- This topic has 60 replies, 33 voices, and was last updated 9 years ago by binners.
-
So who would Jesus vote for in 2015?
-
julianwilsonFree Member
it all feels a long long time since the big society and that bit where Cameron said he was [edited for poor memory, the real story is even funnier]
a bit like Jesus.continuing Jesus’ work, and that he (Dc not JC) was a bit like a great big dyno rod. 😀 😀The Church of England has entered the political debate just three months before the general election with a sharp rebuke to the nation’s politicians for seeking scapegoats among the poor and the rich, hurting the vulnerable with cuts to spending and failing to provide a “fresh moral vision” for society.
maccruiskeenFull MemberDid anyone ever figure out what the Big Society was actually meant to be? And how we’d know if it was happening?
seosamh77Free Membermaccruiskeen – Member
Did anyone ever figure out what the Big Society was actually meant to be? And how we’d know if it was happening?I think it ment a volunteer sector servicing the corporate sector! 😆
meftyFree MemberThey might have more luck if they managed to be more concise, no one is going to read 52 pages and I say that as a church goer.
ernie_lynchFree Member……what the Big Society was actually meant to be?
It was meant to be an antidote to neutralize the effect of Thatcher’s toxic claim that there was no such thing as society and the perception that the Tories were the “Nasty Party”.
Although Thatcher’s fanclub are quick to point out that she didn’t mean it like that. She meant it in a much nicer way. Apparently. So that’s alright.
mtFree MemberHe’s the Lord God! We’d all be on our knees, especially some so called non believers on stw. I can see it now “it were’nt me who wrote that, Stephen Fry nicked me password”.
cfinnimoreFree MemberThe whole political climate would make him very cross.
Green?
jivehoneyjiveFree MemberJesus was a rebel, he’d stick it to da man…
If he wanted the planet to still be here after another 2000 years he’d go green
julianwilsonFree MemberI think the posturing and rebuttals from westminster are as good/informative a read as the 52 page letter, in terms of how interested the 3 main parties seem to be in being called out by the church of england and wales on their duties toward the little people.
I would also be interested to see where Justin Welby is on this. So far so good, he is not talking (in public at least) like ine might fear that an eton-educated former oil indistry chief would talk.Also will be listning out for my own mp who is a rather charismatic christian (in the falling-over spiritual healing sense) but still grabbed his 10-second soundbite on national news laying into Rowan Williams the time-before-last that the church questioned the christian values of the government.
slowoldmanFull MemberJesus was a rebel, he’d stick it to da man…
But why did he have a Spanish name?
5thElefantFree MemberJesus? Founder of the death cult Jesus? He’d strap on a bomb vest and make a statement on public transport.
ElShalimoFull MemberRussell Brand is the second coming and he’s not going to vote.
Actually he’s an odious little gobshite. Let’s crucify him anyway.binnersFull MemberThe church is just stating what everyone with half a brain already knows. Summed up here in the New Statesman: Ministers-are reaching beyond ‘scroungers’ and aiming at britains working poor
Good on ’em. The Tories lack of empathy and compassion, and general inhumanity, that we all just take for granted, now seem to have morphed into an active vendetta against the poor. To punish them for being poor. One that they all seem to be rather enjoying.
IMHO pointing this out is exactly what the church should be doing. If the government doesn’t like it – which they clearly don’t – then it’s touched a nerve. Mainly because its perfectly valid criticism
MrWoppitFree MemberThe Crutch of England will now be cashing in all it’s commercial investments and redistributing the money to “the poor”, presumably?
dereknightriderFree MemberFrom what I could gather from a couple of interviews with various bishoperati, they don’t think Jesus would vote UKIP or for career politico tossers tied to the corporate world so there’s no one for him to vote for, which pretty much sums up all of our predicaments.
They’re wrong of course Jesus would vote Green he loves everyone, even gormless women and tree huggers.
NorthwindFull MemberJesus doesn’t really strike me as the “voting for someone else” type, it’s His way or the hell way.
But who would Satan vote for?
MrWoppitFree MemberThey’re wrong of course Jesus would vote Green
Yes, I’ve always thought that the jesus character in the famous fairy tale was a bit of a dimwit.
gofasterstripesFree MemberSo who would Jesus vote for in 2015?
Bill Hicks or Jim Jeffries.
sbobFree Memberernie_lynch – Member
It was meant to be an antidote to neutralize the effect of Thatcher’s toxic claim that there was no such thing as society and the perception that the Tories were the “Nasty Party”.
Although Thatcher’s fanclub are quick to point out that she didn’t mean it like that. She meant it in a much nicer way. Apparently. So that’s alright.
