Independence - in the U.S.o A.

July 4th - and celebrations all over the United States of America as they recall the signing of the Declaration of Independence (although that signing did not actually take place until Aug 2nd, 1776!) from Great Britain.  

Perhaps the best-know section of the Declaration comes from the preamble: 

"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.  

That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed. 

That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness."  

Some of those words, by the way, may be considered to be particularly appropriate within the context of the result of the recent U.K. referendum on continued membership of the E.U.!  However, I would also have to contend that the "just powers" of any government are derived, not "from the consent of the governed", but from Almighty God! (see Rom.13:1).

Today, for citizens of the USoA, is a reminder of the liberties that such a people, in general, enjoy. Indeed, all of us who live in "the West" enjoy freedoms and rights that are still denied to millions of people in many countries around the globe!  The problem is that most of us tend to take such things for granted, and display little concern for those who are not likewise blessed!  Often, we insist upon our own rights, and make unfair demands on others without due regard for their interests and welfare!  However, is it not true that few of us are concerned about the rights of Almighty God?

In the book of the prophet Isaiah, is a song that pictures the nation of Israel as YHWH's vineyard.  It contains these words: "... He looked for it to yield grapes, but it yielded wild grapes." (Isa 5:2).  The song teaches us that God has a right to expect love, worship, obedience, and willing service from those whom He blesses. Sadly, like those in Isaiah's day, most of us show little gratitude, but flagrantly break His laws.  When we do so, God has the right to act in judgement - and the histories of the nations reveal that whenever they choose to deny His existence, and reject his Word, they do indeed reap a bitter harvest.

Disciples of Jesus, at least, surely need to recognise that He is the Lord of the vineyard, and expects us - as He expected the Children of Israel - to produce "... the fruit of the Spirit [which] is love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness, self-control; against such there is no law." (Gal 5:22-24).

It is interesting that it is in Isaiah 5 that we find words that I have seen quoted, frequently, in recent months: "Woe to those who call evil good and good evil, who put darkness for light and light for darkness, who put bitter for sweet and sweet for bitter!" (5:20).

Dr Jim Denison, in his "CulturalCommentary" for today ends with these words: "The greatest gift we can give our nation is to help her citizens be people God can bless. So let's choose to reverence God and place our hope in his love. Let's pray for others to do the same. And let's pray what we sing: "God bless America." Today and every day, to the glory of our Lord."  Let even those of us who are not citizens of the USoA pray for our own nations; and let us not forget the rights of God!

Brexit, or Remain - some misconceptions.

On a website in which I am involved in France, one of the other contributors commented that, as far as the forthcoming Referendum is concerned "we will just have to wait and see"!!  The problem with that attitude is, in my opinion, that by that time it will be too late to do anything about it!  In this post, therefore, I want to share some information that will, I hope, clear up some misunderstandings.

The first of these is that we are being asked about our continuing membership of the European Union; we are not being asked about our connection with Europe!  The first of those is a political entity that is, in the eyes of many of us, dictatorial, undemocratic, disingenuous, and discredited.  The second is a geographical landmass from which, for as long as records have been kept, we have been separated by the stretch of water known as The English Channel (in the English language), or La Manche (in the French language).  Regardless of the result of the Referendum, that physical, geographical, situation will not change!  We will still be an 'offshore' part of the Continent of Europe!

Nor has the Referendum anything to do with the United Nations, G8, or G20.  This means that, even if we do leave the EU, we will still have a major voice on the world stage.  Indeed, the only problem there is the weakness of our so-called "leadership" - with a PM who has less backbone than a dead jellyfish!

The Referendum has nothing to do with travel in Europe.  Contrary to the statements made by some of those in the "Remain" camp - who not only should know better, but who also do know better - travel around Europe will not be stopped.  It is certainly possible that we would have to have our passports stamped, as in the pre-EU days but, speaking personally, I would welcome that.  Indeed, for as long as I was able, after the "barriers" were opened, I requested the person at the Border Post to stamp my passport, as it was part of my personal "souvenir collection"!  One commenter has even suggested that post-Brexit UK travellers would be able to avoid long queues at, e.g., airports, by being able to go through the "non-EU" gates!  Britain will not be “drifting off into the mid-Atlantic” if it leaves the EU, as Nick Clegg likes to say.

Our national security will not be diminished! We will not be voting on our membership of NATO (The North Atlantic Treaty Organisation) which is the real reason that there has been relative peace in Europe - not merely since the inception of the EU, but since the end of the Second World War! If the UK should become the target of hostile action from a non-NATO member, then other NATO member-countries are obliged to come to our assistance.  This would not change in the event of a Brexit result on June 23rd.

We will not be voting to leave either the European Economic Area (EEA), or the World Trade Organisation (WTO).  The EEA Agreement specifies that membership is open to member states of either the European Union or European Free Trade Association (EFTA). EFTA states which are party to the EEA Agreement participate in the EU's internal market without being members of the EU. They adopt most EU legislation concerning the single market, however with notable exclusions including laws regarding agriculture and fisheries. The EEA's "decision-shaping" processes enable them to influence and contribute to new EEA policy and legislation from an early stage.  All of the UK's trade and benefit agreements will remain unchanged should we leave, until such a time that the UK decides to renegotiate them for any reason.

Well, that's probably sufficient for now.  However, I shall endeavour to post some further information before the end of the week. 

BREXIT, or Remain? - that is the question!

With less than three weeks to go to what is arguably the biggest, most important, and most far-reaching, political decision for this generation, I want to share some thoughts on why I will be voting for the UK to LEAVE the discredited, disingenuous, dictatorial EU.  I claim no originality in anything that I post over the next couple of weeks, but wish to disseminate as much information as I can to as many people as possible.

