Pity this

Speaking in 2007, Mr Farron told a magazine: “Abortion is wrong … Society has to climb down from the position that says there is nothing objectionable about abortion before a certain time”. He was asked if gay sex was also a sin and replied “we’re all sinners”, before later in the campaign being forced to clarify that he did not believe it was a sin.

They may not be views held by all that many people but they’re entirely legitimate, even respectable, views to hold. It’s the general view of the Catholic Church for example, in both cases.

27 comments on “Pity this

  1. If it’s fair game to question atheist and Christian beliefs and then force out anyone who disagrees with the ‘progressive’ view, I want to see the mainstream media and politicians asking these sort of questions of the Moslem (sorry, can’t get auto caps to turn off) mp’s.

  2. I don’t have a problem with him holding those views, I do have a problem with him also claiming to be liberal.

    But I suppose the LibDems haven been liberal since they became a safe haven for snobbish lefties who can’t bring themselves to vote Labour.

  3. It rather depends on what you mean by respectable and legitimate. I have no problem with anyone believing that abortion is objectionable, but to justify that opinion by referring to a non-existent god? Such “respectable” justifications hold the door open for all sorts of religious opinions which undermine human progress, up to and including suicide bombing.

  4. There’s nothing ‘liberal’ about abortion.

    There’s nothing liberal about the libdims either.

  5. Nautical Nick–Whereas atheists have such a charming record of humanity to their fellow beings.

    Farron is Remainiac scum but his opinions as stated above reflect better on him that the sanctimonious cat-calling of those who brazenly support a death cult with 150 million murders on its (non-existent) conscience.

  6. I look forward to Muslim politicians being asked what they think about a man in his fifties marrying a 9 year old.

  7. Aside from the “we’re all sinners” thing which is a judeo-christian thing, his views on these topics are more or less in line with mainstream Islamic thought.

    Media asking muslim politicians the same questions in 3…2…aah, f*ck it.

  8. What I don’t like is the idea that somebody’s private opinions should prevent them holding office on the assumption that he/she will attempt to enshrine those opinions into law. What this has left us with is people of no conviction other than to get elected, and willing to say anything to please the audience in front of them, e.g. Blair.

    I don’t see why somebody who thinks being gay is a sin should not be PM, provided they don’t attempt to ban gayness on the basis of their personal opinions.

  9. In an article on the DUP, I saw the term “forced pregnancy”.

    How’s that for spin?

    (And no, it wasn’t referring to The Handmaid’s Tale)

  10. Farron (noun): a hypocritical individual who holds some unfashionable and non-PC opinions himself, but who is very willing to criticise and persecute others for ‘racism’, ‘hate’ and non-PC opinions that he doesn’t hold.

  11. Pretty depressing, but not surprising, that it’s now not possible to be an evangelical Christian and a high profile politician.

  12. I too am looking forward to open season on more than prod christians.

    Either they reveal less than liberal credentials and are subject to an egalitarian hounding or they displease their god and contemplate hell.

    Excellent!

  13. I wonder whether Farron heard a distant cock crow when forced to clarify that he did not believe [gay sex] was a sin.

  14. “they’re … respectable, views to hold”: OK, respectable.

    “It’s the general view of the Catholic Church”: make your bloody mind up.

  15. Meanwhile, muslims throw gays off buildings and hang them with cranes, but the left embraces them. Only Christian beliefs are unacceptable.

  16. — “we’re all sinners”

    The inevitable implication being you might as well be hung for a sheep as for a lamb.

    A curious moral code which is unable to distinguish between a murderer and a non-murderer.

  17. BiND,

    “I don’t have a problem with him holding those views, I do have a problem with him also claiming to be liberal.”

    He is a liberal. He isn’t trying to impose those views on anyone else.

    It’s like me telling you to get out of my house if you ask for some Coke to be added to the XO Cognac I’ve just given you. In my eyes, you’re a sinner. What you want to do is an abomination. And I’ll have nothing to do with you and you’re not welcome. But I’m not calling for such people to be punished by the state, or for crimes against decent Cognac to be introduced.

    This is the argument I used to have with people 30 years ago on the other side – if gay men want to sandpaper their testicles, then as long as they do it in private, that’s their business. But Farron does his private thing and he’s now criminal scum (labelled by the same people who defended testicle sanding gays).

  18. if nothing else, at least it will stop this cvnt from sending me unsolicited emails on a regular basis headed “Friend” and begging for donations.

  19. They may not be views held by all that many people but they’re entirely legitimate, even respectable, views to hold

    They are in a party which is in the vanguard of criminalising all opinion contrary to Progressivism.

  20. BiAberdeen: I don’t have a problem with people of strong views holding political office, as long as their views don’t influence their role as a politician. However I suspect that would be very hard personally for most of them. They are bound to come up against cases where the better public policy conflicts with their own personal views. Farron was on the hook for his Christian views, but the same conflicts arise in fox hunting, smoking, drinking, drugs policy – a whole raft of public policies that have a moral dimension to them.

  21. I would have respected Farron if he had said:” It’s not criminal but it is a sin. Hundreds of millions of Christians and hundreds of millions of Muslims worldwide hold this view. Criticise us if you will, but respect our religious belief.”
    But, hey, a few more votes……….

  22. The inevitable implication being you might as well be hung for a sheep as for a lamb.

    Even the stranger outliers of Christianity recognise grades of sins. “Mortal sins” – those that prevent salvation, for example.

    But, I suspect, stealing a sheep is of the same grade as stealing a lamb. Neither being mortal sin. Unless you are stealing them to satisfy your heathen lusts, of course.

    But it’s the satisfying of those lusts, rather than the theft or even the lust itself, that would get you in to most trouble.

  23. As Tractor Gent says, it’s bound to come up in policy. Even if you believe that what consenting adults do in private is nobody’s business, there’s still all those questions about what you teach kids in school about gays, whether you should invite drag queens to the library, whether the council should fund Pride marches, etc.

  24. Tractor Gent: a whole raft of public policies […] have a moral dimension to them.

    Yes, it’s probably accurate to say that indeed all public policies have an element of expenditure attached to them covered by taxation or (deferred taxation) borrowing. Obliging tax payers to part with their money must always have a moral dimension since to do so is to curtail their autonomy to some degree.

  25. “whether the council should fund Pride marches, etc.”

    It depresses me seeing the gay flag flying outside the local fire station. Their duties are to prevent and put out fires and respond to other emergencies. Nothing more.

Leave a Reply

Name and email are required. Your email address will not be published.