Should I Vote for John McGeechan – Independent?

I visited John McGeechan tonight and enjoyed a tea and blether. He has decided to stand because he is sick of what the traditional parties have served up over the years and wants to be a sort local councillor writ large serving the Airdrie and Shotts constituency. We discussed the same three issues that I discussed with the other candidates. Here we go for the last time….

Sanctity of Life – We discussed the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Bill and John indicated that he had significant misgivings concerning the creation of human – animal embryo’s and the creation of saviour siblings. He indicated that he believed that human life is precious but also considered that it is not accurate to say that an embryo becomes a human entity immediately upon conception. In relation to abortion he was of the view that the gestational limit needed to be brought down from the current 24 weeks

We also had quite a discussion in relation to assisted suicide and John was aware of the complexity of the issue. He was of the view that there are limited circumstances where assisted suicide might be permissible.

Sanctity of Marriage – John was supportive of the civil partnership legislation and the right of same sex partners to form state recognized partnerships. However, he felt that there was no need for this to be equated with marriage. He was in support of sex education in schools to ‘promote homosexuality as a normal and valid choice’; and he was aware of the complexity of the issues surrounding same sex adoption and fostering. John was cautiously in favour of this.

Religious Liberty – John recognized the difficulties that the Equalities Act 2006 and 2010 posed for faith based groups and considered it ridiculous that faith based organizations could be compelled to appoint people who do not share their faith based beliefs, ethos or values.

We discussed the Westminster Declaration 2010 pledge to, “respect, uphold and protect the right of Christians to hold and express Christian beliefs and act according to Christian conscience.” John was of the view that this was a basic requirement of a democratic and free society and indicated that we would be happy to make that pledge. He also indicated that making the pledge did not constitute an agreement that Christian belief and conscience could be imposed on the larger society.

I would like to express my sincere thanks to John McGeechan for taking the time to chat through these issues with me. It is greatly appreciated.

So there you have it! Five candidates, five perspectives on three crucial issues! The decision is ours! Do please tell people about these five interviews. Get them to come to the blog and read over them and pray over them before voting. God has granted us the privilege of living in a democracy and being able to choose who we want to represent us, so lets make the most of it. That’s all folks!

Should I Vote for Pamela Nash – Labour?

Earlier today I had the privilege of spending some time with Pamela Nash the Labour candidate for Airdrie and Shotts. She was accompanied by Councillor Tommy Morgan who is an elected representative on North Lanarkshire Council. Pamela began by telling me that she is fully committed to ‘Labour Values’ and to the Labour Party manifesto upon which she is standing. We then went on to discuss the same three issues that I discussed with the other candidates. So let’s begin at the beginning.

Sanctity of Life – We began by talking about the ‘Human Fertilisation and Embryology Act’ which the current Labour government passed. I explained that there were a number of aspects of this Act that were of great concern to me, namely (i) the legalisation of human – animal embryos (ii) the legalisation of the creation of ‘saviour siblings’ and (iii) the abolition of the ‘need for a father’ consideration before commencing IVF treatment. I asked Pamela if she could share her thoughts on these issues. Pamela indicated that she was supportive of the Act because it would further the reach of science in our society. She expressed some initial concern at the ‘animal-human’ embryo’s’ but was reassured to know that these embryos would be destroyed within 14 days of creation. She felt that this meant that the needs of science could be catered for adequately.

We then went on to talk about her views on abortion and I asked her how she would vote were the question of reducing the gestational limit for abortion to a level below 24 weeks put in parliament. She indicated that she would be supportive of a reduction in the limit to 18-20 weeks. On the issue of the morning after pill being issued in schools, Pamela was supportive of the government ensuring that the morning after pill was available in schools for pupils who wanted it and was of the view that this did not need parental consent.

We very briefly spoke about assisted suicide and Pamela acknowledged that this was indeed a complex area. She felt that it was appropriate for a terminally ill person to be helped to die, though she was uncomfortable with provisions which would extend this to people who were not terminally ill and yet experiencing intolerable health issues. Using the example of the current bill passing through the Scottish Parliament, Pamela indicated that she would be unlikely to be able to support such a bill because of the width of the provisions it contained.

Sanctity of Marriage – We discussed a number of issues concerning marriage and family. I asked Pamela if, given that ‘Civil Partnerships’ were now on the statute book, she would be supportive of this being upgraded to a ‘full marriage’ for same sex unions. Pamela indicated that she was fully supportive of same sex unions being given full marriage status. She also indicated that she was also fully supportive of same sex partners being given the right to adopt and foster despite the implications of this for faith based fostering and adoption agencies.

