Tim Farron and the new facists.

[EvoUK]

My point is that this might once have been true but is fast changing and now the only Christianity allowed is the liberal sanctioned kind with traditionalists being sidelined or driven out one by one and replaced with the new order. So while people like you can point to the abundance of Christians in government anyone who is interested in these matters will know there is a difference.

So you're saying that they're technically Christians, but not as conservative as you'd like? From what I gather from the religious nutters the Tories are now trying to get into bed with- the DUP- it seems like you might rather enjoy yourself in Northern Ireland. I am very glad that the type of Christianity you find in NI or the States have no teeth here.

Ukip drew a large number of its voters from the Labour party - the working class Brits who were so despised by the policies of the Blair/Brown government.

I can't blame people for looking to UKip solve the problems caused by successive UK Governments. They were told (lied to) by the press & Governments for years that their ills were due to the EU, when this wasn't anywhere near the case in reality (not that the EU is perfect). That the Tories campaigned on a brainless (and baseless) Hard Brexit during the election saw quite a few turkeys voting for Christmas, like the Tories will ever have the interests of poor workers at heart. Fortunately, they thought they had the election in the bag and made so many cynical errors of judgement that rather than get a majority they lost what small lead they had. I'm still chortling at it.

If you think wealth is confined to the Conservatives then think again. Labour and Liberal politicians and elite have made it their business to know about any wealth Conservatives have, but they to tend to hide their own connections to wealth giving the impression they are all working class when they aren't. Liberals in my experience are rich and fast losing touch with ordinary people in their scramble to non-platform views they find disagreeable or give voice to the latest genitalia-linked craze of which abbreviations the rest of us cant keep up with.

You seem to be speaking about the neoliberal New Labour under Blair. I'd agree with you - they were almost as bad as the Tories. And Labour/Left voters are a very strange mix - most don't fall under your 'elites' label any more than they have obsessions about genitalia. One of the reasons Labour had so many problems with the referendum, apart from their lack of ability to counter the lies & cynically fake promises of Brexiteers (but then that's also the fault of the press), was that they're been an uneasy alliance of the working poor & the socially liberal middle classes. This however is mostly the fault of our appalling voting system. If we had proportional representation there might be a chance for other parties to get a look in.

Conservatives certainly dont hate the poor - heck a lot are poor. They are the party for work and fair play whilst still helping those in genuine need.

That's just so contradictory to all of the Tories actions for decades I'm genuinely astounded that anyone would honestly think this! Bless you! Didn't you just start a thread on how goodness knows how many poor people burnt alive in one of the richest boroughs in London a stones throw away from some of the most expensive mansions in London, through nothing more than poor regulations & fire safety standards, worse even than in the US? There's your austerity & slashing of red tape right there.

[Starlight]

Why should his personal beliefs come into it since he is clear they are his and he would never impose them on others.

So there are no personal beliefs he could hold that would be unacceptable in your mind? Imagine he approved of the Holocaust and slavery, but made it clear he wouldn't impose them on others. Is that the sort of person you would vote for as a political leader to make public policies?

Obviously the LDs didn't do all that great in the latest election, even despite the leftward swing. So it's not surprising the leader would step down. It does seem bizarre for a socially liberal party to have as leader a person who is socially conservative in the first place though.

[Starlight]

I am very glad that the type of Christianity you find in NI or the States have no teeth here.

Yep. NZ is in much the same situation as the UK, but perhaps two decades further down the path to secularization (most Western nations seem to be increasing the proportion of the population stating 'no religion' on the census by about 1 percentage point per year). It's much more pleasant when politics is religion-free.

You seem to be speaking about the neoliberal New Labour under Blair. I'd agree with you - they were almost as bad as the Tories.

Yep, neoliberals are bad no matter which party they are in - arguably they are worse if they're in a party that's supposed to be left-wing because then it removes the opposition to them. Exactly the same problem happened to Labour here in the 80s and 90s - the neoliberals took over and Labour went so far right they actually temporarily were further right than the conservative party.

