Tim Farron

Home Forum Chat Forum Tim Farron

Viewing 45 posts - 91 through 135 (of 379 total)
  • Tim Farron
  • mattyfez
    Member

    Yea I saw that earlier, he comes across very well, especially as the leader of the tories and labour seem to be running away from any serious questions.

    It’ll be interesting to see how many empty chairs there are if the leadership debate goes ahead!

    I think he comes across well because he’s transparent and honest.
    The whole homophbia thing is redicuous, he’s consistently voted for gay rights etc.

    May on the other hand.. Well.. Check her records online, they are free to view.

    mattyfez
    Member

    Here’s a handy link to check what MPs actually vote for.

    ulysse
    Member

    God, I really miss Charles Kennedy 🙁

    mattyfez
    Member

    It turns out my local tory is homophic, thinks the disabled are a nuisance, a bit racist, and generally a nasty piece of work.

    Shock horror.

    ulysse
    Member

    Name names, Mattyfez?

    “I think he comes across well because he’s transparent and honest.”

    To be honest, I think he came across well because he’s had training and experience in winning crazy voters over in confrontations with fake niceness, fake willingness to listen and fake sincerity.

    Whatever the Modus Operandi he handled it well in my opinion and even the lunatic voter seemed quite nice in the end.

    “God, I really miss Charles Kennedy”

    Prompted by this I just checked Wikipedia and Farron is literally the worst ever Lib Dem leader (unless the one I don’t remember was crap).

    ulysse
    Member

    Paddy Pantsdown? He was awesomz, more Surfmat than Surfmat

    mattyfez
    Member

    I’m not going to name names, you can search all MPs voting records on the link I provided.

    Then you can see for yourself what they do or do not stand for.

    batfink
    Member

    I thought he came rather well out of this exchange:

    I thought so too. Not confident that many people would have.

    To be honest, I think he came across well because he’s had training and experience in winning crazy voters over in confrontations with fake niceness, fake willingness to listen and fake sincerity.

    I’d agree that he handled it like he’s had some media training – although they all have, surely? (even Dianne Abbot – whose name I always hear in a dead-ringers voice!) So I don’t think that diminishes him vs everyone else.

    As for was it fake – He didn’t really get a word in! He politely challenged him a couple of times – but the bloke was raving like a loony. What set it apart was the comment to camera afterward…… exactly the right thing to say.

    I’m not a lib dem, or a particular fan of Mr Farron – but I think he;s handled himself quite well in these last few days – more than can be said for many.

    Junkyard
    Member

    fun fact I did politics A level with him

    He was always a liberal and always wanted to be a politician

    He had not found god at this point

    Yes he handled that very well and had some witty put downs about the other leaders but lets be honest if there is one skill the Lib Dem leader needs its dealing with folk who disagree with him and wont vote for him 😉

    “I’d agree that he handled it like he’s had some media training – although they all have, surely? So I don’t think that diminishes him vs everyone else.”

    Deffo not, it’s positive really. If your job is dealing with the media you’d better know how.

    “As for was it fake – He didn’t really get a word in! He politely challenged him a couple of times – but the bloke was raving like a loony. What set it apart was the comment to camera afterward…… exactly the right thing to say.”

    Yup, and genuine/trained aren’t mutually exclusive, it’s entirely possible he handled it well technically but that was also consistent with the way he likes to deal with people.

    Premier Icon aracer
    Subscriber

    junkyard wrote:

    lets be honest if there is one skill the Lib Dem leader needs its dealing with folk who disagree with him and wont vote for him

    Meanwhile TM has no experience at all of this (at least not those who are voters – it appears that when she has to deal with those who disagree with her she’s not very good at it).

    mattyfez
    Member

    I don’t think you need training if you are honest and compassionate.

    How the media treat you and who believes the media spin on it, well that’s a contentious issue right now really given the brexit BS.

    “I don’t think you need training if you are honest and compassionate.”

    😀

    mattyfez
    Member

    Well look no further than theresa may. She still manages to come across like a real life sith Lord

    batfink
    Member

    I don’t think you need training if you are honest and compassionate

    tjagain
    Member

    And Farron has now admitted that he does believe homosexuality is a sin and that the wriggly answers he gave were about political expediency. In other words he is the religious bigot many of us said he ws and completely unfit to lead the liberal democrats

    The former Lib Dem leader Tim Farron has said he regrets telling people he did not believe gay sex was a sin when he was forced to clarify his position during the election campaign.