Let's look, for example, at the economic arguments that have been produced by the Prime Minister and the Remainers. 

In the area of trade, they say 44% of the UK's exports go to the EU but the EU only exports 8% to the UK.  This, if one fails to examine the matter more closely, looks like a good reason to stay in the Euroclub.  However, one CANNOT honestly compare the 44% with the 8% because they are, in fact, completely different measures.

Indeed, the figure of 8% is actually 16%. If you want to look at what the EU (as a whole, all 27 other countries) exports to the UK, then you need to exclude the UK from the figures - obviously, because we can't export to ourselves!! The Remainers, through the tax-payer funded government pamphlet, has included the UK in the total EU export figures, thus arriving at a meaningless figure. If we exclude UK exports, then the other 27 countries have, as a whole 16%, of their exports coming to the UK - twice as much as the pro-EU government would have us believe!

Of course, 44% is still a much larger figure than even 16%.  This is where the Remainers' figures are even more disingenuous! The figures are shown as percentages. However, one figure is a percentage of only the UK's trade, whereas the other is a percentage of the whole of the EU's trade. This renders the comparison completely meaningless - one country being compared with 27 countries!

A concrete example may help to clarify the situation.  The 44% of UK exports that went to the EU in 2012 were worth £266b.  However, the 16% of the EU's trade coming to the UK was £296b.  In other words, the rest of the EU exported more to the UK than the UK exported to the whole of the EU!

Over the past ten years, on average, only three EU countries have exported less to the UK than we have to them (Ireland, Luxembourg & Malta). So the other twenty-four countries will most definitely want to continue trading with the UK, simply because we buy more from them!!   Of course, it is also worth noting that the three that don't fall into that category are hardly the world's largest economies!

Another way of looking at this is that the UK has 3 million jobs involved with our exports to the EU, but the rest of the EU has 5 million jobs involved with exporting to the UK. See how stacked in the UK's favour it is?

It is quite astonishing that a major political party would manipulate figures in the way the Conservative government members who are supporters of the EU have done. The clear aim has been to mislead anyone who does not understand figures and percentages.  The people who have most to gain from being a part of an increasingly authoritarian EU, are the Political, Financial and Media moguls. They have everything to gain (cheap labour). They would love to turn the clock back and drive the working people of this country back to Victorian times. To vote to stay in one would, in my opinion, have to be either insane, or deluded!

Vote LEAVE - it's the sensible, and patriotic, thing to do. 

BREXIT, or not?!

With the date for the referendum on the UK's continued membership of the European Union now set, I confess that I am a natural "BREXIT"er.  I object, strongly, to unelected eurocrats making decisions that effect my life; to laws being made by people who have been"appointed"; by even the Supreme Court being able to be over-ruled in its decisions by a group of foreigners (who, as has been pointed out elsewhere, are not even judges!).  On June 23rd, therefore, I shall be voting (DV) to LEAVE the EU.

But note those two letters - DV.  As many will know, they stand for the Latin words "Deo volente" which translate as "God willing".  I may not survive until June 23rd; the world, as we know it, may not survive until June 23rd; the EU might collapse before June 23rd!

There is more!  Some years ago, after the signing of the Lisbon Treaty - regarded by many as an EU Constitution, in disguise - I submitted the following to a Christian forum of which I am a member:

"SO, the Lisbon Treaty has now been ratified by each of the European Union’s member states. Well, if we are going to be accurate, in almost every case, it has been ratified by the political elite of the member states. Only the Irish had the luxury of being asked in a national referendum – and when the unelected, unaccountable, EU ‘powers-that-be’ didn’t like the answer that was received, the Irish were instructed to vote again. As far as I could see, there was so much spin exuded during the campaigning for the second referendum, that it is little wonder that the Irish reversed their earlier decision.

I have been opposed to the EU since its inception. Even when former UK Prime Minister Edward Heath – a man who, in my opinion, was a greater traitor to his country than Lord Haw-haw – led us into the EEC (European Economic Community), I voted against. I could not see how the breaking of cherished ties with other Commonwealth countries was going to be of any particular benefit to the United Kingdom.

I'm no anti-European

Of course, as anyone who knows me will understand, I am not some xenophobic anti-European! I have very dear friends in a number of European countries and, while I am only truly fluent in the English language, I can get by very well in French, have a smattering of German, a little bit of Dutch, and a little bit of Italian. And, of course, for many years, our main summer holiday has been spent in the countries of western Europe. I am just one of what I suspect is a rapidly growing number of people who are totally opposed to a European Super-state, in which I, as an ordinary tax-payer, am expected to accept every diktat, even as I fund the blatant corruption of the Brussels-Strasbourg gravy-train.

However, I have recently been wondering about the advice given by the Jewish rabbi, Gamaliel. “…my advice is, leave these men alone. If they are teaching and doing these things merely on their own, it will soon be overthrown. But if it is of God, you will not be able to stop them. You may even find yourselves fighting against God." (Acts 5:38-39)

Am I opposing part of God's bigger plan?

I am having to ask myself: “Is this ever-expanding, ever-devouring, man-made entity a part of the plan and purpose of God? Is the EU a clear sign that we are in the end-times, when time and history, as we experience them, will be no more?” What is certain is that, climate change, space exploration, or whatever, history does have an end. And was it not Albert Einstein who worked out that time has a beginning, and an end, as well?

So, in opposing the EU, might I be opposing the plan and purpose of God? For me, it’s a big question. For anyone, it’s a question worth considering. My only assurance is that, as an adopted son of the Living God, my future is secure. As one of my cousins states at the close of every e-mail: “I don’t do worry, I know the ending!” History, I was often told, is ‘His story’. That story hasn’t ended, but the day is coming, sooner or later, when the heavens will open, the Lord Jesus will return, and Paul’s amazing prophecy will be fulfilled as “…at the name of Jesus every knee will bow, in heaven and on earth and under the earth, and every tongue will confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father.” (Phil.2:10-11)."

