Tuesday, April 20, 2010

Vote Clegg get Evan Harris

I am anxious about the ideology of Nick Cleggs' atheism, we know about his opposition to "faith" schools, though I am told his children attend them, his Spanish wife is at least a social Catholic. The problem is if vote Clegg you get Harris.
Dr Evan Harris, nicknamed Dr Death, will be well worth having a look at if you are a mainstream Catholic tempted to even think about voting Liberal Democrat. How well does a party that can accomodate Harris and his ilk sit with the Catholic vote?


Mike said...

It isn’t just that you get Dr Death. Most Lib Dems share his views. I have been having quite a bit of correspondence with my own Lib Dem MP and her views are, on most moral issues, much the same as his. Moreover, his views get backed by Lib Dem Conferences. The days when your average Liberal MP was a reasonable, pleasant and tolerant person have long since gone, to be replaced by ideologues who brook no opposition to their views and are anything but tolerant. The big influx of 1997 included a lot of this type of person and you can be sure that if the Lib Dems win more seats in this election most of the new MPs will be clones of Dr Death. It is looking increasingly likely that we are going to get a hung Parliament. Which party is the largest will be irrelevant. The Lib Dems will back Labour. They may not like the National Identity Card but on most social issues they are, if anything, more extreme than Labour. They think that Ed Balls proposals on PSHE are only a move in the right direction. So we are going to get the PSHE proposals back again and this time they will get passed.

jangojingo said...

So here comes my rant Father Ray...

The Liberal Democrats are about;
1) Change the tax system by taxing the rich more.
The 'Catholic Whistle' agrees that there needs to be a more just distribution of wealth within our society. Note that those earning more than £150,000 will be taxed more under Labour new rules.
2) Change the education system by helping the poor more.
The 'Catholic Whistle' agrees that our representatives need to make an option for the poor, especially those poor in education.
3) Change the economy to be more green.
The 'Catholic Whistle' agrees that our government should drive economic policy with green issues in mind but not at the expense of putting the person first.
4) Change the voting system to a more proportional representation.
The 'Catholic Whistle' agrees that our first past the post voting system needs reform to reflect the common good more fully.

The 'Catholic Whistle' supports the Liberal Democrats 'four steps to fairness' tests. These tests are all directed toward the common good.

Look at the overall picture not just an individual!

Michael Petek said...

The rumour mill says the other Liberal Democrat MPs think he's awful.

Independent said...

Nothing has changed. In 1967 the Abortion Act was sponsored by a Liberal David Steel helped by a Labour Home Secretary Roy Jenkins who afterwards joined the Liberal Democrats. Another future Liberal Democrat David Owen was Health Minister during the Labour Governments of the 1970's, when there was a strong drive to give those under the age of consent confidential contraception. From its very inception the Liberal Democratic Party has had a strong secularist agenda as a promoter of what Jenkins called the "civilised society".

Gone are the days when the Liberals had a Jewish President, Lord Samuel, Catholic MPs such as David Alton, and academic advisers such as Professor Michael Fogarty.

The LDP and the Labour left are the most aggressively secularist political groups in our society ,seeking to suppress religious schools by depriving them of their distinctive ethos, and forcing upon all their own particular brand of morality with censorship of speech and crimilising of behaviour which would uphold Christian standards. What a pity that these facts seem not to have penetrated the popular consciousness.

jangojingo said...


The vote for common good is a lot more complicated than just analysing history. I agree historical issues are important to understanding our current situation but I do not agree that history determines the future. We need to seek the common good not by being entrenched in our past but by transcending to the future with the risks. Pax.

umblepie said...

Sorry Paul Malinder, but what does 'transcending to the future with the risks' really mean? It is a good example of Liberal, woolly, wishful thinking. The Lib/Dems stick together as one, understandably so- they are obliged to for their political survival. Our MP is a Lib/Dem, pleasant enough man, but not pro-life, his main claim to fame, is his and his party's promotion of 'equal rights'. Some 'equal rights' are highly questionable, given to those who by their choice of lifestyle, should not have certain 'rights' and do not deserve them. Other equal rights, particularly those due to the unborn - appear to be totally ignored!! Sorry Paul, you appear to have been brainwashed by those secular Lib/Dem MPs. The policies you mentioned are those to which all parties aspire, to a greater or lesser degree ; a fair system of taxation, equal educational opportunities for all children, a balanced 'green' economy;with proportional representation having as many critics as supporters. Consider the issues that really matter, that of abortion and euthanasia. Vote for the Lib/Dems is sadly a vote for the 'pro-death' party. To me, the final two sentences in your first comment veer dangerously close to the false and evil philosophy that 'the end (the common good)justifies the means'.

Seth said...

