the unborn child! It should also be noted that the attempts to legalise abortion right up to full-term (effectively decriminalising the procedure) has been headed by Stella Creasy and Dame Diana Johnson – two Labour MPs!

Reform, UK make no reference to these issues in their manifesto.

Secondly, transgender issues, and puberty blockers. These issues do not appear to have been included in the manifestos. However, both the Conservative, and the Labour parties have indicated their intentions if elected to government on Thursday. Labour has said, through the shadow woman and equalities secretary, that the party would “modernise” the system, making it more simple to obtain a “gender recognition certificate”. The Conservatives, on the other hand, has pledged to introduce new legislation that would change the definition of “sex” (i.e. gender!) to mean “biological sex,”, or “sex at birth”.

Both parties have committed to implementing the recommendations of the Cass Review – a landmark report on gender identity services for children and young people, published in April. It is, I understand, a complex, and far-reaching, review, with the author, Dr Hilary Cass, making several recommendations. NHS England has acted to implement policies that strongly discourage social gender transitioning before one has reached 18 years of age. Puberty blockers are also being withdrawn from medical practice.

Thirdly, so-called “conversion therapy”. This term applies to a practice that seeks to change, or suppress, someone’s sexual orientation, or gender identity. The problem, from a Christian perspective, is that it does not differentiate between certain coercive activities, and the pastoral counselling provided by many Christian clergy, and others. I recall, at Spring Harvest many years ago, counselling a young man who wished to deal with recognised homosexual tendencies. I shared with him from God’s Word, and I prayed with him (whilst holding his hands!). There are those, especially within the “LGBTQ+” community who would have me charged, convicted, and imprisoned/fined, for having acted in such a way.

As far as I can make out, none of the parties (apart from, probably, the Scottish Christian Party and the Scottish Family Party, neither of whom are standing in the MWCC) is supportive of Biblical counselling in these matters. However, Baroness Falkner (who chairs the EHRC) has, in a letter to Kemi Badenoch, has stated that “… any ban is fully effective in protecting people with the protected characteristics of sexual orientation and gender reassignment from harm, while avoiding any unintended consequences.” (my emphasis).

A brief word on marriage. None of the traditional parties appear to make any significant mention of this God-created relationship, although the Conservatives do oppose "child marriage" whilst expressing pride in their introduction of so-called "same sex marriage". However, Reform UK do propose a 25% transferable marriage allowance that would move a little closer to the French (and perhaps other!) system of "household income" for tax purposes. A number of the smaller parties do support marriage in one form or another.

Okay – a considerably longer post than normal but, if it has helped even one UK voter to decide what to do at the polling booth on Thursday, then it will have been worthwhile. Just remember – use your vote. It is your privilege, and your duty, to do so.

General Election, 2019

Well with only a couple of days to go, I've decided that it is time for me to throw in my tuppence-worth on Thursday's General Election. At this stage of the campaign, I reckon that most people will already have made up their minds as to which Party/Candidate they are going to support (or even if they are going to vote at all!), so I doubt that I will change anyone's mind - but the 'blurb' at the top does state that "Some of my posts stray into politics ..."!!

In the constituency in which I am entitled to vote, there are five candidates, representing (in alphabetical order) the Conservative Party, the Labour Party, the Liberal Democrat Party, the Scottish National Party, and the United Kingdom Independence Party. I am not a political guru, and insist that only the poll that will be taken on Thursday is of any importance, but given the figures from the previous GE, it would be a major upset for the SNP if their candidate failed to secure the seat. However, she will not be receiving my support! Why not?

The reasons for my refusing to back the SNP are the same as those for refusing the Labour, and Liberal Democrat, Parties. The first of these is the support of these parties for abortion. If you have been reading my blog for any reasonable length of time, you will know that I am totally opposed to the murder of a human being, in its mother's womb, for whatever reason, and by whatever nomenclature. Labour are proposing the total decriminalisation of abortion. This would mean that babies in the womb could be legally killed, for any reason, right up to the day of birth. If ever enacted, it would be the most extreme abortion law in western Europe. The Lib Dems proposal on abortion is not quite as extreme. However, they propose to completely decriminalise abortion up to 24 weeks. This would mean that babies in the womb could be killed for any reason with no checks and balances. This, in turn, would legalise gender-selective abortion which must mean that Lib Dems approve of this discriminatory practice.

Where do the SNP stand on this emotive, but important, issue? Well, I read through all fifty pages of the Manifesto - but found no mention of a policy on abortion. However, the party's position was more than hinted at by the furore that followed John Mason's motion, to Holyrood, that access to abortion be restricted. He received no support from the Party!  

The Conservative manifesto does not contain extreme policy proposals on abortion as Labour and Lib Dem manifestos do. Regretfully, there are also no commitments not to further liberalise the abortion laws, and the party has shown, in the past, that it is willing to bring forward liberal policies that were not in the manifesto.

In matters concerning gender self-declaration, or no-fault divorce the Conservatives, again, have no specific policy proposals. However, as with abortion, this does not mean - recalling their 'track record' - that they would not legislate if they take power on Friday.  The other two main (UK) parties, have extreme proposals on gender self-declaration, and both propose to introduce the unilateral destruction of families through no-fault divorce. The SNP appear not to have any policy proposals on these issues, either.