One of the reasons Labour had so many problems with the referendum, apart from their lack of ability to counter the lies & cynically fake promises of Brexiteers (but then that's also the fault of the press), was that they're been an uneasy alliance of the working poor & the socially liberal middle classes. This however is mostly the fault of our appalling voting system. If we had proportional representation there might be a chance for other parties to get a look in.

Yep, we changed in NZ from the First Past the Post system to a proportional system 20 years ago, and it's heaps better. Now instead of having literally only 2 parties, we now have those 2 major parties, 2 medium sized parties, and 3 minor parties/independents.

There's your austerity & slashing of red tape right there.

We had a similar problem here, the right-wing party were like "Safety standards? Inspections? Nah that costs money." and then there was a big mine disaster and lots of people died.

[Abigail]

So you're saying that they're technically Christians, but not as conservative as you'd like? From what I gather from the religious nutters the Tories are now trying to get into bed with- the DUP- it seems like you might rather enjoy yourself in Northern Ireland. I am very glad that the type of Christianity you find in NI or the States have no teeth here.

I am saying we are having a purge of a certain type of person - Christians who hold the traditional view - every day we become more like Maoist China where the only christianity allowed is that dictated by the ruling political ideology.

That's just so contradictory to all of the Tories actions for decades I'm genuinely astounded that anyone would honestly think this! Bless you! Didn't you just start a thread on how goodness knows how many poor people burnt alive in one of the richest boroughs in London a stones throw away from some of the most expensive mansions in London, through nothing more than poor regulations & fire safety standards, worse even than in the US? There's your austerity & slashing of red tape right there.

You've probably bought into the simplistic class wars of Jeremy Corban when things are much more complicated. Fact is if Labour are so outraged about the sprinkler systems then why didnt they install them between 1997 and 2008 when tney had ample opportunity to do so. Was Grenfell tower really prettied up to so!ely to please the rich who couldnt bare looking upon its ugliness? I doubt that and more likely is the fact that the cladding was done for a number of reasons - green energy conservation targets being one of them. In fact I read that had the borough spent nothing on the flats the fire would likely have been contained. Were the people in Grenfell tower poor? Some likely were as it seems to have been a mix of social and private housing in there with rents of £1600 and upwards per month I saw a flat in Grenfell tower sold in 2013 for £250 000 so likely would have been worth more now - cheap when viewed against average prices for that area but not when viewed nationally. London is expensive but often people want to live there and are resistant to the council housing them outside London. Fact is a lot of the wealthy home owners in Kensington and Chelsea have lived in their homes for generations and it is only because house prices have gone up that has made them as wealthy as they are. Fact is a good amount of London real estate is being bought up by wealthy foreigers and so the prices go up and up.

No matter if the people in Grenfell were poor or not it is still a tragedy what happened.

[Abigail]

So there are no personal beliefs he could hold that would be unacceptable in your mind? Imagine he approved of the Holocaust and slavery, but made it clear he wouldn't impose them on others. Is that the sort of person you would vote for as a political leader to make public policies?

What use would being a slavist be if you couldnt impose it on someone -isnt that the point of slavery. But I have to ask. Are you the thought police?

Obviously the LDs didn't do all that great in the latest election, even despite the leftward swing. So it's not surprising the leader would step down. It does seem bizarre for a socially liberal party to have as leader a person who is socially conservative in the first place though.

Lib Dems never do well. Farron believes in live and let live - basically old style liberalism.

[Starlight]

What use would being a slavist be if you couldnt impose it on someone -isnt that the point of slavery.

Avoiding the question...

But I have to ask. Are you the thought police?

When I'm literally voting for a person to be my political representative, then what they think matters to me. As I said, I ask myself "Is that the sort of person you would vote for as a political leader to make public policies?" It seems bizarre to me you would equate careful voting with being "the thought police".

[Abigail]

Avoiding the question...

not at all. Just showing you the absurdity of your comment.