For the younger forum user that may want to avoid ernie’s deliberate misinformation:
There is no such thing as society. There is living tapestry of men and women and people and the beauty of that tapestry and the quality of our lives will depend upon how much each of us is prepared to take responsibility for ourselves and each of us prepared to turn round and help by our own efforts those who are unfortunate.
Jesus wouldn’t vote.
dragonFree MemberBit rich of the church to lecture anyone on wealth considering they have benefited massively from preferential tax rates and direct government funding. They are also some of the biggest landowners in the UK and have funds of ~£4 billion.
If I were the government I’d be ringing them up and reminding them of that fact.
ernie_lynchFree MemberIMHO pointing this out is exactly what the church should be doing.
IMHO the church should not meddle in politics. It’s not their role, we have political parties to do that. The fact that the Labour Party no longer effectively speaks up for ordinary people doesn’t somehow transfer that responsibility onto the church.
There are of course situations when the church is the only voice that can speak for ordinary people, in those circumstances it has a clear obligation to do so. But that’s not the situation in Britain in 2015.
A classic example of the need for the church to speak out because there is no one else left to do so :
“Profound religion leads to political commitment and in a country such as ours where injustice reigns, conflict is inevitable… When a dictatorship seriously threatens human rights and the common good of the nation, when they become insupportable and close themselves to all channels of dialogue, understanding and rationality, then the Church speaks of the legitimate right to insurrectional violence”
– Oscar Romero Archbishop of San Salvador who died a martyr’s death at the hands of US-backed death squads.
Interestingly the C of E was once quite fairly described as “the Conservative Party at prayer”, yet now it regularly strongly criticizes Tory governments and that label seems a lot less justified. So what’s changed? Well not much in terms of C of E other than like the rest of society it has become more socially liberal, it’s not now more “left-wing” than it used to be, the big change is that the Conservatives have drifted further and further to the right.
ernie_lynchFree MemberBit rich of the church to lecture anyone on wealth considering they have benefited massively from preferential tax rates and direct government funding. They are also some of the biggest landowners in the UK and have funds of ~£4 billion.
If I were the government I’d be ringing them up and reminding them of that fact.
It’s a bit like arguing that Unite the union has assets worth millions so therefore has no right to speak on behalf of ordinary working people. It’s a crap argument.
binnersFull MemberPeople have short memories. The Church wasn’t too shy of wading in to Blair, and the labour government either. So its not party political.
Inequality grew massively under Labour. And continues apace under the Tories. They’re just pointing out that the society we’ve created is a bit shit if you’re poor. And getting rapidly shitter. And none of the mainstream parties seem to care less about that fact
dereknightriderFree Memberernie_lynch – Member
IMHO pointing this out is exactly what the church should be doing.
IMHO the church should not meddle in politics. It’s not their role, we have political parties to do that. The fact that the Labour Party no longer effectively speaks up for ordinary people doesn’t somehow transfer that responsibility onto the church.There are of course situations when the church is the only voice that can speak for ordinary people, in those circumstances it has a clear obligation to do so. But that’s not the situation in Britain in 2015.
A classic example of the need for the church to speak out because there is no one else left to do so :
“Profound religion leads to political commitment and in a country such as ours where injustice reigns, conflict is inevitable… When a dictatorship seriously threatens human rights and the common good of the nation, when they become insupportable and close themselves to all channels of dialogue, understanding and rationality, then the Church speaks of the legitimate right to insurrectional violence”
– Oscar Romero Archbishop of San Salvador who died a martyr’s death at the hands of US-backed death squads.
Interestingly the C of E was once quite fairly described as “the Conservative Party at prayer”, yet now it regularly strongly criticizes Tory governments and that label seems a lot less justified. So what’s changed? Well not much in terms of C of E other than like the rest of society it has become more socially liberal, it’s not now more “left-wing” than it used to be, the big change is that the Conservatives have drifted further and further to the right.
Whilst I can agree with most of that post, you really can’t suggest the Conservatives have drifted further to the right, need I remind you of the gay marriage affair during a period when the economy could have used some more attention. It is precisely because the Conservatives have drifted left and Labour have drifted right that we have the likes of UKIP on the rise. Cameron bless him his more of a lefty than Blair.
dekadanseFree MemberSatan = Cameron and Osborne’s new special advisor?
Jesus = not LibDem any more, veering into Green territory?Ed Mil and Labour = doh?
dekadanseFree MemberDereknightrider – the Tories have moved steadily to the right economically, as the demonization of poor and disabled people evidently shows…..but some of the Cameroons retain a social liberalism about matters of lifestyle, partly because it ties in with libertarian free market thinking, and partly because growing up when they did they cannot avoid the fact that half their pals have come out. Hence the political space for the likes of UKIP (who in terms of my previous email would probably prefer ‘the devil you know’.)
ernie_lynchFree Member….you really can’t suggest the Conservatives have drifted further to the right, need I remind you of the gay marriage affair during a period when the economy could have used some more attention.