You may have noticed that I have not made any reference to what has become known as "Brexit". However, I find it to be of interest that they state, in their manifesto, that "Unborn children are children. 218,581 abortions were performed in the UK in 2018. UKIP will seek to reduce the number of abortions carried out in the UK, and we will support alternative options such as adoption." This party also " rejects any moves for new laws to make gender a self-declared condition. Gender is not different to biological sex. There are two sexes – male and female – determined by anatomy and chromosomes."

So, for me, given the choice that I have, there is only one party to which I could give support. I hope that others, particularly those who claim to be disciples of Jesus, will have checked out issues such as those I have mentioned, and will prayerfully decide where they should place their X.

Of course, at the end of the day, I believe in the total sovereignty of Almighty God. The Psalmist asked: "Why do the nations conspire, and the peoples plot in vain?" He went on to paint a word-picture: "The kings of the earth set themselves, and the rulers take counsel together, against the Lord and His anointed, saying, 'Let us burst their bonds asunder, and cast their cords from us.' He who sits in the heavens laughs; the Lord has them in derision. Then He will speak to them in His wrath, and terrify them in His fury, ..." (Ps 2:1-5).

May His will be done, on Thursday, and every day, to His glory.

A principled man!

Prior to the referendum on the United Kingdom's continuing membership of the European Union, I don't think that I had ever heard of the Hon. Jacob Rees-Mogg, Member of Parliament (Conservative) for North-East Somerset. However, his obvious depth of knowledge; his razor-sharp wit; his debating prowess; his ability to make his point in a mature, gentlemanly manner; and his overall demeanour; caused me to look more closely at this man - whose name suggests that he lives in an élite bubble, unaware of the circumstances of "ordinary" people (although that is, quite obviously, not the case!).

I have continued to keep a close eye on "JRM" in the many months since the result of that referendum was announced - even although the government have not yet represented the will of the majority of UK voters. He has become, as many will be aware, the favourite to replace Theresa "Sharia" May(be, maybe not!) as Prime Minister, and has an enviable following in social networking - many of his followers being from the younger generation!

Of course, this has meant that he is suddenly the man every radio and television presenter wishes to interview. One such interview, was on Good Morning Britain, which aired yesterday morning, and in which Mr. Rees-Mogg, in answer to a question, told presenters Piers Morgan and Susanna Reid that he supported the teaching of the Catholic church and opposed gay marriage, adding: “The teaching of the Catholic Church is completely clear.” He was also asked if his opposition to abortion included cases of rape and incest, and replied: “I’m afraid so. Life is sacrosanct and begins at the point of conception, and I think it is wrong.”

My first reaction to the reports of this interview was to be grateful for a modern MP who is not only a man of principle, but who is not going to hide his principles for the sake of "popularity". Of course, the usual leftie-liberal-luvvies went into a hyper-ventilated frenzy of opprobrium. "This homophobe wants to take us back to the 18th century" may not have been said, verbatim - but it sums up a fair number of the comments that I have since read by those who believe that they have the freedom to publicly disagree with JRM's personal beliefs - but who would deny him the right to publicly state them! As has often been said - the most intolerant people are often those who demand tolerance!

Now, let me state clearly that, with regard to matters of theology, I am opposed to certain matters of doctrine that JRM would presumably hold - even marriage is seen by him, as a member of the Church of Rome, as a sacrament. I do not agree with that. However, my mind goes back to when I was a student at the University of Glasgow. The former Trinity College had been "acquired" by the University, and was now the Faculty of Theology. In what was seen, by many, to be a bold move, a priest of the Church of Rome, from the nearby Cardross Seminary, was invited to speak to the new Faculty - staff and students - for the first time in some centuries. I was there, as a rabid evangelical, ready to denounce whatever this man might say that would be in any way opposed to my solid Protestant heritage. I left the lecture, somewhat chastened! I discovered that I had more agreement with this Roman priest than I had with some of my regular lecturers! Since those far-off days, I have counted a number of members, and clergy, of the Church of Rome to be among my friends - including a Prince-Cardinal of the church!

However, going back to JRM, I am - as those who know me well would expect me to be - in full agreement with him on these two specific issues. More than that, I firmly believe that, in speaking as he did, he was representing the views of many of the "silent majority" who recognise that the nation has not merely drifted away from its Judaeo-Christian roots, but has been deliberately led away by a succession of governments and others who have been under the influence - and, in some cases, have themselves been active participants - of militant atheists, secular humanists, sexual deviants, and devotees of the so-called New World Order. Certain newspapers have been quick to vilify him. There are those who claim that his views will have totally destroyed any possibility he may have had of becoming PM.

I have now added JRM to my personal daily prayer-list, and will be praying for him and his family that they may know divine protection from those whose metaphorical knives are being sharpened in order to metaphorically stab him in the back. Perhaps you will join with me in doing this!

As usual, my friend David Robertson has published an excellent post on his own blog. You may access it by clicking on this link:

http://theweeflea.com/2017/09/07/the-man-who-could-make-me-vote-tory/

If you have the time, do listen to the video-clips that David has provided. If short of time, then miss out the Ali-G one!