As the referendum date approaches, and as I read all of the conflicting arguments, this question continues to loom large in my mind.  As I look at the changes that have occurred since November 2009 when I wrote the above - the rise of Daesh (aka ISIS); the return of blatant anti-Semitism; the ever-increasing persecution of disciples of Jesus - and their marginalisation even in many countries in which there is not overt persecution; when I read that the Pope is working towards a "one-world religion"; when I learn of the moves of the secular élite to bring about a "one world order"; I am more convinced than ever that we are in the last times, and that much of the Biblical prophecy that has not yet been fulfilled is being fulfilled before our eyes.

I shall still vote for the UK to LEAVE the EU.  However, I shall do so in the certain knowledge that the Creator and Sustainer of all that is; the Sovereign God of the Universe; is in control; and that He will have His way!   Yesterday, in Café Church, I preached on the immutability of God - His "unchangableness".  On that I rest and, regardless of the eventual result of the referendum, I shall seek to serve Him until He calls me home - whether that be by my mortal death, or by the glorious rapture. (see the relevant chapter in my book "Great Words of the Faith" - link above).  

I trust that you will be there with me!

May 7th - Why I won't be voting SNP.

This is my penultimate pre-election, political post.  I am not dealing with the specifically N.Irish and Welsh Parties as none of them are, for obvious reasons, standing in Scotland.  Nor am I dealing with the very minor Parties (could include the LibDems, next time around!!).

However, I have to make mention of

The Scottish National Party (The Scottish Nasty Party).

There is nothing unexpected in the SNP Manifesto.  This is the Party that, in its manifesto for the 2011 Scottish Parliamentary Election, pledged to consult on same-gender 'marriage'.  It did so - but pushed the legislation through even although some 64% of respondents opposed such a redefinition of marriage.  Ministers even denied that there was any need for amendments to the Bill that would have protected religious liberty and freedom of speech (something that, as many are aware, lost me my Strathclyde Police Chaplaincy!).

This is also the Party that has introduced the controversial 'Named Person' scheme that allows an outsider to interfere in the lives of ordinary families by having a "State representative" for every child, from birth until they have attained 18 years of age - a person who can, for example, ask questions of a Primary School child that relate to what happens within the home, and what level of sex education the child has been given!  This scheme - which is being challenged by a wide range of people and organisations - is planned to be rolled out by August of next year, although 'pilot schemes' have already operated in a number of areas.

Nicola Sturgeon, the current leader of the SNP, is in favour of a "rights envoy" for those who practice sexual deviance.  This person would promote their 'rights' "throughout the world, as an integral part of UK foreign policy"!  Talk about the tail wagging the dog!

In 2004, an SNP spokesman welcomed the introduction of the Civil Partnership Bill.  All of the contemporary SNP MPs supported the Bill at Westminster - and voted against the benefits of the Bill being provided to siblings, or a parent and carer 'child' who shared a home, but not a bed!

Last year, the SNP Government published revised guidance for sex education in Scottish schools.  The guidance emphasises the 'rights' of children at the expense of parental involvement, and says that a "named person" (as above) should be given confidential information that should be kept from parents!

In spite of the assurance, given by the previous Leader of the Party, after the referendum on Scottish separation from the rest of the UK, that such a referendum would not be held again "in his lifetime", his successor is already making noises as to the possibility of a second referendum during the lifetime of the next Scottish Parliament.  As one of the 55%, I find this a very dangerous move that could, so soon after the previous one, end up with the "yes" camp actually being successful!  This, I believe, would be simply because of the same - in my opinion - unthinking euphoria that will see a dramatic increase in the Westminster seats won by the SNP next week.  It would not be for the good of the country, or of its people.

These are some of the reasons why, next Thursday, my vote will not be cast in support of the SNP.

After the event.

It's all over, bar the shouting - and, regretfully, there appears to have been quite a bit of that! However, the result of the referendum is fixed, and no amount of conspiracy theories; alleged ballot-box, or count, fraud; or even of different questions on ballot papers in different polling stations, is going to change it.  If Mr Salmond is willing to accept the result, I fail to see why others appear to be unable to do so!

I also trust that friends, who were on opposite 'sides' of the pre-referendum debate, will discover that their friendship is real, and above politics of any sort.  A true friend is one who sticks with a person through thick and thin.  Such a friend does whatever is possible to encourage, and support, and even bless.  A true friend is neither triumphalist (as some 'No' supporters have shown themselves to be), nor sullen (as some 'Yes' supporters have shown themselves to be).  

This is even more important within families and, while I have not yet heard of any familial discord based on the result of the referendum, there were certainly families with members supporting opposite sides.

In my archives, I came across a story that may, or may not, be true.  Either way, it does make an important point.  It reads: "It was the interval between final two rounds in a boxing match.  In one corner, a severely bruised and battered fighter sat on his stool, while his helpers worked furiously at his bleeding face.  His manager leaned in.  'I think he's got you whipped.' he said.  'Yes', agreed the pugilist, gazing dizzily through nearly-closed eyes.  'I should have got him earlier, when he was by himself.' "

The manager may not have realised it, but his comment was as damaging as the physical cuts and bruises that the boxer had already suffered.  It's bad enough to have to bear the stinging blows; the buffeting; the battering; of an enemy. However, the criticism, and discouraging words of someone close can be much worse.

I trust that the good relationship that I had with many who supported the 'Yes' campaign will continue now that the decision has been made - at least for the foreseeable future.  I would contend that it is certainly the responsibility of those of us who claim to be disciples of the Jesus Who said "Blessed are the peacemakers, for they shall be called the children of God." (Matt.5:9) to do all that we can to bring about peace and reconciliation in our land. 