We also discussed sex education in schools and Pamela indicated that she was fully supportive of the ‘promotion of homosexuality’ in schools. She said that the use of the word ‘promotion’ was rather unfortunate as what she thought this education should involve was the teaching that homosexuality was an absolutely normal and appropriate sexual choice for people to make.

I also asked her about the ‘free speech’ provisions that were inserted in to the ‘Incitement to homophobic hatred’ laws by the House of Lords. The Lords had to insert that clause three times before the Commons accepted it. However, it is Labour Party policy to try and repeal that free speech clause and if the Lords try and insert it again, then to use the Parliament Act to force it through. We used an example to work it through. I said that my view was that God had ordained that sexual activity should only take place between one man and one women bound together in marriage and that all sexual activity that took place out with this was sinful and wrong. I said that based on this I did not think that homosexual practice was normal or right. I asked Pamela’s views on how far my freedom to express that view should extend. Pamela felt that I should be free to express that view in my own home and also to express it from a church pulpit. However she felt that should such a view be expressed in the street, in the context of open air preaching, then it might be appropriate for this to constitute an offence.

Religious Liberty – We spoke about the Equality Act 2006 and 2010 and Pamela indicated that there were a number of provisions which were concerning. She felt that faith based groups should be able to employ people on the basis of their commitment to the beliefs, ethos and values of that faith community which this Act has eroded.

Finally we discussed the Westminster Declaration 2010 pledge to, “respect, uphold and protect the right of Christians to hold and express Christian beliefs and act according to Christian conscience.” Pamela indicated that she would not be able to make this pledge. There were two reasons why Pamela held this view. Firstly, her pledge to the people of Airdrie and Shotts was the pledge to uphold Labour values and deliver the Labour manifesto. She felt this was the key pledge that she wished to make. Secondly, Pamela was of the view that it was wrong to make such a pledge for one religion, when there are many in our society of other religions and none. Accordingly, Pamela was unable to make the pledge to “respect, uphold and protect the right of Christians to hold and express Christian beliefs and act according to Christian conscience.”

I would like to express my sincere thanks to Pamela Nash for taking time out of her busy schedule to spend time chatting through these issues with me. It is greatly appreciated. I would also like to thank Cllr Tommy Morgan for arranging the meeting.

So there you have it, the view from Pamela Nash! So far we have had contact with all of the main the parties; an email from the Conservative candidate and meetings with the Lib Dem, SNP and Labour candidates. We have one final candidate to meet with and he is the Independent candidate John McGeechan. I’ll be seeing him tonight so check out the blog even though it’s the weekend for the final installment.

Should I Vote for Sophia Coyle – SNP?

I’ve just had the privilege of spending an hour or so over coffee with Sophia Coyle the SNP candidate for the Airdrie and Shotts constituency. She was accompanied by her father Cllr. Michael Coyle and her daughter. Sophia has been active in local politics for a number of years currently serving as a North Lanarkshire Councillor and having previously stood for the Scottish Parliament. Our discussion was focussed on the same three issues that I discussed with the other candidates. Let’s look at them in turn.

Sanctity of Life – We began by discussing the issues of abortion, embryo experimentation and euthanasia. Sophia indicated that her upbringing and background had given her a deep respect for the sanctity of life. I asked her about her voting intention should she be in the position of having to vote on a potential reduction of the time limit for abortion to a lower level than the current 24 week limit. The SNP’s policy is to give MP’s a free vote on this issue. Sophia indicated that she would certainly vote to reduce the time limit for abortion to a lower level than 24 weeks. She also indicated that she was strongly against experimentation with human embryo’s and was generally uncomfortable with procedures which seemed to be ‘playing God’ with human life.

In relation to assisted suicide and euthanasia, again Sophia indicated that whilst this was a complex issue, she was not in favour of interfering to bring about the end of life. We discussed Margo McDonald’s Assisted Suicide Bill which is passing through the Scottish Parliament and Sophia indicated that if called to vote on a bill such as this one, she would vote against.

