Public Morality.

When the morality, and personal behaviour, of public figures is questioned, there are always those who insist that "as long as they can do the job".   However, increasing revelations of historic paedophilia, and other forms of sexual abuse; of the fraudulent claiming of expenses; of the abuse, and misuse, of power and authority; lead me to believe that the public should actually take greater care in checking out the personal morals, and behaviour of those whom they elect and who, in turn, are often in a position to influence the promotion of those in, for example, the judiciary.

The latest figures from the Office for National Statistics state that the numbers of homosexuals and lesbians etc., in the United Kingdom, is 1.6% of the population.  I have looked, but have been unable to find, figures for the number of parliamentarians who are openly in one of the sexually-deviant groups but, with 650 members in the UK Westminster Parliament, any number over 10 is higher than the national average.  I think that I can safely say that there are more than 10 openly homosexual/lesbian members in the Lower House!  I have often wondered if this was a major factor in the passing of The Marriage (Same Sex Couples) Act, 2013, in spite of the clear majority of the general public were opposed to the measure.  Too many had a vested interest - either for themselves or their friends!

So, perhaps this is why we should, indeed, check out the morals, sexual preferences, ethics, and anything else about those who represent us.  Otherwise, we may continue to place, in positions of influence and authority, those who hold views that are diametrically opposed to the majority.  It is one of the reasons why I am currently supporting The United Kingdom Independence Party.  It's not simply because I am opposed to the European Union.  It's not because I would not still prefer an overtly Christian Party in charge (I doubt, in all honesty, that that will ever happen).  Its because they appear to be the only viable Party that holds to at least some of the policies that I can, in conscience, support.

It's now only about six months to the next U.K. General Election.  Let us be careful how we vote.  Remember, we often get the government for which we have failed to pray!

The end of life.

Quite a number of recent posts have been on the topic of abortion - the deliberate killing of an unborn human being.  This evening, I want to go to the other end of the Journey of Life spectrum, and look at another emotive issue that is currently very topical - assisted dying (aka assisted suicide/euthanasia).

"What's in a name? that which we call a rose by any other name would smell as sweet;" states Shakespeare's heroine figure in his play Romeo and Juliet.   So, whatever name is given, and has been given, over recent decades, the common denominator, in this situation, is the deliberate taking of a fully adult life, for whatever reason.  By the way, I do not propose going into a discussion on etymology, especially with regard to the strict definition of euthanasia (from the Greek!).

Yesterday, the UK House of Lords debated the Bill that has been brought forward by Lord Charlie Falconer.   This Bill seeks to “enable competent adults who are terminally ill to be provided at their request with specified assistance to end their own life”.   Of course, there have been a number of attempts to legislate in favour of the right to end one's own life in recent years - at least one previous one also being in the name of Charlie Falconer.   Thankfully, each one has been defeated, but the assisted suicide and/or euthanasia supporters keep coming back with the sort of determination that one often wishes was seen in other areas of politics!

Often, some recent high-profile case, in which there has been a lot of public sympathy for the person who wishes to end his/her own life, is used by the 'suicide lobby' (to use a convenient shorthand expression!).  One that may well have been raised in the House of Lords, yesterday, is that of Brittany Maynard, the young woman from the USoA who travelled from her home state of California, to the state of Oregon, in order to legally kill herself!   However, emotional cases do not lead to good legislation!   Thankfully, for every Brittany, there are hundreds of others who do not take the 'easy' way out!  There were many who shared their stories on social media, but I didn't notice their stories receiving the same publicity in the main-stream media!

However, away from the individual cases.  What about the general picture?  It is interesting that all of the professional medical bodies are opposed to the sort of legislation that Charlie Falconer and, in the Scottish Parliament, Patrick Harvie, wish to see enacted.   However, that is not really surprising! Do assisted suicide supporters really expect doctors and nurses to be able to assist the suicide of one patient, then go on to care for a similar patient who wants to live, without this having an effect on their ethics or their empathy? Do they realise that this reduces the second patient’s will-to-live request to a mere personal whim—perhaps, ultimately, one that society will see as selfish and too costly? How does this serve optimal health care, let alone the integrity of doctors and nurses who have to face, and live with, the fact that they helped other human beings kill themselves?

