Friday, 20 February 2015
For The First Time Polls Show That The Majority Of Christians Won't Vote Tory
It would seem that the Church of England is the 'Tory Party at Prayer' no longer. Tom Hawksley,
a Conservative Christian and regular contributor sums up this tension and sense of alienation
in the article below:
At the election there is little choice for Christians: it's time they had their own party.
Traditional Christians have been disenfranchised
It is difficult for a Christian to vote for any established political party in the 2015 General Election. For all the main parties are hostile to Christian family values. In effect traditional church-goers – Roman Catholics, the Orthodox, Anglicans, Methodists, Baptists, Presbyterians, Evangelicals, Pentecostals – have been disenfranchised.
This is a watershed in British history. From the earliest days of our parliamentary system the main parties never campaigned against Christianity or the traditional family. Nor did they threaten to use the levers of state to make the views of Christianity illegal. So, spared the howling winds of Europe's anti-clerical revolutions, the UK has never needed any church party as they have on the continent. Until now. This May any vote a Christian gives to any of the main parties means voting for political leaders who are all committed to a fiercely liberal secular agenda and are ready to use the powers of the state to oppose the teachings of the church. This is almost certainly the case for the Conservative Party.
The Conservative betrayal of Christians
The Tory leaders have treated their loyal foot soldiers with contempt. Many of the thousands of ordinary hard working Conservative supporters who have knocked on doors, stuffed envelopes and hosted tea parties in their spare time were Christians. Like the rest of the country, nobody asked them whether they supported the abolition of traditional marriage. Despite thousands of protest letters from Conservatives to their MPs, the rank and file of the Tory Party were ignored, and, as if in a nightmare, the pragmatic party, the 'steady as it goes' party, the men and women who are the backbone of middle England watched aghast as their liberal aristocratic leaders vomited out of Westminster an Orwellian social experiment that would have made the pigs in Animal Farm blush. The experiment is now on the statute book, and one word sums up how ordinary Christian Conservatives feel: betrayed.
And it was arrogant betrayal. Philip Hammond, the Foreign Secretary, said on TV there was no demand for destroying traditional marriage in parliament; and no demand in the country. He was right. But arrogance – a quality aristocrats are not unfamiliar with – did not need the support of ordinary people. Assuming they were born with the right to rule, the Etonians arrogantly forced radical legislation onto a public who had never seen any mention of it in the Tory manifesto.
Abortion and Pornography
There are other reasons why Christians should feel uncomfortable supporting the modern Tory party. Though there has been plenty of talk, there has been no robust attempt to deal with the deeply anti Christian practice of abortion. In early 2015 a healthy baby was born aged 23 weeks. If the mother had wanted an abortion this baby could have been killed, because the legislation which in power this Tory party has tolerated, allows abortion up to 24 weeks.
And though there has also been plenty of talk about the danger of pornography, when David Cameron was asked to support the campaign to take nudity out of the Sun newspaper, he refused.
The gap between the rich and the poor
Another aspect of the Tories that has always made traditional Christians uneasy is that Tories tend to team up with the very wealthy. This unease has rightly intensified in recent years as the gap between the rich and poor in the UK continues to widen. There are thousands of people working in full time jobs, but because of low wages they have to rely on food banks. This has happened under the Tories.
And while few doubt that change to the welfare system was needed, as the reforms have been unveiled genuinely vulnerable people have suffered. And worse, the Daily Mail reading Tory supporters have been sold a narrative about the 'undeserving poor'. This whole notion is inimical to Christianity. Yes, there is the Biblical expectation that everyone should work; but the underlying emphasis, vividly portrayed in Jesus' teaching about the Good Samaritan, is that when people hit rough times they should be given a helping hand, not asked whether they are deserving or not.
The Bible and church teaching insist that the poor must be treated with compassion. This is not an obscure doctrine; it is a part of the church's DNA. Christians must remember the poor. And so Christians should vote for a party that will do the same.