May all of us go forward, united in our love for our nation, and determined to see it flourish, as Glasgow's original motto states: "by the preaching of His Word, and the praising of His Name"!

Yes, or No?

With only one full day before the polls open for the Scotland referendum, this is my final post on the subject.  I have made on secret of my personal conviction that the best future for Scotland is within a continuing United Kingdom.  This is not, as Mr Salmond was suggesting in a clip on the BBC programme, Reporting Scotland, earlier this evening, that I do not believe that Scotland could 'go it alone' - I merely happen to be one of those who believes that there is strength in unity that is lost in isolation.

Mr Salmond's interview by Jackie Bird was, to say the least, interesting.  Time and time again, he 'ducked' the direct question that she had put to him.  This, I have noticed, has been a feature of the 'Yes' campaign which, however much he denies it, has been very much the campaign of Mr Salmond, supported by the SNP.  I have been told, ad nauseum, that the 'No' campaign has been negative and false.  However, I have also noticed that Mr Salmond has fought for his side with just one word - 'scaremongering'.  Everything that the 'Yes' campaign has put forward - from currency to cost of living - has been tarred with that single word.  No suggestion that it might actually be reality!  Even in this evening's interview, he was insisting that the rest of the current UK would go into a currency union, and that a separate Scotland would keep the pound sterling!  I believe that the correct psychiatric term is 'denial'!  Even if the leaders of the two main Westminster political parties (I totally discount the LibDums as a major force in British politics, and fully expect them to all but disappear at next year's General Election!) were to realise the error of their ways, and go along with Mr Salmond's conviction (which may well be correct!) that a formal union would be in the best interest of both a separate Scotland and the remainder of the UK as we still know it, the electorate outwith Scotland have made clear their disapproval of any such accommodation!  And Mr Salmond talked, this evening, about the 'mandate' of the Scottish people for such a union!  I honestly cannot see any of the Westminster politicians putting their own positions in jeopardy just to please "oor Alex"!

The ultimate choice, it seems to me, is the uncertainty that would continue within the UK - because the future is always uncertain; or the uncertainty of following the 'Braveheart' rhetoric of Mr Salmond.  I know which option I find less worrying!

Anyone who knows me, knows that I am no fan of David Cameron.  I have seen more backbone in a jellyfish, and his kowtowing to minority groups - from homosexuals to Muslims - is, I believe, an affront to most of the British population. However, I did agree with one of his most recent statements.  I have constantly insisted that this referendum is not about 'independence', but separation.  However, I have come to realise that I have been wrong!  Separation allows for re-union. This vote, if it is a 'Yes', will be a divorce.  It will be a divorce that is full, final, and irrevocable.  If Scotland votes, on Thursday, to leave the United Kingdom, then it will never - and that means 'not ever' - be able to return to the fold.

It is my prayer that the period following the declaration of the result which, regardless of the outcome, is going to disappoint a great many people, will be a time of peace and reconciliation.  As a disciple of Jesus, I am convinced of the sovereignty of Father God and I believe that He is still in control.  I don't know what the future holds - but I know Who holds the future!

One week today!

One week today, an unusually large number of the residents of Scotland will go to the polls to vote in what is popularly known as the "Independence" referendum but that is, in reality, the "Separation" referendum.  By Friday 19th September, the newspaper polls will all have become redundant, and irrelevant, because the people will have spoken, and their voice will have been heard!

The 'Yes' campaign have had a number of planks in their platform that have been, in my opinion, disingenuously deceptive.  Regretfully, a number of people have accepted the word of politicians (a dangerous thing to do, whichever side one supports!), and either plan to vote 'Yes', or have already done so by a postal vote.  What follows is of no interest, or value, to the latter group.  However, I trust that it will cause some of the former group to reconsider their position over the next seven days.

One of the major issues, it seems to me, has been that of the NHS.  The cry has gone up from Mr Salmond, and others, that if the result of the referendum is that we do not separate from our fellow-Britons, then the NHS in Scotland will be gradually privatised (and the 'Yes' campaign have consistently criticised what they have perceived as the 'fear' tactics of the 'No' campaign!).  The pros and cons of NHS privatisation is a totally different topic, but what surely ought to be made clear is that, under the terms of the Scotland Act (1998)  the NHS is a devolved matter.  This means that it is, and has been, the responsibility of the Scottish Executive/Government for many years.  It also means that it will continue to be so.  Sorry, Alex - that one doesn't work!

The currency that would be used in a separate Scotland has also been an issue that has dogged the 'Yes' campaign.  The current Chancellor of the Exchequer has, vehemently and consistently, ruled out any form of currency union with the remainder of the current UK.  The Shadow Chancellor has agreed wholeheartedly with that stance.  Even the wee LibDums (who are no longer the 'third major party', and who may disappear after the next UK General Election!) have said that they would not be a part of any such union.  The Governor of the Bank of England who, according to Mr Salmond, "is in charge", has clearly stated that "a currency union is incompatible with sovereignty."  This, of course, does not effect only the currency with which I pay for my messages in ASDA.  It also effects matters such as international trade; pensions (very important to some of us already, and to all of us eventually!); the banking sector.   We have already seen, on the back of a single poll that indicated that the 'Yes' campaign had overtaken their rivals, a fall in the value of sterling, and a fall in the stock market!  And that was just one poll!  The only person who regularly assures us that, when the 'Yes' vote succeeds, everyone else will fall in with his way of thinking is - Mr Salmond.  I am reminded of the old story (too old for some of my readers to have known!) that ends with the line "They're a' oot o' step, but oor Jock"!  Sorry, Alex - that one doesn't work either!