Indeed, a report in The Telegraph, on Thursday, stated that "One in 10 British people believe elderly people should be offered a “reward” if they opt for assisted suicide, new polling suggests."  Now, apart from the fact that, if the 'reward' is only to be offered posthumously, it is going to be of little satisfaction to the recipient, why should anyone wish to be rewarded in this way?  By the way, the suggested 'reward'  was "a martini and a medal"!  I'm teetotal; and I would prefer to wear a medal on my own chest - while standing up!   The report continued: "Anti-euthanasia campaigners said the finding was “chilling” evidence of deep-seated prejudice towards older people from a small but significant minority of the population."   Chilling, indeed.

What is needed is more, and improved, palliative care.  The Hospice movement does a wonderful job - I know, I have visited enough of their establishments! - but it is limited in its scope because, as a charity, it depends on the donations of supporters.  As I type, I am thinking just how far the latest demand from the EU - £1.7 billion - would go to providing that desired level of care.  However, all that will happen is that it will be wasted on an already corrupt and bloated administration!

The debate, yesterday, went on for longer than was expected, and there was no formal division.  However, it is reported that the majority of those who spoke did so in opposition to the Bill.  For this, at this stage, many of us are truly thankful.

Prayer

As I appear to be unusually busy this week - who said that retirement was a dawdle?! - I am cheating a little this evening by posting some quotations, about prayer, from Charles H Spurgeon, the great 19th century Baptist preacher.

The story is told that, when visitors came to the Metropolitan Tabernacle from the pulpit of which he preached for 38 years, he would mention the modern heating system.  He would then ask if they would like to see the power-house.  The answer was always in the affirmative, as people were intrigued by the thought of a boiler-system that could provide heating for such large premises.  Spurgeon would take them to the basement and, opening a particular door, would proclaim, "This is the power-house of the Metropolitan Tabernacle!"  On looking in, the visitor(s) would see people, on their knees, praying passionately.

Spurgeon was a man of prayer himself. Throughout his entire ministry many hearers remarked that they were moved by his preaching, but yet still more affected by his praying. The famous American evangelist D. L. Moody, upon returning home after his first visit to England, was asked: "Did you hear Mr Spurgeon preach?" Moody replied: "Yes, but better still, I heard him pray."

So, a few prayer-linked quotation from one, often referred to as the prince of preachers, but who said that what the church needs, rather, is princes, and princesses, of prayer.   Some things do not change!

"If you want that splendid power in prayer, you must remain in loving, living, lasting, conscious, practical, abiding union with the Lord Jesus Christ."

"A prayerful church is a powerful church..."

"I have not preached this morning half as much as I have prayed.  For every word that I have spoken, I have prayed two words silently to God."

"Until the gate of hell is shut upon a man we must not cease to pray for him. And if we see him hugging the very doorposts of damnation, we must go to the mercy seat and beseech the arm of grace to pluck him from his dangerous position. While there is life there is hope, and although the soul is almost smothered with despair, we must not despair for it, but rather arouse ourselves to awaken the Almighty arm."

"My own soul's conviction is that prayer is the grandest power in the entire universe; that it has a more omnipotent force than electricity, attraction, gravitation, or any other of those secret forces which men have called by a name, but which they do not understand."

Let us pray!

Femininst votes against girls!

If Victor Meldrew was a real character, he would surely be uttering his famous catch-phrase: "I don't believe it!"