Sanctity of Marriage – We then moved on to the area of marriage and human sexuality. Sophia was of the view that the state had now recognised same sex unions as ‘civil partnerships’ and that she would not support any move to make these unions, ‘marriages’ since she believed that marriage was something that existed between a man and a woman. She also indicated that she is not in favour of homosexual partners being given the right to foster and adopt. She confirmed that had she been in the Scottish Parliament when this Bill was going through she would have voted against her party whip to oppose it.

She also indicated fundamental concerns with the sex education teaching within schools and was concerned about the promotion of homosexuality in schools where parental concerns are not taken seriously.

Religious Liberty – We had a discussion concerning religious liberty with specific reference to the Equalities Act and the issue of employment within religious organisations and the use of church buildings. Sophia was of the view that religious organisations should be free to appoint people to jobs, whose belief and lifestyle are consistent with the belief and ethos of the religious organisation. She was also of the view that churches should be able to let out their building to community groups without this compelling them to let the building to groups which were inconsistent with their Christian ethos.

We also spoke about the issue of freedom of speech for Christian groups and she was concerned to make sure that Christian groups were free to speak and act according to their Christian conscience.

We then moved on to speak about the Westminster Declaration 2010 pledge to respect, uphold and protect the right of Christians to hold and express Christian beliefs and act according to Christian conscience. Sophia indicated that she had already emailed Westminster 2010 to indicate that she was supportive of the pledge. She even showed me the email on her blackberry! She also said that the pledge was so minimal that it was amazing that anyone was finding cause not to sign it!

I would like to express my sincere thanks to Sophia Coyle for taking time out of her schedule to spend time chatting through these issues with me. It is greatly appreciated.

So there you are the view from Sophia Coyle! I’m still trying to track down the Labour Party candidate. I’ve had a friendly councilor trying to organise a meeting with her but so far he hasn’t managed to deliver the goods! Never fear your election news hound will continue to track her down! Until next time…

Ruth Whitfield - Conservative Update!

Do you remember the pledge? The pledge to ‘respect, uphold and protect the right of Christians to hold and express Christian beliefs and act according to Christian conscience' that is. It doesn't sound that controversial does it?

Well as I mentioned on an earlier blog I had asked Ruth Whitfield if based on her earlier comments here she would be prepared to make this pledge. Well here's the response, "Dear Alan, Thank you for contacting me again, but unfortunately I am unable to sign up to this pledge. Best Wishes, Ruth"

We are in a bad way when potential politicians refuse to pledge to respect, uphold and protect the right of Christians to hold and express Christian beliefs and act according to Christian conscience. God have mercy on the United Kingdom!

Should I Vote for John Love – Liberal Democrat?

It seems that the question, ‘Should I vote Lib Dem?’ is one which half the country is asking at the moment! I’ve just had the privilege of spending an hour and half with John Love the local Lib Dem candidate. He has been active in local politics for years and is currently a sitting North Lanarkshire Councillor. I asked him about the place faith had in his own life. He told me that he was a believer in the Lord Jesus Christ and that he was an Elder in the Church of Scotland in a local congregation. He told me that the reason he got involved in politics was as an expression of his Christian faith, and he indicated that since it was his Christian faith that led him into politics; that faith would shape how he reacted politically. There were three areas I wanted to speak to him about:

The Sanctity of Marriage
The Sanctity of Human Life; and
Religious Liberty

Let’s take them one at a time.

The Sanctity of Marriage – I asked John what his position was on the issue of same-sex marriage. Nick Clegg is the only main party leader so far to advocate the legalisation of same-sex marriage. (This would mean ‘civil partnership’ being upgraded to a full bone fide marriage). John was very clear in his view that a marriage, by definition, could only be between a man and woman. He accepted that the state may wish to assign a legal status to other types of unions but was emphatic that this is not marriage.

In relation to family issues and adoption, I asked John for his view on same sex couples being allowed to adopt children. John indicated that he opposed the policy of allowing same sex couples to adopt children and was concerned about the negative effect this policy had had on religious adoption agencies.

The Sanctity of Life – We then moved on to discuss life. The Liberal Democrat policy is that they would allow MP’s a free vote on the issue of reducing the time limit for abortions to below 24 weeks. I asked John how he would vote if elected and called to vote on such an issue. He indicated that he would vote to reduce the time limit below 24 weeks, since he is against abortion except in limited circumstances. He indicated that he was fundamentally against ‘abortion on demand’.

In relation to embryo destructive research; animal/human embryos; and saviour siblings, John indicated that he was against the creation of life for scientific experimentation. He indicated that life is in God’s hands and that we ought not to be ‘playing God’ with lives.