Just one other issue for now - the European Union.  The declared opinion of a number of high-ranking officials in the EU is that a separated Scotland would cease to be a part of that body, and would be required to apply for membership - a process that could take many years.  The opinion of Mr Salmond and the 'Yes' campaign is that the EU would be so desperate to have a separate Scotland as a member, that it would be little more than a 'rubber-stamping' job!  I seem to recall 'expert legal opinion' to support that notion - but opinion that remained, and remains, anonymous!  The SNP spokesman on BBC Radio 4, yesterday, claimed that no-one in Scotland was interested in leaving the EU.  I suppose that that is why we now have a Scottish MEP - from UKIP!  Of course, if the whole of the UK is allowed its referendum on membership of the EU and, as is expected, comes out of that discredited body, then there is unlikely to be an EU for a separate Scotland to join!  When one domino falls, others have a habit of following suit - and there is no shortage of countries who would gladly be the second to leave!  Is it indicative of the state of the SNP, in particular, that they would even wish - in an 'independent' Utopia - to be a continuing part of an organisation that hasn't even been able to satisfy its own auditors for many, many years?   Sorry, Alex - that's a third strike!

I don't like my posts to be overly long.  However, there is one issue that I have not heard raised at all, but that concerns me greatly.  No, it has nothing to do with the place of the Christian faith in this new. separate, Scotland - although that is something about which many are, indeed (and rightly), concerned.  This issue is much more politically practical.  As those who know me well are aware, I currently spend a lot of my time in France, and also travel, as occasion demands, to Germany, the Netherlands, Italy, Spain, Portugal, and other countries.  With me, I always carry a number of important documents.  One of these is my (UK) passport.  Having that passport means that if, for whatever reason, I am in trouble, I have access to the British Embassy, or a local Consulate, to receive assistance.  Will those officials be willing to help a foreigner - as I would officially be if I belonged to a separated Scotland?   I suspect not!  The alternative would be to go to the Scottish Embassy/Consulate.  However, I have heard no-one mention the cost of such the large number of properties that would have to be acquired for those purposes.  Other countries may be willing to act on Scotland's behalf, but the assistance would be minimal - and there would undoubtedly be a cost involved!  The other item is a little card named the EHIC - that assures me state healthcare at a reduced cost or sometimes for free, anywhere in the EU and Switzerland.  This is all, as far as I know, because of a mutual agreement with these countries.  How long would it take a separated Scottish government to put all of that in place - especially in countries like France, Spain, and Italy where a separatist movement is a thorn in the flesh of the respective governments?  

It is my hope - yes, and my prayer - that common sense, and pragmatism, will prevail over an emotional, albeit laudable, desire to "dae oor ain thing"!   The Bible, even if not accepted by all as being of divine origin, is usually recognised as having many wise words.  I close with one reference: "... 'though a man might prevail against one who is alone, two will withstand him. A threefold cord is not quickly broken." (Eccl. 4:12).  Let us not break up a country that is, of course, far from perfect, but that is still looked up to by many.  Let us put our energies, not into separating, but into improving.

You know it makes sense!

Yes? - or No?

It's okay!  I know that there is only a fortnight to go before the referendum on Scottish independence (= separation!), but this post is going to be in no way political.

I have just come across a post on Facebook.  It's from 'Jesus Daily' and shows a picture that is obviously intended to represent the incarnate Lord Jesus.  The caption above reads: "I CAME, LIVED, AND DIED, AND ROSE AGAIN FOR YOU. DO YOU BELIEVE ME? Yes or No"

That is, indeed, an important question.  It reminded me of the one asked by a man named Pontius Pilate, almost 2,000 years ago: "Then what should I do with Jesus Who is called the Messiah?" (Matt.27:22).   What will you do with Jesus?   

There are many responses to that question - too many for me to deal with in one post.  There are those who, like the Pharisees and the priests, with the support of a mob, merely want to get rid of Him.  He challenges their traditions; their lifestyle; their philosophy.  "Let's get rid of Him", is their response.  However, He is not so easily dismissed - as those 1st century Jewish leaders soon found out!

Others have no particular animosity towards Him.  Indeed, like Pilate, they may even have a grudging admiration for Him.  They like His teaching - as long as it isn't too radical!  They admire His courage!  They even suspect that He is more than any ordinary man.   But they wash their hands of Him (Matt.27:24).  They can't, or won't make a decision for Him - and, by default, have made a decision against Him!

However, in every generation there are those who, even as did one of those crucified with Him, recognise His Kingship, and seek the salvation that is available only through Him. They commence a life that is so different from the life they have formerly led, that it is referred to as having been 'born again'.  It's a life that is under His control.  It's a life that is not necessarily a 'bed of roses' - as those of His disciples who live in Iraq, Nigeria, Somalia, and about fifty countries in the world today, well know.  If you wish to find out more about the persecuted church, please scroll down to the links on this page.  However, as so many of them testify, it's His presence in even the direst of situations that proves His promise that he would never leave, or forsake, His followers. (see Heb.13:5).

The final tally of votes on Sept.18th will decide the future of Scotland and, to an extent, the remainder of the current United Kingdom, for generations.  Your 'Yes', or 'No', to Jesus will decide where you spend eternity.  I know which I believe to be the more important decision!

Thar's a referendum a-comin'!

Apologies for the headline!  Oh, and I know that, before the Referendum on Scottish Independence (or, better, Separation) there are elections to the somewhat impotent European Parliament.  However, it was the Referendum on which the Deputy Prime Minister of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and N.Ireland was pontificating today.

I watched the report of his speech on the early-evening television news bulletin.  If Scotland's residents vote 'No', we were informed, the LibDems would guarantee greater devolution.  I was glad that it wasn't breakfast-time - I would have been in danger of choking on my porridge!