Yesterday, in the UK House of Commons, the Abortion (Sex-Selection) 10 Minute Rule Bill was debated and put to a vote.   This was a Bill, in the name of Fiona Bruce, MP, to make illegal abortion on the basis of the gender of the unborn child.  As was well publicised last evening, the 10 Minute Rule Bill was supported with a vote of 181 for and 1 against.  If I understand the situation correctly, this allows it to go forward to it's currently scheduled Second Reading in January.

However, many were asking that the one person who voted against the Bill be named (and shamed!).  I am happy to now be able to do so.  The one MP who voted, effectively, to allow the abortion of unborn females simply because they are female, was the well-known feminist, and former actress, Glenda Jackson.

Does Ms Jackson not see the irony of her situation?  Someone who would claim to have fought for the rights of women; who castigated the late Margaret Thatcher (after her death) for not having been feminist enough; is apparently happy to see little girls murdered in their mothers' wombs, simply because they have the potential only to become women!

Now, of course, it may be that, like Mrs Thatcher after the death of her beloved Denis (she was at least feminine enough to keep a husband for life - something that Glenda Jackson has patently failed to do!) Glenda Jackson is suffering from the early stages of dementia, and did not realise that she had walked through the 'wrong' lobby.  If that is the case, then she does have my sympathy - and my relief that she has already stated that she will not be standing at the next General Election, as she will then be 80 years of age.

However, if that is the case, perhaps she should just stand down now, and not allow herself another six months of 'wrong' decisions! 

It may be that I am totally misreading the situation, and I will be sending this post to Ms Jackson to enable her to respond, if she so wishes.  However, if I am correct in my analysis, then she came across, yesterday, as an arch-hypocrite in a gathering that is not short of them.

On a more general note, it is worth remembering that if our own mothers had had an abortion, we wouldn't be here!

Do true disciples of Jesus need material evidence?

One of the online magazines that I regularly receive had an interesting article in today's issue.  The heading was certainly one that caught the eye: "How babies were made in Jesus' time."   I reckoned that I knew the answer to that one - in the same way that they have been made since Adam and Eve!

However, the article, by Andrew Lincoln of the University of Gloucestershire, was actually about the virginal conception of the Lord Jesus, and the source of the male-provided 'Y' chromosome!  There is an opportunity for comment, and the first two comments referred to Ron Wyatt (of whose existence I was previously unaware!) and his alleged discovery of the Old Testament Ark of the Covenant which, according to the two commenters, had traces of the dried blood of Jesus on it - blood that was tested and showed that it only had the mother's chromosome! 

Now, I am not in a position to comment on Ron Wyatt’s findings, other than to say that, apart from anything else, I can think of no reason why the human blood of Jesus would be found on the Ark! However, I wonder about the relevance of any of these alleged discoveries – finding Noah’s ark; the Shroud of Turin; finding the Ark of the Covenant; etc.

When the resurrected Jesus made His first appearance to the disciples (John 20:19), Thomas was not with them. He was informed, later, and responded that without ‘concrete’, material proof, he would not believe!

Eight days later, Thomas was with the others, and Jesus appeared again. He invited Thomas to check out the evidence as he had wanted. Of course, brought face-to-face with the risen Saviour of the world, and King of the universe, Thomas could only fall to his knees in worship. (v.28).  Jesus’ following words are very enlightening: “Jesus said to him, ‘Have you believed because you have seen Me? Blessed are those who have not seen and yet believe.’” (v.29). I would respectfully suggest that those words could be interpreted as, “Blessed are those who have no material evidence, but who still believe”!

In other words, whatever alleged material evidence is produced, real faith does not require it!  

I saw another reference, yesterday - to LGBT people.  It suddenly struck me - I am an LGBT person!   For those who are astonished that I should make such a statement, let me quickly assure them that my sexuality is not in question.  It's just that I realised that those letters, in that order, have an immediate connection to Paul's words in Rom.3:4 - "Let God Be True though every man be false, ..."!  I'll stand on that LGBT statement until the day I die or am raptured!  Hallelujah!