The Liberal Democrats are also committed to a free vote on the issue of assisted suicide and euthanasia. When I asked John for his view on this issue he indicated that he was fundamentally opposed to all forms of assisted suicide and euthanasia, acknowledging that all of life was in God’s hands.

Religious Liberty – Under this heading we chatted about the Equality Bill 2010 and various free speech issues. John indicated that he was very much in favour of the state ensuring equality of treatment. He did recognise the need for churches and church based organisations to be entitled to employ Christians without interference from the state. Further he was committed to the rights of Christians to speak and live according to their Christian conscience.

If elected John would respect, uphold and protect the right of Christians to hold and express Christian beliefs and act according to Christian conscience.

So in a week where the Lib Dems are riding high in the polls, here is the view from the Airdrie and Shotts candidate! I would like to express my sincere thanks to John Love for taking time out of his schedule to spend an hour and half chatting through these issues with me. It is greatly appreciated.

So, now, off in search of the SNP and Labour candidates! I also hear that an independent candidate is also standing; if any of you have a contact number for him/her then perhaps you could pass it on to me. We want to hear from the Independent as well. From your election eager beaver; over and out!

Should I Vote for Ruth Whitfield – Conservative?

Unfortunately Ruth Whitfield is unable to meet with me. However, she has very helpfully outlined her views on some of the issues I asked about in my original email. Let me give you a flavour of what she said.

Ruth started off by giving me a little of her own faith background. She said, “I am a member of the Church of Scotland and my Christian faith is very important to me. I know that as a Member of Parliament I would be asked to vote on a number of issues of conscience, on which you can be assured that I would be guided by my faith.”

I think that this is encouraging. It is right that the candidates’ Christian faith should strongly impact how they vote. I suppose my concern is that the political parties tend not to be giving ‘free votes’ on all the issues of conscience that should concern a Christian. I’d really like to know the candidates response should she be faced with a choice of pleasing the party whip or standing for Christian concerns.

In relation to the Westminster Declaration 2010 Ruth said, “It is impossible to condense all of them (issues of Christian faith) into a Declaration; questions would inevitably be raised as to why some issues were included and others not, and our faith should not be simply a check list. Also the proximity of the General Election may imply a blurring of lines between the party political and the personal which I am sure you would not wish to see. So I hope you will forgive me for not signing the Westminster Declaration at this time.”

Whilst I didn’t ask Ruth to sign the Declaration, her response is instructive. I would agree that the Christian faith cannot be reduced to checklists, but it seems to me that the Westminster Declaration 2010 is an irreducible minimum, it seems to represent the absolute basics and there is much I would wish to add to it was I writing it. Indeed some Christians don’t want to sign it because it doesn’t say enough! So it seems a little coy, not to want to sign it. I also feel that I really do want to see the blurring of lines between the party political and the personal! It is a living, breathing, thinking, feeling person that we will be electing and I want them to be personal people in the political process. I don’t want them to be able separate how they think and feel from how they vote!

I was extremely heartened by Ruth’s comments on the place of Christianity in UK society. She said, “Our Christian heritage is integral to the United Kingdom; it is not possible to understand our history or society without knowledge of it, nor to appreciate today’s society without respecting its values. If elected I hope to play my part in asserting these values which mean so much to you and me, which will certainly include freedom of speech, freedom of worship and freedom to associate.”

On the basis of this statement, I’ve email Ruth back to ask if she would be prepared to make the pledge that if elected she will, “respect, uphold and protect the right of Christians to hold and express Christian beliefs and act according to Christian conscience”. I’ll let you know what the response is!

Well there you go our first response from a Prospective Parliamentary Candidate for Airdrie and Shotts! I’d like to take this opportunity to offer my sincere thanks to Ruth Whitfield for taking the time to respond to my email and for sharing with me her thoughts on some of the matters that are important to me in the run up to this general election.

I’m meeting the Lib Dem candidate tomorrow morning and still trying to sort out a date with the SNP candidate. Despite sending emails I’ve had no contact from the Labour candidate, so if any of you see her out and about, tell her I’d like a chat with her. That’s all folks!

Will the Real Conservative Candidate Please Stand Up!

