Monday, September 17, 2007

Clark Gets Religion

It seems The Electoral Rorting Bill has aroused the hitherto dormant religious right with one Michael Wynd asserting before the select committee that his church, Christian Life Centre, has more money to spend campaigning than the dreaded EBs. One imagines they might not be campaigning for Labour.

Adolf has seen Mr Wynd in action before and regards him as a good example of your Kiwi fundamentalist nutter. I am so pleased the Bilious Bitch has got up his nose because when these guys get an itch they don't just scratch, they gouge out the skin and they don't stop gouging until they expose arteries.

Methinks there may well be scenes of mass civil disobedience not seen since the Springbok tour of 1981. Just imagine how that will play out electorally for Labour, night after night on the nation's television screens, for a whole bloody year before an election.

13 comments:

David said...

If EFB got passed into law before Jan 1, even with "tweaking" in the Select Committee, then I agree that it would be ignored en masse. More so than the Anti-Smacking Bill. I think that people would regard it with such disdain that it would lower the respect for the law even further.

I don't know that in itself it would lead to civil disobedience. But if there was another outrageous issue -- ah, there is, the "science ignorance tax" dressed up as Climate Change Costs -- then I can see people ignoring the attacks on freedom of speech and marching on parliament to say "No More".

Anonymous said...

If the EFB is passed, the violent overthrow of Helen Clark's regime would become a legitimate option.

Psycho Milt said...

I'm not chuffed about this bill either, but "...mass scenes of civil disobedience not seen since the Springbok Tour...?" I find it difficult to credit that my fellow ordinary citizens would feel that level of outrage over rich people being denied a greater level of influence over election outcomes than the rest of us. It certainly wouldn't get me out on the street...

Adolf Fiinkensein said...

Milt, you appear not to see the issue behind the superficial.

dad4justice said...

Statistics New Zealand say in 2006 there were 2,027,418 Christians, but our leaders are secular - go figure in the land of distorted nutbars dwelling in a disgraceful beehive packed with foolish wimps . If any of them vote for any present political party next election then I suggest they are only hypocritical week end Christians as this country is firmly in the grips of evil leaders !

ZenTiger said...

The rich people now include the Teachers Union who fessed up to sinking $130K on the last election.

They said they might need more this time.

Michael Wynd said...

Adolf,

You've misquoted what I said to the select committee. What I said was that evangelicals have more money than the EBs rather than my home church. Let me make it very clear I was speaking on my own account, and not, I repeat not, on behalf of my church.

I'd be very interested where and when you've seen me in action before. My last submission on the Civil Unions Bill I deliberately avoided any mention of Christian faith and dealt with that bill on issues around nullification, UN treaties, and existing legal avenues.

Given the patent hated towards displayed by Mr. Benson-Pope (which you don't mention), Labour needs reminding of the reality. What you needed to add was that he also invited me to go join the EBs - unfortunately I declined.

As I also pointed out, prior to the 2005 election it was made very clear that Labour had politicised Christians and they should have not been surprised when someone ran a parallel campaign.

I find it interesting the so-called Christian right is seem as some kind of solid bloc. It is my own experience that there is divergent views and approaches amongst evangelicals. But all would agree that Labour is both profoundly anti-Christian and whose evil is banal.

Finally, thank you for the compliment. I love being called a fundamentalist nutter. And I shall, keep scratching.

Inventory2 said...

Good opinion Michael - I was especially interested in your comment about Benson-Pope inviting you to join the EB's! Pity that it hasn't been reported in the MSM!!

With regard to your comments about the divergent views among evangelicals as opposed to a solid Christian bloc, what do you think is the better option - a "Christian" party, or individual Christian MP's seeking influence within existing parties? And as a voter keen to see the current government ousted, is a vote for a Christian party wasted?

Michael Wynd said...

My personal preference is for a Christian Party. Unfortunately the Destinty party has so muddied the waters that no Christian party can ever get real traction amongst the voters or agreement on core principles.

I beleive that Christian MPS can make a difference but they have to be Christians and not the God-optionals that seem to populate Labour. I am convinced that evangelical churches would be far better off to use our money within mainstream parties or running paralell campaigns if parties do not want us. We have votes and teh cash and National for instance would in my view be foolish to ignore that.

Adolf Fiinkensein said...

Interesting comment Michael. My own preference is for Christians to keep politics out of the Church and Church out of politics. I believe that is what Jesus did. The best thing committed Christians could do is join a political party and bring about change from within. Whether they join Labour, National, Act or Greens probably doesn't matter too much. My problem with overtly Christian political parties is that ordinary people actually want politicians to be politicians first and they will always be suspicious that self proclaimed Christians can never be trusted to have sound judgement. There is a subliminal perception of flakiness. The Caphil factor also is far too fresh in people's minds, I think. Similarly I suggest that the majority of middle to liberal Christians would be very unlikely to vote for a Christian party which was perceived to be based at the fundamentalist end of the theological spectrum.

Inventory2 said...

I tend to agree with Adolf on this one. The worst-case scenario for National - and let's get real here - if we want Labour out, National is the only alternative - would be a Christian party picking up 4.5% of the party vote, and not ending up with representation. This vote would almost certainly disavantage National more than it would Labour, as the likeliest source of support for a Christian party would be the centre-right. However Christian MP's have had significant influence in the past within the established parties.

Unfortunately, Michael's suggestion for evangelicals to use their influence in running parrallel campaigns is the very thing that scares Labour, and that which they are trying to outlaw via the EFB.

Psycho Milt said...

"...a Christian party picking up 4.5% of the party vote, and not ending up with representation. This vote would almost certainly disavantage National more than it would Labour..."

It constantly amazes me that Christians don't figure this out. I'm certainly happy to benefit from it though...

Shout Above The Noise said...

I hear that Taito is involved in this.

The only way this could damage Labour in any way is if TTF is totally cleared of any wrong doing by the Courts [unlikely I'd say], runs for these guys in '08 and strips off a substantial slice of the South Auckland PI vote - the voters in his electorate would stay loyal to him.

But as I said, he is unlikely to be found to be squeaky clean.