    The MP said he had felt “isolated” and under pressure from his party to say gay sex was not sinful, suggesting he ended up misleading the public about his views.

    He said he had spent weeks dodging the question but wanted to draw a line under the issue, which led to him “foolishly and wrongly” giving an answer that was “frankly not right”.

    Premier Icon kelvin
    Subscriber

    Hie is trying to claim that his “isolation” was due to a lack of christians around him, and that they didn’t understand his “problem”. They understood fully, his views on this aren’t acceptable with his party, or those who vote for it. And “one of my oldest friends is gay” does not balance out homophobic views… ever.

    badnewz
    Member

    I viewed the full interview and it was very strange. I think Farron’s main problem is that he is not particularly bright. Surely he knew his views on homosexuality would become an issue around election time, so he can hardly pretend to have been targeted by the media.
    I expect to see Farron pop up as the head of an evangelically-funded think-tank soon, hence his recantation.

    tjagain
    Member

    I got such a kicking on this thread for calling him a homophobic bigot yet here he is outing himself as a homophobic bigot

    I don’t see the problem. He probably thinks loads of things are sins – gluttony/coveting things for instance – so what? He’s not advocating punishing anyone for gluttony, or doing anything about it, he just thinks according to a middle eastern relegion it happens to be a sin.

    As it happens I also think covetousness is a sin, I could probably find a passage in the Bible to support the idea.

    Sin is a meaningless word that has no purpose in the modern world. Lust, Gluttony, Greed, Sloth, Wrath, Envy, Pride are all sins. Does anyone care?

    If he was advocating death camps for proud people I’d have a problem. If he just thinks pride is a sin, I have no problem at all.

    He’s welcome to any relegious beleif he wants as long as he doesn’t impose it on anyone else, and he didn’t, quite the opposite.

    I think TGA summed up the whole issue with this post:

    “I can’t quote a dictionary definition of homophobia off the top of my head, but it’s something like an irrational fear or loathing of homosexuals due to their sexuality – along those lines anyway. Farron quite clearly neither loathes, hates or fears homosexuals. A belief that gay sex is a sin, if that’s what he believes, does not equate to a hatred or even dislike of gays. As I understand it, in his eyes, someone engaging in gay sex is no more wrong than sins committed by anyone else, including himself. It’s disingenuous to think he looks down on or thinks he’s better than gay people.”

    Ro5ey
    Member

    It’s a problem for me. I’m a Liberal Church goer, but he puts me off the Lib Dems Christians

    tjagain
    Member

    He’s welcome to any relegious beleif he wants as long as he doesn’t impose it on anyone else, and he didn’t, quite the opposite.

    Anti abortion and anti equal rights because of his beliefs is attempting to impose his views on others

    poly
    Member

    Sin is a meaningless word that has no purpose in the modern world. Lust, Gluttony, Greed, Sloth, Wrath, Envy, Pride are all sins. Does anyone care?

    If he was advocating death camps for proud people I’d have a problem. If he just thinks pride is a sin, I have no problem at all.

    He’s welcome to any relegious beleif he wants as long as he doesn’t impose it on anyone else, and he didn’t, quite the opposite.
    Perhaps he needs you to help him write his speaches as that is a considerably more eloquent explanation than he managed yesterday having had months to formulate exactly what he wanted to say. It still makes no sense, whilst calling jealousy or gluttony a sin probably doesn’t fit with modern usage of language I think with a little introspection we can probably see why they are considered to be not the preferred behaviour. It’s now clear that Farron thinks gay people who have sex are not quite as virtuous as straight people who have sex. No matter how you polish that, it’s not consistent with a big part of the target liberal electorate.

    I think it is highly relevant whether someone asking to become the leader of the country has strong religious views and how those views might impact policy or culture. If you hold views which are seemingly at odds to your party, or possibly even the country you’d better be good at explaining and justifying them or expect not to get elected!

    Premier Icon martinhutch
    Subscriber

    Sexual sin has always had a special place in the hierarchy of sinfulness within the evangelical church.