Eagle eyed readers of the blog will notice that the last blog has disappeared! In it I gave chapter and verse on a series of emails between myself and 'Ruth Whitfield' and concluded that she didn't want to meet me! Well that's right! But the reason she didn't want to meet me is that she has nothing to do with politics and isn't standing in Airdrie and Shotts! This poor innocents email address has been included in a whole range of political websites including 'your next MP' and 'Westminster Declaration' among others and wait for it! She is the wrong Ruth Whitfield! So egg on face all round! Apologies to the wrong Ms Whitfield and apologies to the right Ms. Whitfield. I'll look forward to talking to the genuine Ms. Whitfield in the near future.

Watch this space! If nothing else you'll have a laugh!

Decisions, Decisions – Who should I vote for?

A few years ago I decided that I was finished with party politics. I decided that what was more important than a party machine was the person who was actually going to be representing me in the Council, in the Scottish Parliament or in Westminster. In practice, what this has meant is that after years of voting for the same party, since making this decision I have voted for three different parties based on the individuals representing them. This has been a major challenge because it is really difficult to find out anything about the people behind the parties!

So I have decided to try and do something about that and share what I find with you. So far in Airdrie and Shotts Constituency we have 4 candidates who have declared:

• Sophia Coyle – SNP
• John Love – Liberal Democrats
• Pamela Nash – Labour
• Ruth Whitfield – Conservative

I have contacted 3 out of the 4 of them (still trying to source an email for Pamela Nash) and asked to meet them to discuss their polices and personal political philosophy. On top of this I have asked them to consider taking the pledge! The Westminster Declaration 2010 pledge that is! The pledge is as follows, “I will respect, uphold and protect the right of Christians to hold and express Christian beliefs and act according to Christian conscience.” You can find out more about the Westminster Declaration 2010 here. I got one really quick reply, but we’ll save that for the next post!

Performance Treadmill

Hi


I thought I would share some thoughts that have been of great release to me in my Christian walk and also just as challenging.

The easiest way to summarise it is I have been trying to work through the following Question,

How am I going to live in a God Pleasing and Glorifying way today?

I know that if we were all to be asked do we want to live that way today we would in the blink of an eye say darn right or maybe Amen or yes even. However that is a totally different question to How am I going to do that! I have to say that with the help of a nice wee book called Transforming Grace by Jerry Bridges, I have become aware of danger of what he Calls the "Performance Treadmill".

Bridges looks at the 3 stages of our Christian lives, Salvation, Life after salvation and then life in eternity, or if you want the theological terms, Justification, Sanctification and Glorification. He makes the point that we all sound Evangelical Christians would agree that we are both saved by Grace and enter in to heaven by grace but how do we live our lives between the 2?

It is Bridges premise that we our natural sinful predisposition to legalism often ends up with us trying to earn our growth in God, or blessings, or even answers to prayer. That well known feeling to us all I am sure, of when we have been "good" and read our bibles daily and prayed and even put out the bin for the next door neighbour we have this sense of invincibility that God is soooo pleased with us and will surely be itching to shower blessings on us. However, just as familiar I am sure is the feeling of woe that comes with giving in to that so familiar temptation and how we want to hide from God and feel unworthy or of no use to Him at all, until, that is, we are "good again for a while, and there you have it, you are on the performance treadmill.

Bridges has a good way of helping us check our hearts, and suggests that we think of the following scenario, if we have fallen to that old familiar sin that is our battle, and then in the next minute had the perfect opportunity to witness for God to our long time friend, would we do so with gusto and faith or would we maybe even pass it up due to our failure before God and His disapproval with us. If you can relate to this then as Bridges says you better check you are not living on the performance treadmill.

Well, how do we live our lives between Salvation and Heaven? How do we live today for the glory and pleasure of God? Well it is the answer to that question that has been so liberating and challenging to me recently, you live it by the same faith in God's Grace that Saved you, and that you believe will see you through to Heaven. You look to eternity and then look to your heart, feel that faith that believes that by the Grace of God you will one day spend eternity in heaven, it is that same Faith you are to live for Christ today. Believing that by the Grace of Jesus Christ and the grace for today he supplies you can live for Him.

I now wake up and each morning look at the day ahead and acknowledge that I am bankrupt before a holy God, and that even the good things I would attempt are as filthy rags, I then throw myself on His grace believing that through the cross Jesus' grace will enable me to be more like Him the same way I throw myself on His grace for the forgiveness of my sins and for my Hope of eternity with him.

Why don't we this Easter resolve to live in the power of God's Grace. Gal 2:20-21

Jim