The current likelihood of the LibDums (no, that wasn't a typo!) having any say about anything after next year's General Election are slightly less than the likelihood of me succeeding Barack Obama (yes, I know that I might do a better job - but I wasn't born in the USoA, and that is a major requirement for candidates!).  However, even if they were leading in all of the polls, for Mr Clegg to make such a promise is about as helpful, and meaningful, as him guaranteeing that there will be two blue moons in the sky on every Wednesday night between now and the end of the century.  In other words, his guarantees aren't worth the paper on which his speech-writer had written the words.

However, if Mr Clegg's words were pointless, those of the Deputy First Minister were no better.  She, if I recall accurately, accused Mr Clegg of making promises he can't fulfil!  Sorry, Nicola, but what is the 'Yes' campaign doing?  "We will have the pound sterling, because Alex Salmond says it will be better for everyone if we do."  He may even be correct in that assessment.  The problem is that it's a UK ball, and the rest of the UK don't want us to share it!  "We will have an automatic entry to the EU."  Not according to most of the EU pundits, who insist that a separated Scotland will have to make a formal application - and, if successful, would be anything but independent! 

The only concrete thing that came out of the report was further confirmation, if any is needed, that one can tell that a politician is lying simply by noting that the lips are moving.

Of course, it is pre-election time!

Marriage confirmed!

Last Sunday, 65% of Croatians voted in favour of a referendum officially amending their constitution to define marriage as being only between a man and a woman.  This is probably the reason why David Cameron refused a referendum to the people of England and Wales, and why Alex Salmond continues to refuse a referendum to the people of Scotland!  They knew, and know, that a similar result would be likely to be produced.

A petition campaign has been created to thank the Croatian voters for their stand.  Please join in solidarity by signing this petition at:
 
http://www.citizengo.org/en/1051-thank-you-croatia

Soon after the historic vote a media assault began. News outlets around the world were headlining phrases calling them "anti-gay” and "homophobic,” Hollywood celebrities made statements against Croatians, and lobby groups began to mobilise.

Those of us who support marriage, as instituted by Almighty God, must stand in solidarity with the Croatians, thanking them for defending the family and protecting the definition of marriage. We must let them know that the voices of Hollywood celebrities, news media, and powerful rich lobby groups do not speak for the rest of the world.

It is surely the hope, and prayer, of many of us that this would be the beginning of a 'fight-back' in support of the moral standards that have underpinned our society since the beginning of time.    

Please take a moment to sign the petition, and thus encourage the people of Croatia at this time.

Egypt – Political developments, but continued persecution.

Political developments in Egypt have raised hopes for the future of the Christian community. The committee tasked with re-writing the Egyptian constitution has voted in favour of articles that would grant religious freedom to all citizens. It also adopted a transitional article cancelling the existing requirement that Christians must obtain a special presidential permit before building or renovating a church.

These positive moves come as Egypt’s Christians continue to suffer at the hands of Islamists. For example, on 1st November a group of Islamists marched on a church in Cairo, shouting anti-Christian slogans, immediately after leaving Friday prayers at a nearby mosque. The attackers tore down a banner in front of the building and daubed the façade with graffiti insulting Christians.

The Christian community has also been beset by a spike in kidnappings since demonstrations by Islamic hardliners were broken up on 14th August. One Christian man, Hany Sedhom, endured a horrific ordeal in late September. His captors dragged him out of his car, slashed his face with a knife, hit him on the head with a rifle butt and drove him into the desert. For 48 hours he was beaten, threatened and denied food and clean water. But Hany remained steadfast; he said, “… every step of the way, every moment of pain, I could feel God there with me, telling me, ‘I’m going to save you.’”

Let those of us who also claim to be disciples of Jesus give thanks for Hany’s faith under pressure, which is typical of the trusting and non-retaliatory response of Egypt’s Christians to their recent persecutions.

Give thanks too, for the planned moves towards full religious freedom. The draft of the new Egyptian constitution is due to be completed at the end of November and will then be put to a referendum.

Pray that the final version will guarantee true freedom to Egyptian believers, and relieve them of crippling restrictions on their ministry and mission.

What's in a name?

"A rose, by any other name, smells just as sweet", the English Bard has his character Juliet argue, in Romeo and Juliet (Act II; Scene I).  The argument is that the names of things don't matter, only what they "are"!

However, although there is an element of truth in the statement - an 'apple' is the same as a 'pomme', or a 'manzana', or a 'μήλο' (melo) - it is not completely true.  Some names have a meaning that makes them of greater importance than others.

One such word, I would still argue, is the word 'marriage'.  Regardless of the language into which it is translated, it is still the union of a man and a woman, for life, and to the exclusion of all others.  That is so, regardless of the voting decisions of any group of politicians!

Wednesday evening's vote in the Scottish Parliament had more to do with the impassioned speeches of some of the members in the Chamber, than it had to do with reason and common-sense!  Of course, as the last Sunday School teacher that I ever had (by 15 I was considered too old, and had to leave!) often said, "The problem with common sense is that it isn't very common"!

I was unable to listen to all of the debate.  However, it struck me that the strongest pleas came from those who, like the Conservative leader, Ruth Davidson, are openly homosexual/lesbian/bisexual.  I didn't pick up on anyone confessing to be transsexual.   It also struck me that those speeches which I heard, from the aforementioned groups were very personal - as Ms Davidson stated in her opening remarks, "... this could be the most personal speech that I will ever make in the Chamber."

Therein, I would contend, lies the problem!  All of those speakers whom I heard supporting the Bill appeared to be doing so from the perspective of either personal choice (to do with their own sexuality), or on the basis of 'equality'.