    Sin is not a meaningless word to them, because although in theory we are all sinners in one form or another, being a bit envious or wrathful doesn’t seem to raise many red flags, whereas I can remember (from my distant and misguided youth as a member of an evangelical congregation) church members who had admitted an adulterous relationship being dragged up the front on a Sunday for a bit of public shaming, and members who admitted being homosexual being expelled from the community.

    Don’t remember many of the fat churchgoers getting the same treatment.

    Evangelical Christianity isn’t like the mix and match of the CofE, where stuff that makes you a bit unpopular or uncomfortable in wider society can be jettisoned. You either betray your teachings, and the expectations of your church that you spread those teachings, or you express some views that, frankly, ARE intolerant, and, if voiced from high office, potentially harm the status of a significant minority group.

    Farron was struggling to bridge two worlds that cannot be bridged, and failing to satisfy the requirements of either. He was a poor choice for leader, forced on the LibDems because they had no-one else who wanted the job.

    Anti abortion and anti equal rights because of his beliefs is attempting to impose his views on others

    Kind of irrelevant to a debate about “is it ok to be a party leader if you think some things are sins” but from wikipedia:

    “He currently holds a 90.4% rating on the issue of same sex marriage according to the website Public Whip.”

    It’s now clear that Farron thinks gay people who have sex are not quite as virtuous as straight people who have sex.

    I suspect that Farron thinks that *everyone* has committed sins of some kind. If someone want’s to post a comprehensive list of sins we’d probably find he’s right. Fortunately in the modern world nobody gives a toss about sin, and we all cheerfully go about committing sins without the slightest concern or impediment.

    Premier Icon nickc
    Subscriber

    And Farron has now admitted that he does believe homosexuality is a sin

    TBF to Farron, this was his issue, in that he thinks everyone’s a sinner…However, his defence that the media would be uninterested in his nuanced viewpoint about homosexuality is feeble. Rees-Mogg has as deeply held religious convictions as apparently does Farron, and yet manages to vote and speak accordingly. For Farron to then say that he wouldn’t have been understood; ergo he had to lie speaks volumes of his disingenuousness (is that even a word?)

    Hopefully soon to be a forgotten figure.

    Premier Icon martinhutch
    Subscriber

    Except evangelical groups are still trying to influence UK policy. This one, which believes that homosexuals can be ‘cured’, funded an intern in the offices of a number of supportive MPs including Mr Farron.

    https://www.theguardian.com/world/2012/apr/13/gay-cure-christian-charity-mps-interns

    It. Stinks.

    Premier Icon convert
    Subscriber

    For me the issue is credibility as a person. From my personal standpoint, and I admit it is a very bias one, if someone is so infected with fairy dust that they hold what to me are abhorrent views because his favourite book tells him to and he insists on not questioning its veracity, I would not trust his intellect and independence as a thinking man enough for him to be a national leader. Therefore he is not fit for office of a party that (in theory) hope to be elected to power.

    For me it would be no different to a flat earther who in every other way was entirely rational leading a party.

    Premier Icon SaxonRider
    Subscriber

    I think it is highly relevant whether someone asking to become the leader of the country has strong religious views and how those views might impact policy or culture. If you hold views which are seemingly at odds to your party, or possibly even the country you’d better be good at explaining and justifying them or expect not to get elected!

    Pierre Trudeau was Prime Minister of Canada from 1968 to 1984, and in that time, decriminalised homosexuality, declared that ‘the state has no business in the bedrooms of the nation’, loosened laws on abortion, and introduced the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms – amongst other things.

    He was seen – and is still seen – as a model liberal.

    He was also a devout Catholic, but no one knew just how much so until he passed away in 2000. His son, Justin, is also a practicing Catholic.

    It is entirely possible to separate what you believe to be true in terms of faith from what you believe to be the domain of the state.

    Premier Icon scotroutes
    Subscriber

    Also a liar and a charlatan then.

    What a pleasant chap.

    Except evangelical groups are still trying to influence UK policy.

    So really the debate should be which relegions shuld be banned from public office. I’m guessing you’d go any that think Sodomy is a sin: Islam and evangelical Christianity for starters. Any others?