When I'm literally voting for a person to be my political representative, then what they think matters to me. As I said, I ask myself "Is that the sort of person you would vote for as a political leader to make public policies?" It seems bizarre to me you would equate careful voting with being "the thought police".

From what I understand of Tim Farron's position is that he doesn't let his personal positions influence his policy making. You are just being bigoted against him because he is Christian.

[Starlight]

You are just being bigoted against him because he is Christian.

There are Christians in politics who don't hold the horrible views that he and you do.

[Abigail]

There are Christians in politics who don't hold the horrible views that he and you do.

Admit it, you are a bigot

[Starlight]

Admit it, you are a bigot

Against immoral evil pathetic pieces of... covfefe, like you, yes. I hope people like you and your evil medieval pathetic excuses of your distorted versions of 'Christianity' die out soon. The world will remember people like you the same way we remember the 'Christians' who fought a war to keep slavery going in the US.

[RumTumTugger]

Against immoral evil pathetic pieces of... covfefe, like you, yes. I hope people like you and your evil medieval pathetic excuses of your distorted versions of 'Christianity' die out soon. The world will remember people like you the same way we remember the 'Christians' who fought a war to keep slavery going in the US.

there you go again Starlight misrepresenting conservative Christianity, American History etc. You are again showing what a close-minded bigoted anti-intellectual you are. You really need to get a monitor that mirror you are using does you no good.

[Starlight]

there you go again Starlight misrepresenting conservative Christianity, American History etc. You are again showing what a close-minded bigoted anti-intellectual you are. You really need to get a monitor that mirror you are using does you no good.

Do you not realize that the biggest US protestant Christian denomination, the Southern Baptists, was literally founded on the issue of supporting slavery? (It split from northern baptist groups in 1845 over the issue of slavery) In 1995, the SBC voted to adopt a resolution renouncing its racist roots and apologizing for its past defense of slavery, segregation, and white supremacy. Likewise, the co-founder of Methodism the US's second-biggest protestant denomination, George Whitefield, led a successful campaign to get slavery reintroduced to the state of Georgia after it had been banned there. The US 'Christians' don't have a good history on moral issues.

[One Bad Pig]

Do you not realize that the biggest US protestant Christian denomination, the Southern Baptists, was literally founded on the issue of supporting slavery? (It split from northern baptist groups in 1845 over the issue of slavery) In 1995, the SBC voted to adopt a resolution renouncing its racist roots and apologizing for its past defense of slavery, segregation, and white supremacy.

Which, apparently, means nothing to you, since you persist in holding it to its renounced positions.

Likewise, the co-founder of Methodism the US's second-biggest protestant denomination, George Whitefield, led a successful campaign to get slavery reintroduced to the state of Georgia after it had been banned there. The US 'Christians' don't have a good history on moral issues.

Holding the 1700s against us now? How, pray tell, did your homeland fare in such ideas?

[Starlight]

Holding the 1700s against us now?

I wouldn't, except that US 'Christians' have been on the wrong side of every civil rights issue from then to the present day.

How, pray tell, did your homeland fare in such ideas?

Much better. The biggest denomination here was Anglican (aka Church of England / Episcopalian) who were traditionally 'liberal, social-gospel' believers and considered caring for others in society a Christian duty. So there was never slavery here, and it was the first country to give women the vote, and the first Western country to provide universal healthcare to its citizens, and one of the leading Western countries in terms of providing social welfare. They generally wouldn't consider what you've got going in the US to count as real Christianity.

[One Bad Pig]

I wouldn't, except that US 'Christians' have been on the wrong side of every civil rights issue from then to the present day.

Much better. The biggest denomination here was Anglican (aka Church of England / Episcopalian) who were traditionally 'liberal, social-gospel' believers and considered caring for others in society a Christian duty. So there was never slavery here, and it was the first country to give women the vote, and the first Western country to provide universal healthcare to its citizens, and one of the leading Western countries in terms of providing social welfare. They generally wouldn't consider what you've got going in the US to count as real Christianity.

When?