Aristotle Posted July 22, 2017 Share Posted July 22, 2017 24 minutes ago, Max Power said: As I say, ask them a direct question. At one of our requisition meetings, Chris Robertshaw made it clear that his beliefs would not allow him to be pro-abortion. It seems that even if people offer information, many people can't be bothered to ask the question, read manifestos and take an active part in the electoral process. They then complain when something doesn't happen to suit them. I declared all information which I believed to be relevant in my manifesto, people may likewise judge me on something which was missing? "Pro-abortion"? Outside of the Charles Manson cult and other mentally sick delinquents, I doubt you'll find anyone who is "pro-abortion". People who are supporting reform to abortion laws and allowing women on the island to have abortions without being criminalised or having to go abroad to undergo the procedure, do not consider abortion to be some good, positive thing. Rather, they -- we -- consider it to be something that is sometimes very unfortunately a necessary thing. The fact is, politicians wriggle their way out of telling us what their core beliefs are. They then get voted in and then their core beliefs have a major influence on the way they vote; and the way they vote is supposed to be representative of the people who voted for them. I am struggling to understand why you would oppose expecting politicians to disclose their core beliefs. They are putting themselves in the public sphere and seeking to represent thousands of people. It is perfectly reasonable to expect them to disclose their core beliefs so we can assess whether they do or do not represent us and our own core beliefs. As I said, Zac Hall got into office by jumping on the Peter Karran bandwagon. Nobody had a clue what his "core beliefs" were. I, like many others, assumed that because he was a member of a party which goes by the name "liberal" he would vote based upon liberal values. When push came to shove, nothing could have been further from the truth. We need more transparency and openness. I completely reject your suggestion that personal beliefs of public representatives should be private. Their personal beliefs inform the way they vote. We, as constituents, deserve to know what their core beliefs are and what they represent. It is not up to us to ask prospective MHKs for their beliefs on every different subject. It is up to them to inform us. I have no idea who you are or what was in your manifesto. I only know that if I was running for public office -- something I do not intend to do -- I would be fully transparent with the people I would be asking to place their trust in me. If that would mean losing, so be it. As Shakespeare said, "this above all else: unto thine own self be true." It is sad that so many politicians will not disclose their core beliefs. I've previously given many politicians the benefit of the doubt, but in future I will simply not vote for anyone unless they disclose their core beliefs. If that means not voting at all, then that is unfortunate. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Max Power Posted July 22, 2017 Share Posted July 22, 2017 As I have said, candidates should state their personal core beliefs but do we really want to have people's religion as a core issue when considering who to vote for? It will get to the stage where Protestants won't vote for Catholics, Jews won't vote for Muslims none will vote for athiests etc. Aren't we trying to get away from all that? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JoeyDeaconsCat Posted July 22, 2017 Share Posted July 22, 2017 17 minutes ago, Max Power said: As I have said, candidates should state their personal core beliefs but do we really want to have people's religion as a core issue when considering who to vote for? Only that one of the people this thread has enquired of has not stated his core beliefs at all. Other than saying that he has some. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pongo Posted July 22, 2017 Share Posted July 22, 2017 20 minutes ago, Max Power said: It will get to the stage where Protestants won't vote for Catholics, Jews won't vote for Muslims none will vote for athiests etc. Aren't we trying to get away from all that? Being completely honest, I believe that I would struggle to vote for a practising happy-clappy evangelical. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NoTail Posted July 22, 2017 Share Posted July 22, 2017 Likewise I would not vote for a fundamental religionalist. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Max Power Posted July 22, 2017 Share Posted July 22, 2017 2 hours ago, pongo said: Being completely honest, I believe that I would struggle to vote for a practising happy-clappy evangelical. 2 hours ago, NoTail said: Likewise I would not vote for a fundamental religionalist. I would be the same, but those types would make themselves well known I would have thought? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
j2bad Posted July 22, 2017 Share Posted July 22, 2017 9 hours ago, Chinahand said: J2bad, Talk about inappropriate badgering concerning people's deeply held religious beliefs. Deeply held religious beliefs, you mean believing made up stuff? About your most succinct post ever and its still rubbish. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thesultanofsheight Posted July 23, 2017 Share Posted July 23, 2017 20 hours ago, pongo said: Being completely honest, I believe that I would struggle to vote for a practising happy-clappy evangelical. The last one of them we had was David Anderson and I certainly wouldn't have voted for him. I think if people in politics have particular beliefs they should make them generally known otherwise it's being evasive. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Wright Posted July 23, 2017 Share Posted July 23, 2017 Oh, there were happy clappies standing in 2016, but they very carefully didn't announce it in their manifestos or websites or FB pages. one came within a whisker of being elected. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NoTail Posted July 23, 2017 Share Posted July 23, 2017 Must make a point of asking them next election, not thought to before. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pongo Posted July 23, 2017 Share Posted July 23, 2017 11 minutes ago, John Wright said: Oh, there were happy clappies standing in 2016, but they very carefully didn't announce it in their manifestos or websites or FB pages. That's odd. Normally they can't wait to talk all about their personal friend Jesus. I'm not agin religion in general, just evangelicalism, pentecostalism etc. It's not just the down-to-earth empty-headedness or the terrible singalongs. It's the anti-theological arrogance of the idea that a person could have a personal relationship with God. Or would talk about it. It's worse than listening to people tell you their dreams. 17 hours ago, j2bad said: Deeply held religious beliefs, you mean believing made up stuff? I bet you believe all sorts of other made up stuff. I know I do. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phillip Dearden Posted July 23, 2017 Share Posted July 23, 2017 19 hours ago, j2bad said: Deeply held religious beliefs, you mean believing made up stuff? About your most succinct post ever and its still rubbish. Lots of us believe made up stuff and often, because we believe it, it exists. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ReverendRamsden Posted July 23, 2017 Share Posted July 23, 2017 7 minutes ago, Phillip Dearden said: Lots of us believe made up stuff and often, because we believe it, it exists. Very profound words. However, often it's a matter of publicly reciting Gospel until everyone else believes it too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phillip Dearden Posted July 23, 2017 Share Posted July 23, 2017 3 minutes ago, ReverendRamsden said: Very profound words. However, often it's a matter of publicly reciting Gospel until everyone else believes it too. I was not talking about religion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ReverendRamsden Posted July 23, 2017 Share Posted July 23, 2017 5 minutes ago, Phillip Dearden said: I was not talking about religion. Then I am truly disappointed. There is only one true religion and one true path. I had hoped Robert Callister was firmly on the right path. I shall pray for him! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.