I fail, utterly, to see why the very fabric of our society should be altered merely to suit the personal lifestyles of certain politicians - politicians who are elected (although, in the List system used by the Scottish Parliament, the majority are not even directly elected, but are put in place by their respective Parties!) to represent the public, not to use their positions of temporal power to achieve their personal ends!

The others, it seems to me, have yet to understand the difference between 'equality' and 'equivalence'!  Yet there is, in fact, a world of difference between the two terms.  To put it simply, 'equality' means being treated the same; 'equivalence' means being the same.

The Civil Partnership legislation gave, and gives, same-gender couples all of the legal rights of heterosexual married couples.  That is equality.   Indeed, they have far greater rights, in law than, for example, two elderly same-gender siblings, or a mother and (full-time carer) daughter, sharing the same family home - but not the same bed!  That same Civil Partnership, we were assured at the time (and that was less than ten years ago!), would not lead to any further demands from the homosexual (etc) community.  Of course, it was politicians who gave the assurance and, as the old joke (with too much truth in it to be funny) asks: "How do you know when a politician is lying?  His lips are moving"!

It is more than interesting that these "representatives" totally ignored the expressed view of almost fifty-five thousand petitioners (almost 670,000 for the whole of the UK - but David Cameron ignored them and realised, too late, that he had made a major mistake!) who were, and are, opposed to the proposal.  They realise that neither two men, nor two women, is the 'equivalent' of one man and one woman - any more than two oranges, or two bananas, is the equivalent of an apple and a kiwi fruit!

What is also interesting is that it is not, as the media have persistently portrayed, only 'religious' people who are opposed to this redefinition of marriage.  Prominent homosexuals have voiced their opposition - including Rupert Everett (actor), and David Starkey (academic); or their indifference - Alan Bennett (playwright) has stated that he isn't bothered, and doesn't even know anyone who cared, one way or another!   Indeed, even the (largely tax-funded) homosexual rights organisation, Stonewall, didn't start pushing for the redefinition of marriage until after Civil Partnerships had been introduced!

Paddy Manning, a homosexual commentator, writing in the Irish Daily Mirror, said that with same-gender marriage, the state remakes the institution as “an anything-goes irrelevant partnership agreement between adults”.  He further commented that same-gender  marriage “asks us to ignore reality and children’s rights”, and stated that “I’m a gay man, I’m not a victim and I reject this notion that traditional marriage should be drastically altered for some fantasy.”   He said that Civil Partnerships are sufficient. Of course, he was writing within the context of the Republic of Ireland having announced that, in 2015, it is giving all of its citizens the opportunity to vote in a referendum regarding the redefinition of marriage to include two persons of the same gender.  Jim Eadie (SNP) provided the debate with the views of three (3) of his constituents (none of whom actually elected him!) out of the hundreds that he claimed he had received urging him to support the Bill.  It would be of great interest to know how many requests he received urging him to oppose it!  I wondered, too, if those who support the Bill are so convinced that they have the electorate on their side, why we were constantly refused the very referendum that the Republic of Ireland is being given!

Of course, the Bill has two further stages to go though and so, although the signs don't look good, I am one who will continue to campaign, and pray, that it will be defeated.  What if it passes all stages, and is enacted?  All that I can say to that is that this is not human beings seeking to change that which was introduced by human beings - such as the Butter and Margarine Act, 1907!  This is human beings flying in the face of the Creator, and Sustainer, of all that exists, and Who ordained, from the beginning, that it should be a man and a woman who come together for their mutual comfort (strengthening);  for the procreation of children (a definite 'no-no' for same -gender partners!); and for the good of society.  Those who are supporting this measure, or who have supported it in the Westminster Parliament, will ultimately answer to Him - and "It is a fearful thing to fall into the hands of the living God." (Heb 10:31).

An EU Referendum for the U.K.?

Mr Cameron, the U.K. Prime Minister stated, only a few days ago, that the vast majority of the British public don't want to leave the E.U., merely to have it reformed!!

I do wish that he would explain to us the basis on which he arrived at that conclusion. Polls, we are constantly informed, use a representative cross-section of our society. I am unaware of a single such poll that has shown anything other than a majority (sometimes a substantial majority) taking an alternative position to that of the PM.

Indeed, today's newspapers report that a petition signed by 100,000 subjects of H.M. the Queen, and demanding a referendum on the U.K's. continuing membership of what must be one of the most discredited organisations in recent history, was delivered to 10 Downing Street, yesterday.

What we need is a mass demonstration marching on Downing Street - when the PM is there, of course. Whilst not advocating a repeat in the U.K. of some of what we have seen on our television screens across North Africa and in the Middle east, these people have shown that even dictators of long standing can be deposed.

If we are to get out of the corrupt, and insatiable, E.U. we may have to first of all get out on to the streets!

I'm voting "Yes"!

After weeks of campaigning for the various elections being held throughout the UK tomorrow, and months of campaigning for the referendum that will involve the whole adult population, the time to cast votes is almost upon us.

As far as the Scottish Parliament is concerned, I still haven't made up my mind as to who will receive my support.  However, on the referendum, I am in no doubt.  I will be voting 'Yes' to change, and a departure from the "first past the post" system that has long outlived its usefulness.

I added a video to my Facebook page, yesterday, and was asked why, if only three other countries use the Alternative Vote system, I was so obviously in favour of it.  I turned to my catering background in order to provide an analogy!  If I have spent my whole life living on cheap minced beef (and that would still, by the way, make me better fed than the average citizen of North Korea, and of many other parts of the world!), and dreamed of having fillet steak for dinner each evening, I wouldn't refuse a plate of good quality stewed beef!  Of course it wouldn't be exactly what I wanted, but it would be a lot better than what I had.