Did you notice this bit “like the rest of society it has become more socially liberal” ? By ‘the rest of society’ I was including the Tories.
Society has become much more tolerant towards homosexuality and it would make no sense at all for the Tories to take an anti-gay stance, other than if they wanted to alienate voters. Even UKIP supporters take a much more pro-same sex marriage stance than UKIP does.
More importantly there is no economic gain for the Tories to be anti-gay, ie, it won’t make them any wealthier. So what would be the benefit to them?
And of course we now see that the Tory pro-same sex marriage stance allows people to make ridiculous and absurd claims that they have become more left-wing. What’s not to like for them?
MoreCashThanDashFull MemberRegardless of views on religion, the underpinning message from the bishops that people should get out and vote and that politicians should give us something worth voting for shouldn’t be lost.
binnersFull MemberIndeed. If the poor all got out and voted, like other sections of society do, we’d certainly never see another Tory government. But lets be honest, the labour party hardly look like fearless crusaders for social justice at the moment, do they?
aracerFree MemberThe problem you’re having there is trying to define a broad set of principles and policies on a one-dimensional left/right line. Political position nowadays tends to be measured on a two-dimensional graph, including authoritarian/libertarian as the second dimension, which is at least a bit more informative, though still pretty limiting IMHO. The only point of this sort of labelling that I can see is to allow people to define themselves, or determine who they should be aligned with based on their own self-image.
Certainly in the context of ernie’s comment he is generally right – “the Conservative party at prayer” is a pretty old suggestion, and if you look at where the Conservatives were on the political spectrum as recently as the early 70s, they were a long way to the left of where they are now – arguably further to the left than any current major party. Of course there are other aspects to it – typical churgoers are very conservative with a small c.
To be fair I’m not sure you’re wrong about your comparison between Blair and Dave, but then ernie’s timescale is rather longer than that, and neither will you find him to be a big fan of Blair!
jambalayaFree MemberJesus doesn’t really strike me as the “voting for someone else” type, it’s His way or the hell way.
🙂
I love the way you have capitalised His. Joking aside (sort of) surely Jesus would be the leader of the Christian Democratic party ? I mean if he wasn’t the leader it wouldn’t be much of an endorsement for him as the prophet/messiah/superstar/other title would it ?
jambalayaFree MemberIndeed. If the poor all got out and voted, like other sections of society do, we’d certainly never see another Tory government. But lets be honest, the labour party hardly look like fearless crusaders for social justice at the moment, do they?
Interesting point this. Yes you can see in the short term a significant number of votes away form the Tories, but towards a mix of Labour and the extreme right ? I am not sure you would never see another Tory government as if the economy went to hell in a handbasket under the new “government of the poor”, be that labour or otherwise, I can see it being firmly rejected at the next GE
chrismacFull MemberNo one, fictional characters dont get a vote. It like asking how Mickey Mouse would vote
dereknightriderFree Memberaracer – Member
dereknightrider » Whilst I can agree with most of that post, you really can’t suggest the Conservatives have drifted further to the right, need I remind you of the gay marriage affair during a period when the economy could have used some more attention. It is precisely because the Conservatives have drifted left and Labour have drifted right that we have the likes of UKIP on the rise. Cameron bless him his more of a lefty than Blair.
The problem you’re having there is trying to define a broad set of principles and policies on a one-dimensional left/right line. Political position nowadays tends to be measured on a two-dimensional graph, including authoritarian/libertarian as the second dimension, which is at least a bit more informative, though still pretty limiting IMHO. The only point of this sort of labelling that I can see is to allow people to define themselves, or determine who they should be aligned with based on their own self-image.Certainly in the context of ernie’s comment he is generally right – “the Conservative party at prayer” is a pretty old suggestion, and if you look at where the Conservatives were on the political spectrum as recently as the early 70s, they were a long way to the left of where they are now – arguably further to the left than any current major party. Of course there are other aspects to it – typical churgoers are very conservative with a small c.
To be fair I’m not sure you’re wrong about your comparison between Blair and Dave, but then ernie’s timescale is rather longer than that, and neither will you find him to be a big fan of Blair!
I don’t know, think about it for a second, almost their entire right wing will now be supporting UKIP, David Davies losing the leadership contest saw the left of the party triumphant and but for the Major period you cannot say they are to the right of the position they were post Thatcher.
somewhatslightlydazedFree MemberNo one, fictional characters dont get a vote.
Whatever your views on the religion industry, and the whole Son of God thing, its quite likely Jesus wasn’t a fictional character.
The topic ‘So who would Jesus vote for in 2015?’ is closed to new replies.