Adrian Warnock on Voting Conservative – Part Two

More from the New Frontiers church leader.

Over the last few years there is no question that the Labour government have overseen a striking de-Christianisation of our country. Told by his spin doctor that he could not “do God”, Blair then Brown have seen fit to pass a series of laws that either directly contradict Christian principles, or have components that have helped to further exclude Christians from the public square. I am convinced that we cannot afford another five years of Brown.  We Christians risk finding ourselves genuinely persecuted and discriminated against in the name of “tolerance.”  Although the recent abusive Foreign Office memo about the Pope’s visit does not represent official Labour pollicy, it does reflect the culture that they have been allowing to form, which is  increasingly aggressive and dismissive towards Christians.

The Christian Institute has published a briefing document that tracks Labour’s record in office and the positions of major other parties on these issues.  They try and list the facts without making an opinion clear, so the opinions in this post are mine alone, while the facts are indisputable. So for example Labour has:

  • Whipped their MPs to support the Human Fertilization and Embryology Act.
  • Introduced various equality legislation without considering the needs of churches and individual Christians for exemptions from certain provisions. For example, we are not far from a church being forced to employ pastoral workers who do not believe the church’s doctrine, and registrars are already legally compelled to conduct homosexual civil unions,  even if their religious beliefs preclude them from doing so, or be fired.
  • Passed a law to permit people to change the gender on their birth certificate without any right for a potential marriage partner to know whether someone was born as a man or woman.
  • Massively deregulated the gambling industry
  • Downgraded cannabis despite evidence it can trigger psychosis
  • Repealed the blasphemy laws
  • Allowed 24/hour drink licenses
  • Continues to ban Christians from owning some type of TV and radio stations
  • Vowed in their manifesto to repeal a “free speech” amendment that conservative peeers forced onto the “hate crimes” legislation. Repealing this amendment could mean that a preaher who said that he believed the Bible says sex should be within marriage only would be imprisoned. This pledge could mark the end of centuries of Christian liberty in Britain if Brown was to return to power. So quite simply a vote for Brown is a vote for persecution of Christians. Our freedom of religion is at stake.
  • 3 Comments on “Adrian Warnock on Voting Conservative – Part Two

    1. >>The Christian Institute has published a briefing document that tracks Labour’s record in office and the positions of major other parties on these issues. They try and list the facts without making an opinion clear

      Ha! This would be the same 'Christian' Institute with a peerless record of having their cases thrown out of court, with very good reason? Last time I checked, their site had three articles on the Scottish Epsicopal Church, two of which were flat-out lies (or at least gross misrepresentations). The fact that the Daily Mail can sell a lot of papers by breaking up their Immigrants Give Swans AIDS – Property Prices Fall Again with 'persecuted Christians' hot-button pressing in no way means that Christians should lose their ethics or discernments when prevented with such stories.
      And (broader but still relevant point) : those who talk about the harm done by Labour invariably invoke the UK's Christian (unwritten) constitution and the apparent endangering of civil liberties. But , on the topic of sexuality, the former is presented as mandating theocracy in a way that (if said model was true) would preclude the implications of any valuing of civil liberties. The wilful blind spot that CCFON/CI demonstrate when it comes to the implication of gays paying taxes and the no-taxation-without-representation principle (which surely Dave C would agree with!) is worrying to an extent that warrants invoking the "h" word. Homosexuality is against God=gays should not have equal rites is the sort of strict (and, yes, fundamentalist) logic that, if consistently applied, would surely lead to a party running on a "Bring back the pre Catholic/Jewish emancipation days!" platform.

    2. This is too brief (am short on time) for me to substantiate it much, but I'm not sure all Adrian Arnock's points are entirely accurate. "The facts are indisputable" – well, quoting the Home Office website, "The government reclassified cannabis from Class C to Class B in January 2009", so what of his fifth bullet point? Peter, you tell us AW leads a New Frontiers church. Picking up another of his points, a BBC article from 2004 says that the blasphemy law only applied to Anglicanism (see, not all Christian denominations – if that's accurate, keeping the law would not have protected AW's branch of the church. OK, so I must be feeling especially snippy tonight, but articles such as this do need to be accurate – otherwise it becomes easy to suggest that AW's simply scaremongering with little solid basis.

      Also, is there a commitment from the Conservatives to repeal all / most of the legal measures AW cites?

      in friendship, Blair

    Leave a Reply

    This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.