In one area the Tories deserve praise from Christians. They have followed the Bible's advice and tried to get the country out of debt and into surplus. And this has led to economic growth, creating the money that is needed to help the poor. The question for Christians is whether they are getting the balance right between creating growth – and protecting the vulnerable.
While the Tory's economic policy needs to be treated with discernment, it would be harsh to suggest it violates a Christian's conscience. As stated above, what violates a Christian's conscience is the contempt the Tory leaders have shown their party members members; their unprincipled attack on conventional marriage; and their continuing support for abortion. It is this that makes it difficult for a traditional Christian to support the modern Tory party in the coming election.
Labour, no friend of Christian teachings
It is equally difficult to support the Labour party. The vast majority of Labour MPs supported the abolition of ordinary marriage. Indeed their support for the traditional family is very suspect, proved by their tax policy. The party opposes any tax breaks at all for people who marry and work hard to bring up a family. This leaves the UK in a situation where you are better off if you don't marry and have children.
Harriet Harman has said that families in the UK now come in all shapes and sizes. Social workers wearily agree, and one reason for the chaos is that socialist enemies of Christian morality have designed a benefit system that gives money and bigger houses to girls who sleep around and get pregnant. People who never leave their leafy neighbourhoods would hold up their hands and cry that this is an attack on single mothers; people dealing with some of the single mothers know this is exactly the situation.
While there are quite a few Tories who oppose abortion, in the Labour party it is almost a tribal chant. Every mainline Christian church from the Greek Orthodox through to the Anglicans and of course the Roman Catholics oppose killing the unborn. It is condemned in Scripture and church tradition. But it is fervently supported by Labour.
And like an old painted pagan clinging to a pathetic idol, they are unwilling to even acknowledge that all the science, all the research, points to this killing of the unborn as murder. Modern technology gives us close up pictures that clearly shows that there is a little human being in the mother's womb; the same technology tells us that these little human beings can feel pain; and modern medicine now delivers healthy babies at 23 weeks, even though, as stated, UK law says that same baby can be murdered inside the womb at 24 weeks. Endless studies also prove that women who have abortions sink into depression.
There were nearly 200,000 abortions in the UK in 2013; nearly 550 every day; nearly all funded by our taxes through the NHS. Many have deep unease over this. There is none with Labour. In 2011 a sensible bill was introduced in the House of Commons by Nadine Dories which would have made it mandatory for a woman seeking an abortion to see a professional advisor who was not in the pay of the abortion provider. Dianne Abbot's response for Labour was disturbing. With lethargic arrogance she told the House that abortion had been an accepted practice for over forty years.
In other words – we have worshipped sex without responsibility for forty years, and while this god demands the unborn to be sacrificed, this is settled, because – Animal Farm again - it is settled. Diane Abbot made no attempt to deal with the actual issues that gave rise to the bill. There was no intellectual energy, no engaging with reason, just a lethargic and arrogant dismissal. Even though science has long dismissed the notion that the foetus is a part of a pregnant woman's body, and so the spurious claim that she has the right to do what she likes with her own body, still Labour supports the killing of the unborn.
Another reason why a Christian might be wary about voting Labour is their poor record on the economy. As with the Tories it would be wrong to condemn the party out of hand for this, but nevertheless Christians believe in careful stewardship, and the Labour record does not always shine with this. The appalling deficit left by Gordon Brown being an obvious example. Historians will have to decide whether this deficit was caused primarily by the 2008 banking crisis or careless spending, but in the meantime Christians have a responsibility to be discerning. The idea of socialism has nobility; but often the record seems to be that money gets wasted by amateurs who are probably out of their depth.
It is difficult for traditional Christians to vote Tory with an easy conscience, difficult to vote Labour, and certainly difficult to vote Lib Dem.
