People are angry. There’s a sense of frustration, grievance and even fury in the air. As we saw in yesterday’s post there’s talk of a Day of Rage today. Continue reading
Some groups and politicians are calling for a day of rage and for demonstrations over the next few days. Continue reading
Yesterday I wrote about why Christians should and could be involved in public life. I wrote in the context of Tim Farron’s resignation as Liberal Democrat leader.
The root of Farron’s resignation can be found in a series of interviews he gave at the start of the General Election campaign. Farron was pushed hard to say whether or not he believed being gay and/or gay sex was a sin.
Farron’s initial defence and that of his supporters was that his religious beliefs about moral questions were a private matter and did not impinge on his public role as leader of the Liberal Democrats. Farron eventually stated that he did not think gay sex was a sin. However, I think he would have wanted to say that the principle he had argued still stood. Farron was also challenged about his views on abortion. Could he as a Christian see abortion as wrong whilst leading a party that supported it as representing a woman’s right to choose. Continue reading
Yesterday, Tim Farron resigned as leader of the Liberal Democrats explaining that he felt “torn between living as a faithful Christian and serving as a political leader”
Today, people are asking whether or not Christians who believe the Bible’s teaching on moral matters such as abortion and same-sex marriage can still be involved in public life or whether their view now in effect bar them from mainstream politics and high office. Continue reading
The General Election result is still making waves. One result of the hung parliament is that Theresa May is seeking some kind of arrangement with the Democratic Unionist Party to try and continue to govern. Fascinatingly, quite a lot of well-informed people have admitted that they didn’t know who the DUP were and had to google them. The news coverage has been generally unfavourable portraying them as bigots and odd-balls.
So, in a moment I want to make a couple of comments from a Christian perspective but a little bit of background might be helpful. Continue reading
I’d planned two little articles this norming, one entitled “For those who got what they wanted” and one “For those who didn’t get they wanted.” Well this morning we wake up to a hung parliament and so we could say that nobody gets what they want! Continue reading
The lesser of two evils?
Last year I wrote about those times when voting is difficult because it feels like a choice for the lesser of two evils. You may recall that I said at the time that it is okay to choose not to choose, in other words, not to vote for either option.
My reasoning was simple. So often, the message goes out at elections that it doesn’t matter who you vote for so long as you vote. That cannot be true, can it? All viewpoints are not equally valued or ethical. What about the person who goes and votes for a neo-fascist committed to racial supremacy? What about the person who opts for a hard-line Marxist committed to the elimination of all religion? Is the important thing that “at least they voted?”
I said in the article that when we do not feel that there is a suitable choice, then it is okay to say “I refuse the options put in front of me.” This is itself a choice. Continue reading