The AV system is not, nor is it near to, full proportional representation.  However, it is a step in the right direction.  With the FPTP system, in a 'safe' Labour seat, my personal vote is always going to be wasted - as I would never vote for the Labour Party.  With AV, my vote may still be wasted - but only if I have voted for the person who receives the lowest number of votes.  Otherwise, I get, not a second vote (as the 'No' campaigners have erroneously, and mischievously, claimed), but the opportunity for my single vote to be given to the candidate whom I considered to be the second-best on the voting slip.

This means that, in my own constituency, the sitting incumbent will have to take more notice when I write to him about particular matters.  According to past election results, he has never enjoyed the support of 50% of the voters.  But with FPTP that didn't matter.  As long as he received even one vote more than any other candidate, he was home and dry - a job for life in this neck of the woods!  With AV, he will be depending on non-Labour voters placing him as their second choice.  If people are not satisfied with his performance, then they might only place him at No.3, or 4 - and that would probably mean that one of his opponents would reach the 50% threshold before him.  That certainly sounds like an improvement to me.

I'll be at my local Polling Station, tomorrow, encouraging folk to vote "Yes".  I trust that many will do so.

An E.U. referendum!

According to news reports today, the European Parliament has passed legislation that will permit "EU funding" (which, of course, like all 'government funding' is supplied by the taxpayer!) to be used by political parties to publicise their campaigns even in national referenda!

This could mean that, if the British people are eventually given the right to vote in a referendum regarding continuing membership of the discredited, disastrous, debacle that is called the EU, then their own cash could be used to support the campaigns of those with vested interests (aka overly-generous salaries, gold-plated pensions, exorbitant expenses, etc., etc.) in keeping the United Kingdom in!

Of course, there has to be the opportunity for such a referendum in the first case.  Unfortunately, while it would appear that Prime Minister Cameron is all for allowing the people of Libya to determine their own national future - and, as earlier posts would indicate, I am with him on that - he is not as willing to allow the British people to determine theirs!

It would appear that there is only one credible political party within the UK that would be willing to permit the British people to have their say.  It is my hope, therefore, that in the forthcoming elections at various levels of government around the UK, the United Kingdom Independence Party (UKIP) will see a great surge in support.  It is unlikely that they will end up in control of even a smaller Council, but a good result for them might just increase the pressure on Mr Cameron sufficiently that he would bow to the demands of many of his own back-benchers (supported, I understand, by a fair number from the Labour opposition) to allow a referendum.  It is unfortunate that he is not prepared to save considerable expense by holding such a vote on the same day in May as the other elections are taking place.  But of course, as usual, spending other people's money is just too easy!

Is this the beginning of the end for the EU?

So, at long last, there is a focal point for those of us who long for the U.K. to get out of the discredited (and you may take that in any way you wish!) E.U.  The Daily Express newspaper has commenced a 'crusade' to "... liberate Britian from the stranglehold of Brussels."  Mind you, I trust that those who run this campaign remember that "Britain" or, more accurately, "Great Britain" (as in Grande Bretagne - size rather than importance!) consists of only England, Scotland, and Wales, even if the adjective 'British' is applied to all of the peoples of the U.K.!  If N.Ireland (which is still separate from the Republic of Ireland) is included - as it should be - then one should refer to "The United Kingdom of Great Britain and N.Ireland" - see your passport for confirmation!  The two islands, and their associated smaller ones, are The British Isles!

However, I digress!

Let me state, for the record, that I love Europe, and have very good friends in each of a number of European countries.  Even after our experience of the summer that has now passed, my wife and I plan to return to France in 2011.  Indeed, we are seriously considering a wee holiday home in the Dordogne, or the Vendeé, or Charente, or Charente-Maritime!  However, when I voted, almost 40 years ago, against joining the European Economic Community, I was at least voting about a trading partnership.  Only in his latter years did the late and, in my opinion, treasonous, Edward Heath confess that he had hidden from the British public the truth that a political union, with its associated, and manifestly corrupt, bureaucracy, had always been the ultimate vision!

The current Coalition Government (for whom I still pray, on a daily basis!) has done no better.  'Students' may continue to riot over what they claim is Mr Clegg's broken promise with regard to the proposed increases in their fees in spite of his repeated explanation that the Lib Dems did not win the last General Election, and that he has had to make compromises - especially when the scandalous state of the nation's finances, after the abysmal performance of the previous administration, is taken into consideration!   However, many have pointed out that the 'stiff' (well, it's hardly 'hard'!) line of the Conservative leader on Europe has had to be watered down because of the Lib Dem love affair with the E.U.!

I welcome the move by The Daily Express, and trust that there will now be such a groundswell of public opinion that not even the Government will be able to ignore it.  I do not claim to have the gift of predictive prophecy, but I am fairly certain that, if a referendum were to be called on the matter, there would be an overwhelming majority who would wish to say "Cheerio" to the E.U. and the Brussels' bureaucrats.  I certainly know which side would be getting my vote!

Broken promises!

The last (Labour) government of the U.K. had a manifesto pledge that it would allow the British people a referendum on the Lisbon Treaty. It reneged on that promise - only too aware that the likelihood was that the referendum would go against the, apparently insatiable, desire of the European Union to grab more power for its own unelected beaurocracy!

The apparent failure of the current (Coalition) government to make any firm stand against the E.U. - particularly the obscene demand for increased funding at a time when the rest of us are being told that we must make do with less - either, has led to the formation of a movement named "The Pledge".  Some details may be found at
 www.eureferendumcampaign.com

I have already signed the pledge, as have many others.  If you feel that the E.U. is a drain on our national finances, and a massive gravy train for the eurocrats, then you might wish to add your own name to the growing list.

You may go straight to the 'pledge button' via this link