Lib Dems – well deserved reputation for secular amoral humanism
There are a few Lib Dem Christians, but generally the party has a well deserved reputation for secular amoral humanism. Well deserved because Nick Clegg, the party's leader, has said he is not a man of faith; and for most decent people, with his public boasts of philandering, he is amoral about sex.
It would seem being amoral in the area of sexual morals is something of a tradition for liberal leaders: Jeremy Thorpe slept with rent boys, and was accused of trying to have one of them murdered. Cyril Smith abused minors; Paddy Ashdown betrayed his wife; and Chris Rennard (a former chief executive of the party) has faced multiple accusations of behaving with women inappropriately. Not surprisingly several female Lib Dem activists have resigned.
The reputation for secularism is also well deserved because one of its senior figures, Nick Harris, is deputy leader of the British Humanist Society, a group committed to tearing out the church's influence in Britain. And also well deserved because Sir Ming Campbell, one time leader of the Lib Dems, when asked about faith on Question Time said all religions were the same to him. In other words the man aspiring to be prime-minister actually thought that it made no difference whether you were a Muslim, a Hindu, or a Christian: quite extraordinary. And Sir Ming bleated out this nonsense with a nauseating smugness as if he were a superior being because he was so very clever for coming to his conclusion. In fact he showed that he knew less about religion than all the fourteen year-olds up and down the country who take Religious Studies at G.C.S.E.
The Lib Dem reputation for its hostility to the church is also well deserved because its policies are inimical to traditional Christianity. This party has been the most fanatical about tearing apart traditional marriage, and now boast of their success on their web-site. Not satisfied with spreading the misery of their confused sexual morality on adults , they now want to inflict it by force on children as young as seven. Most people believe it is the job of the family to teach their children about sex; and so, quite rightly, parents can bring their children out of sex education classes if they wish.
But if the Liberal Democrats have their way, this opting out will become illegal. Only Big Brother State can be trusted to teach about sex and 'relationships'. This is where the church and the state will have a head on collision. For the state, to the delight of Lib Dems, have abolished traditional marriage and so now can only talk about 'relationships'. Nobody knows what precisely this relationship is meant to mean, but one thing is for sure, that the state will not be teaching that sex should be kept for marriage, a union between a man and a woman. This is the approach of the church and it is the teaching that brings security for adults and children alike, but, by force, the Lib Dems want to teach some alternative half baked sexual morality that had its untimely birth in the 1970's when Jimmy Saville and others were making the most of the liberal establishment's attack on Christian morality to hone their predatory skills.
As for the killing of the unborn, all have been legally murdered because of the Abortion Act of 1967, the creation of the then leader of the Liberals, David Steele. As with Labour, killing the unborn remains a tribal policy for Liberals and Nadine Dorris pointed her finger straight at a Liberal MP, Evan Harris, when her previously supported bill to make sure the providers of abortion did not give the counselling was dumped by David Cameron. The Liberals had forced the prime minister to change course.
How can a Christian vote for the Liberal Democrats knowing they despise the sanctity of human life, are fanatical enemies of traditional marriage, and now want to infect by force the thinking of every child with their twisted views about sex and 'relationships'. A vote for the Liberal Democrats would be a vote for more of what the UK has been suffering ever since the likes of David Steele and others unpinned our country's attachment to Christian morality and ushered in the specious alternative morality of the 1960's. Glance back over forty years and here is what this alternative morality has given us: the break-down of the traditional family, the most disgraceful gap between the rich and the poor in Europe, and a lot of anger building up in the younger generation who have been denied a proper family to grow up in.
It is difficult for traditional Christians to vote Tory with an easy conscience, difficult to vote Labour, difficult to vote Lib Dem.
And extremely difficult to vote for UKIP.
UKIP – undertones of racism and weak under pressure
There are at least four reasons why it is difficult for a Christian to vote UKIP.