    Premier Icon SaxonRider
    Subscriber

    From my personal standpoint, and I admit it is a very bias one, if someone is so infected with fairy dust that they hold what to me are abhorrent views because his favourite book tells him to and he insists on not questioning its veracity

    I am glad you concede that this is a very biased opinion, convert, because it is an almost-absurd reflection of what mainstream Christians – and probably mainstream believers of most faiths – actually believe.

    You may be describing some evangelical/fundamentalist politician in the USA, but certainly not any leader in the UK that I recognise.

    Premier Icon nickc
    Subscriber

    So really the debate should be which relegions shuld be banned from public office

    No absolutely none. BUT they should be consistent. Tim’s issue is that Evangelical Christianity is incompatible with many issues on the Liberal Left hence his stumbling nonsense over this, he’s trying to bridge two camps that simply cannot come together.

    Hold religious views as a political party if you wish, go to the public with those views; survive or die via the ballot.

    Sexual sin has always had a special place in the hierarchy of sinfulness within the evangelical church.

    In which case Farron should have been asked if he thought sexual sins were worse than all the other sins. I suspect he could have offered a clear and emphatic ‘no’ to that question and everyone would be happy.

    tjagain
    Member

    Saxon rider – Farron is an evangelical and the bible being 100% true and must be followed at all times is his position.

    Yes its not the mainstream COE belief. He is an evangelical fundamentalist by his ownwords

    Premier Icon ransos
    Subscriber

    outofbreath – Member

    I don’t see the problem.

    My flabber is entirely ungasted.

    tjagain
    Member

    It is entirely possible to separate what you believe to be true in terms of faith from what you believe to be the domain of the state.

    Yes it is – But not for Farron as his voting record shows and so do his public pronouncements

    Premier Icon martinhutch
    Subscriber

    There’s no need for a ban – simply pointing out the incompatibility of his deeply held views with UK social policy seems to have done the trick.

    As above, as long as the electorate knows that the politician involved is either

    a) actively seeking to implement policies in line with his rather distasteful beliefs
    or
    b) a hypocrite who will even deny what he personally believes to achieve high office

    then the ballot box will take care of the rest.

    I’ve got no problem with anyone aiming for high office, as long as the people know exactly what they are getting. Tim Farron equivocated between two incompatible positions, and has paid the price.

    Premier Icon convert
    Subscriber

    I am glad you concede that this is a very biased opinion, convert, because it is an almost-absurd reflection of what mainstream Christians – and probably mainstream believers of most faiths – actually believe.

    You may be describing some evangelical/fundamentalist politician in the USA, but certainly not any leader in the UK that I recognise.

    But Farron was no mainstream Christian. He is an unrepentant evangelical. He might have survived in the states but fortunately he got found out here.

    It’s a problem for me. I’m a Liberal, but he puts me off the Lib Dems.

    I like him as a politician. I don’t feel he has what it takes to be the party leader.

    Premier Icon SaxonRider
    Subscriber

    b) a hypocrite who will even deny what he personally believes to achieve high office

    I hope you’re not suggesting (and I genuinely can’t tell if you are or not) that if a religious person runs for office without trying to impose their beliefs, that he or she is being a hypocrite.

    A true liberal believes in the separation of Church and State. It is possible, therefore, to hold personal beliefs derived from one’s religious tradition, and also believe that it is neither possible nor even desirable to impose those beliefs on the people. Especially through legislation! That would be coercive at best and dictatorial at worst.

    Premier Icon martinhutch
    Subscriber

    A true liberal believes in the separation of Church and State. It is possible, therefore, to hold personal beliefs derived from one’s religious tradition, and also believe that it is neither possible nor even desirable to impose those beliefs on the people.

    A true evangelical Christian believes not only in the primacy of the word of God, but of a clear instruction from God to spread that message in wider society, hence the title.

    So Farron has to choose between the liberal tradition and the evangelical one. They are incompatible.

    This is obviously something he’s struggled with, which led to him telling Nigel Evans that he didn’t believe gay sex to be a sin, and his public recanting of that just now.

    Premier Icon SaxonRider
    Subscriber

    So Farron has to choose between the liberal tradition and the evangelical one. They are incompatible.

    Thanks for the clarification.

Viewing 45 posts - 91 through 135 (of 379 total)

You must be logged in to reply to this topic.