Paul Mallinder

The Lib Dems might pass your 4 tests (which are, frankly, arbitrary and missing things such as whether taxing the super rich is really the most effective means of helping the poor), but if you vote for a pro-abortion, pro-euthanasia, pro-embryonic cell testing politician like Dr Death, the black mark on your soul will obscure all those other goods.

Independent said...

Mr Mallinder - The Liberal Democrat conception of the common good is conditioned by their past. As the police would say" they have got form." History certainly does not determine the future, however "Men make their own history, but they do not make it just as they please; they do not make it under circumstances chosen by themselves, but under circumstances directly found, given and transmitted form the past"(Marx). Among the LD circumstances is the secular ideology of Jenkins and the other founders of the party.

One might hope that this could be transcended but their voting record in the last Parliament might suggest that it will not be.

Should we ignore the past we are in danger of repeating its mistakes. Your four steps to "fairness" are interesting points for discussion but require a lot of definition to make them other than pious aspirations.

Anagnostis said...

Come on, Father - all of the parties include people like this.

Some of them also include genuine Christians, like the LibDem candidate my PP has asked me to catechise. Unfortunately, I can't also vote for him, being registered in another constituency.

Vote pragmatically, if at all.

Michael.Petek@btinternet.com said...

It's come full circle. The Liberal tradition in British politics goes back to the Radicals who, before they merged with the Whigs to form the Liberal Party, favoured Catholic Emancipation.

Today, however . . .

Cetti's Warbler said...

Actually Dr Death is my MP and you may be astonished to know that he has a great deal of respect in these parts. His stance on pro-life issues my be objectionable but he is a dedicated, honest and hard-working man. I have personal experience of this as he very actively supported a campaign group I was closely involved with. As Paul Mallinder and Moretben say, choosing who to vote for is not easy. Please pray for Evan Harris.

Mike said...


Yes. All the parties include people like this. You just have to think of Harriet Harman in the Labour Party and the pro-abortionists in the Conservative Party.

What is more important is the policy of the party.

How many of the other parties have an official policy which is in favour of “assisted suicide” and the effective abolition of all state-funded faith schools?

It is those two policies which make the Lib Dems the most secular and the most anti-Christian of all the main parties.

In addition, look at the balance of the MPs in each party. There might be a lot of this kind of person in the Labour Party. There might be quite a few in the Conservative Party. But the vast majority of Lib Dems think that way. Virtually all the Lib Dem peers voted in favour of the PSHE proposals in the Children’s Bill and very few, if any, of the Lib Dem MPs voted in favour of David Drew’s amendment to the Equality Bill. (Designed to ensure that the Churches could still insist on certain norms of behaviour for their clergy.) My own Lib Dem MP voted against the amendment. The Lib Dems listen totally to what Stonewall has to say and totally ignore anything the Churches have to say. When the Churches expressed a concern the Lib Dems just brushed it aside. In the last Parliament they imposed a three-line whip on their MPs to support an amendment which would, in effect, have abolished faith schools.

Another difference between the Lib Dems and the other two major parties is that the MPs in the other parties are interested in a wide range of issues. The only issues which get Lib Dems really excited are those to do with “civil rights” – and we know what they understand by “civil rights”. (When I was a member of the Lib Dems the Conference Hall would get rather empty when economic issues were being debated and the café would get very busy.)

Poor old Vince Cable. He may be well-informed about economic matters but he is a member of a party which isn’t terribly bothered about such matters. What interests your average Lib Dem is spending the taxpayers’ money, rather than thinking about how to help the economy grow and the tax base to increase. Just look at all their ‘flagship’ policies: abolition of tuition fees, free personal care for the elderly, etc. they are all about spending money.

And I know a Lib Dem candidate who is an evangelical Christian and is totally opposed to a lot of Lib Dem policies. He has no chance of getting elected and if he did it would not make any difference to the way the party as a whole would vote. He is also highly unlikely ever to be allowed to contest a seat the Lib Dems might actually win.

pelerin said...

I have just seen that we have eight candidates for the Pavilion. One candidate is standing for the rights of zombies - the undead - but sadly there is no one standing for a Christian party this time. A sad state of affairs.

Independent said...

Evan Harris who as a physician uses the courtesy title of Dr. "claimed thousands of pounds to enhance the value of his taxpayer funded home before selling it to his parents for a profit."("The Complete Expenses File"p 26). No doubt his activities enhanced the common good and transcended mere life and moral issues. Was this part of the LD contribution to "fairness"?

Anagnostis said...


You're right. I'd love to see the back of Trident and our sickening subservience to American interests, but the cure is as bad as the disease. I won't be voting. Again.

The Lord’s descent into the underworld

At Matins/the Office of Readings on Holy Saturday the Church gives us this 'ancient homily', I find it incredibly moving, it is abou...