First of all there is an undertone of racism in UKIP. Yes, officially they state they are not racist, but in a survey of their supporters over 50% believed that immigrants and their children should be 'encouraged to leave' the UK. That's ugly racism and wholly contrary to the Christian stance that practises hospitality to strangers. This has been commented on so much there is no need to dwell on this dark side of the party further. This by itself should put all decent Christians off UKIP, but there is more.
Secondly they are – of course – anti Europe. That in itself is not anti Christian. Christians can be pro or anti Europe. What is wrong about UKIP's policy is that there is little explanation as to how the UK is meant to proceed once out of Europe. Most of our trade is with Europe, our serious foreign policy (e.g. negotiating with Iran) is done via Europe, and our defence policy for the last sixty years has been formed on the basis of peace in Europe. UKIP are telling the passengers that the ride is bumpy and shouting for them to jump. But they have no idea where the passengers will land. This is irresponsible. The Bible is full of warnings about hasty action, evidence should be pondered, alternatives carefully considered. At present just a casual observation tells us that if the UK leaves Europe we risk economic melt-down, loss of influence in foreign affairs, and an unacceptable defence risk. The cheering to leave Europe might sound intoxicating in the night bars of Ramsgate; but in the early morning dawn there would be a horrendous hangover. Jesus told his disciples to think ahead. That is not what Nigel Farrage and his party are doing.
Thirdly they are a party with no convictions; a harsher word would be to call them cowardly. It is obvious from their tweets and off the cuff remarks that UKIP people are no supporters of gay marriage. On the 18th June a query to their head office regarding UKIP's policy on same sex marriage received this reply:
UKIP is totally opposed to any attempt to "redefine" words from the dictionary and believes that David Cameron has enough important things to do rather than causing an unholy row without any justification.
And in an official statement the party says that it 'opposes the move to legislate for same sex marriage'. This paper is titled – 'Gay marriage is illiberal.'
It's a no-brainer. UKIP were anti gay marriage in 2012. But now in 2015 the party has changed – very easily – and supports gay marriage. One would have thought that a subject like marriage deserved more loyalty than just a few months exposed to the pink winds of Westminster and the BBC, but when UKIP was tested, there was no backbone.
This shows us that UKIP at the end of the day are just the same as the establishment they are thumbing their nose at. They only want power and they're not too concerned about loyalties to the principles they support to get them there.
And finally, when you get any where near to UKIP, there is a hint of oddness, eccentricity, instability. So in response to a question about same sex marriage, this was the reply from an aide in Nigel Farage's office arguing that the problems of the UK and Europe were due to a global conspiracy to create a world dictatorship.
The email is dated June, 2012
It (same sex marriage) is a part of a global agenda, known as the "New World Order", which has been set by a clique of supranationalists (including "our" government) working through an immense array of taxpayer-, and big-business-funded organisations, to create dictatorial, world-government.
Andrew S. Reed
Office of Nigel Farage, Brussels
In the initial enquiry there was no request for Nigel Farage's office to set the question of same sex marriage in a wider context, but here an aide does just that. And that is eccentric. Christians are to elect into power level headed people with their feet on the ground who know how to get things done; not people who believe in fanciful conspiracy theories.
It is difficult for traditional Christians to vote Tory with an easy conscience, difficult to vote Labour, difficult to vote Lib Dem, very difficult to vote for UKIP, and also very difficult to vote for the Green Party.
For Christians - better a drunken and whoring Tory than a Green Robespierre.
Regarding freedom of opinion around the matter of same sex marriage and hostility to traditional marriage it is well known that the Greens are wholly authoritarian. So the Christian, Christina Summers, was expelled from Brighton's Green Party for refusing to support same sex marriage. In the Green world, there is no room for church people.
More dangerous still, the Greens want to encourage homosexual teenage sex. They want the age of consent to come down to 16. No Christian could ever support this invitation to every homosexual paedophile in the UK to legally abuse children. This dangerous policy comes out of the naivety that so easily buys the unproven allegation that sexual orientation is just the same as race, and so all discrimination is wrong. Only the simplistic think that sexuality can be equated with race, and that dangerous simplicity is on full display in the Green Party.
They have other policies that are also very dangerous. It would seem that they reject the Christian idea of a fallen world. So just because at present the UK has no enemies who want to invade us they propose dismantling the UK's defence system. Christianity and history points to a world where the strong will always exploit the weak and so most people believe that the first duty of the state is to defend its citizens. A vote for the Greens would be a vote to make the UK vulnerable.
Perhaps most alarming of all about the Green Party is that they proclaim lofty words, which, when pinned down, are nearly meaningless. They use words like 'sustainability', 'equity', 'devolution'. Who is going to define what these high sounding concepts mean. Well, the Green Party of course. It's like the French Revolution. Those high minded idealists had their slogan – 'Liberty, Equality, and Fraternity' - but, like the Greens, only the revolutionaries could define what those terms meant. That is ominous, especially when you think about what happened to Christina Summers.
Christians have been the victims of these sort of parties who ride to power on the back of big undefinable concepts: think French Revolution; the Russian Revolution; Hitler's Revolution; Mao's Revolution. There is no reason why the Greens would be any different. They think they are the saints who can save not just the world, but the whole planet. That makes them dangerous, indeed for Christians, better a drunken and whoring Tory, than a Green Robespierre.
What about the Christian MPs and Christian members of the main parties?
This persuasive argument that it is difficult for traditional Christians to vote for the major parties this May raises an obvious question: what about the committed Christian MPs in these parties. Are they to be accused of having dull consciences?
No – for at least two reasons.
First of all when they joined their parties it is likely they had no idea that their leadership would end up bringing about the abolition of normal marriage. Indeed the Conservative party, especially under the leadership of Margaret Thatcher, had a reputation for supporting family values.
Secondly they have decided that the most effective way for a Christian to impact policy is to work within the system, even if these means compromises. For joining a main party has been the normal way, almost the only way, for not just Christians, but anyone wanting to have an impact on national politics.
This is still a strong argument.
These Christians can rightly claim that their witness is making a real difference. For example these Christians have been campaigning – with others – to bring down the abortion limit from 24 weeks to 20; they have been active in ensuring that the vulnerable are not treated too harshly in the benefit reforms; and they are keeping an eagle eye on any moves by the state to threaten the freedom promised to the churches to maintain the Christian definition of marriage.
Christians in all the main parties deserve the respect of other Christians for what they do, the witness they bear, and the decision they have made that staying in the party system is the best way to be effective.
Is it time for Christian MPs to leave the secular liberal parties and join a Christian party?
Christian MPs deserve our respect, but the sad truth remains that they have been powerless to stop the secular liberal assault on the church. As insiders they have watched their parties refuse to deal with abortion, refuse to challenge pornography in the Sun newspaper, legislate for the abolition of traditional marriage and create an army of equality enforcers to harass schools.
Christian MPs in the main parties are like crew members of a ship who wanted to sail to America, but on the deck the captain and his officers have suddenly decided the ship must go to Russia. It is then not easy to get off the ship, especially when you have a position and a certain status.
Nevertheless given the inevitable storms that undiluted secular liberal legislation will cause, perhaps the time has come for these committed Christians to consider whether they should go on supporting their party leaders who have been so hostile to the traditional church.
Maybe it is time for the fourteen or so committed Christians in parliament to leave the ship. If they did so, they could have an historic impact on the future of the UK. For they could stand as independents or, even better, as members of a fledgling Christian party. With their reputations for being fine MPs, combined with the support they would attract from the very many Christians (there were 33 million in the last UK census) who feel betrayed by the main parties and the fact that the churches tend to have massive contact lists, it is not fanciful to argue that these Christians MPs would have a fair chance of keeping their seats. Put this another way: if defectors to UKIP can retain their seats, why shouldn't traditional Christians be able to do the same?
These Christians would then sit in the new parliament able to speak out for Christian values – which cover all policies - free from always having to look behind their backs at the party whips who take orders from liberal secularists. Even if just one Christian MP won a seat, this would then give traditional Christians the voice they have so long been denied.
The Christian narrative in politics deserves to be heard
And, crucially, if there was a Christian party with a Christian MP in parliament, this voice would then allow the public to hear the Christian narrative for the UK. Now they never hear that narrative. They hear the UKIP narrative (blame the immigrants); they hear the Green narrative (blame big business and pollution); and they certainly hear the secular liberal narrative, adopted by the three main parties (believe in education and varying degrees of regulating capitalism.)
But the public never hear the Christian narrative because the Christian MPs are submerged in a sea of secular liberalism in their own parties. If Christians had their own well supported party, the Christian narrative could be heard. This is a narrative that acknowledges the tendency for fallen man to side with sin, so the need for laws that restrain evil. But also a narrative that believes in the unique value of every individual and their potential for goodness, so the need to always 'seek the common good'. It is ultimately of course a narrative that believes in redemption, for people to have a second chance, and so all laws must be tempered with mercy. And much more.
It is a narrative that is well worth telling, not least because in the past this narrative has served many countries, including the UK, so well. A simple test for this is to ask which countries in the last hundred years have refugees fled from, and which counties do they flee to. Refugees have fled from political systems that are anti Christian (communist, fascist, Islamist), and fled to countries shaped by the Christian narrative (USA, Canada, Europe, Australia).
But, as said, the Christian narrative is not heard, because all the Christian MPs are serving in parties where liberal secularism is the dominant ideology.
It would seem that May now stands as 'such a time as this' for these MPs. If they left their parties and joined a Christian party, the fight back against the secularists could begin. Nobody could accuse them of disloyalty. They have been betrayed by their parties, especially the Conservative MPs. Surely it is time for their leaders to learn that one always reaps what one sows. Their leaders have spat at the church and embraced Stonewall. The question now for any Christian MP is this: why stay with these leaders?
The Christian People's Alliance
These Christian MPs could start their own party; however there already is a fledgling Christian party that could well deserve not just their support, but the support of millions of Christians in the UK.
This is the The Christian Peoples Alliance (CPA).
It's a broad church Christian party that is ready to ally with all those who support Christian values. This is worth unpacking. The words 'Christian Peoples' tell us that this is a group that exist to reflect the views not of a particular church or sect but of Christians in general. In essence the party is 'broad church', seeking to represent mainline Christendom.
And the word 'peoples' underlines this. It is an important reminder that Christians in the UK are made up of different ethnic groups. Christians are not just white middle class English people. There are many Christian peoples in the UK - Carribean, Chinese, Indian, Pakistani, Iranian, African, and some of their churches are growing at a phenomenal rate. And none of them subscribe to the wishy washy morality that some of the white middle class declining churches support. They are firmly behind traditional Christian morality.
Unlike the main parties which are controlled by a small white elite who all went to the same sort of schools and have done the same sort of jobs in the Westminster village, a party for Christian peoples would be many coloured and full of leaders from wildly different backgrounds: yet all bound together by a basic commitment to traditional Christianity.
The words 'Christian peoples' is good for the UK, and so is the word 'alliance'. This does not only mean an alliance among Christian peoples though that is important. This also means the party is open to work with all groups who support the basic principles of Christianity. It is a party that in its essence wants to work with others, regardless of their creed. A party of co-operation, rather than confrontation; a party that wants to build with others, rather than just smash down what others propose.
Hearing about a 'Christian' party, people of other faiths and those with none can wrongly assume that such a party would oppose their interests. The word 'alliance' blunts this fear, as does the fact that the party reflects traditional Christian values. And those values have always sought to look after the interests of all, even the enemies of the church. As for Muslims and Jews, they would be the natural friends of the Christian Peoples Alliance party. Many of their parents and grand-parents came to this country when the UK was still ruled by a general Christian consensus – and under this consensus they have prospered. These faiths now face the same threat from the harsh valueless secularism of the main parties as is also endured by Christians. As the Big Brother inspectors crash into Muslim and Jewish schools demanding that seven year-olds learn about same sex unions, this attack on decency demands an alliance. And that alliance can be found with the Christian Peoples Alliance party. It is not just a party for Christians, it is a party that believes people are happiest when the state supports the ethics of the Christian faith, and rejects the new morality that despises traditional marriage and the family.
The Christian Peoples Alliance party also has decent policies. They respect Christian values, but are valid for all Britons. They are not pie in the sky spiritual fantasizing, but well thought through no nonsense statements about how Britain should be governed.
So on the economy, the CPA are absolutely for balancing the books, and while not anti wealth – as the Bible is not anti wealth – the CPA wants the rich to pay their fair share of tax. On employment, the CPA would put up the minimum wage to the living wage and cut out all the zero contracts. On foreign policy, the CPA is pro European and pro NATO, and on foreign aid focuses more on dealing with unfair trade agreements rather than just giving out dollops of money. On social policy, the CPA are all for putting the family back at the centre of things in the UK. So they are pro traditional marriage and opposed to the sex without responsibility mantra that gives rise to the murder of the unborn.
And much more. All the polices can be read in detail on their website. The point is this: these are down to earth sensible policies for ruling Britain. They are not eccentric; not wacky; not weird – indeed when you think of the Lib Dems wanting 7 year olds to have sex education, or the Greens promoting gay sex for 16 year olds; or Labour's insistence on killing the unborn on the advice of those getting paid to perform the murder, or Boris Johnson thinking that marriage can 'evolve', it is these parties that will look like dark forces intent on cutting up normality to future generations.
No need for a Christian party to stay small
While many Christians might well want to have their own party, there is a natural hesitation because it is assumed that small parties can never make a difference in the UK. The assumption is wrong, especially if Christian MPs leave the parties that have betrayed them and join the CPA. With the prospect of a hung parliament, small parties can make a massive difference; and, if all main line Christians took the logic of this article on board – that we Christians must have our own party – then the Christian Peoples Alliance Party would not stay small. As said there are over 30 million Christians in the UK. The Tory Party only has 134,000 members; Labour 190,000, and the Lib Dems just 44,000. If just 5% of the UK's Christians supported a Christian party that would give them one and a half million members. And, as said above, it is important to remember that churches and Christian groups have massive contact lists. The constituency is already there. Once a church gets behind a Christian party, then the email lists are there, ready to be used by campaigners. Despite all the liberal talk of church decline, Christians are still a huge force in the UK. So, there is absolutely no reason why a Christian party should remain small. A well run Christian party could easily become a serious presence in Westminster.
'Enough is enough' – why should Christians give their vote to the enemies of Christian morality?
As said at the start of this article, historically there has been no need for Christians to have their own party in the UK. Sadly that is not the case today. There is an urgent need for Christians to have their own party, because for far too long the liberal elites in Westminster have treated their vote with contempt.
For years and years Christians have been voting for the main parties using the argument that it is best to influence these parties from within. But what has actually happened. Nothing. The killing machine of the abortion industry crunches on; the killing machine for the elderly is being prepared; marriage has been destroyed. The strategy has not worked. So why should Christians give their votes to those who despise what is closest to their hearts?
Surely it is time for ordinary Christians and Christian MPs to say, 'Enough is enough', the arrogant liberal elite of Westminster whose actions have shown their contempt for Christians have had my vote and support for long enough. Let it go elsewhere, let it go to a party that reflects the values of Jesus Christ.
The church has the numbers and the networks – all that is needed is a strong determination to take action and vote for men and women who are willing to stand for Christian values in Westminster, and fight against the poisonous secularism that has wrought so much misery in our society. T.Hawksley