Exactly why Brown will be a poor PM

He has just spent almost two hours in a cabinet meeting talking about a failed car bomb!!

 I remember when former PM Blair dealt with 7/7 so swiftly coming out and making a strong stand!

 Brown has said nothing at the Treasury he was used to long term planning he did not deal with events on the hop.

 He is quickly finding out just how difficult it is. He will soon get found out.

Fisking Gordon’s speech

This will be a new government with new priorities

 so the last ten years didn’t work then?

I have been privileged the great opportunity to serve my country

 yes. but by who again?

And at all times I will be strong in purpose, steadfast in will, resolute in action, in the service of matters to the British people, meeting the concerns of our whole country

 so what were you doing for the last ten years then?

I grew up in the town that I now represent in parliament. I went to the local school. I wouldn’t be standing here without the opportunities I received there.

 and you thought it took a long time to get rid of Tony? 

I want the best of chances for everyone. That is my mission

 Tell that to the pensioners.

 If we can recognise the talents of all our people.

Well that seems difficult as you can’t seem to find anyone on your own benches to sit in the cabinet

As I have travelled round the country

As we saw on Guido

As I have listened and learnt

what from the five people you actually get on with

I will continue to listen to the people.

Exactly what Blair outside no.10 after 2005, that did him a lot of good.

Change in NHS, schools and housing, change and extend the protection of British life.

Ok, well if you want to extend protection, don’t change it!!

This change cannot be met by the old politics

Yep, a bit of Cameron rhetoric there.

So I will reach out beyond narrow part interest.

oooo little bit of David Davis there!

I will build a government of all talents!

Well everyone has used that. No-one else will join you though apart from some bizzarre Tories, who you actually despise!

I will invite men and women

Good this is the twenty first century Gordon

that will to contribute their energy to public service and make our nation what it can be.

what can it be Gordon do enlighten us?

I am convinced there is no weakness in Britain today

Well your about the only one.

That cannot be overcome by the strengths of the British people.

Hows about you let them vote in a general election and let them decide then????

On this day I remember the words from my childhood and which matter to me a great deal today.

Wow, you really have wanted this for a long time haven’t you?

My school motto I will try my utmost. This is my promise to the people of Britain

Well Gordon our promise to you, we will try our utmost to remove you.

An Utter Cretin

Thank god Mr. Davies has decided to nail his colours to the mast after only two decades as a member of the Conservative party. He’s now worked out he’s not a Tory after all, he’s a Labour man. It’s organized collectivized central planning all the way for him. Though hang on, Labour don’t do collectivized central planning now do they. This is because the ‘Right’ in British politics, and pretty much across Europe, won all the intellectual arguments of the Twentieth century. Labour moved right-wards in the mid-90’s was because Blair and Brown were astute enough to recognise this was the central reason Labour had not been in power for 18 years. One can only deduct that he is moving for no other reason than personal ambition realizing that he has stagnated in his political career with the Tory party. That moment of lime-light, so desperately needed by some men, was far more enticing to Quentin Davies than the honest principles needed from our politicians. His shift to Labour rests on the back of the battles fought and won by his own side.  

I write this as an undergraduate student. Most intelligent young people who follow politics and belong to political parties have spent a long time seriously and objectively asking themselves questions about why they have chosen the party they have. They do this to ensure that their own personal beliefs, admittedly always influenced by factors beyond ones control, chime with those of their chosen party. I don’t have a desperate dislike of Labour students; I just think there are profoundly wrong and misguided. Naïve perhaps. The thing is, why has it taken Davies at least twenty bloody years to work this out? One thinks of the wasted hours spent by party workers over the past decades campaigning for a man who has grasped at some Faustian pact for nothing more than a foot-note in political history.

Rejoice to Ode to Joy: EU Treaty.

The new EU has been signed, and it is a great success! Thank goodness Tony saved that one for Britain!

What I fail to understand is why this Government refuses to ask the public what it wants. Why has Labour shied away from calling a referendum on the treaty and engaging the public in a real and informed debate on our future role in a new and enlarged EU?

The answer probably is the public would give the wrong answer. We have not been consulted about Europe now for more than 30 years and the EU beast has changed significantly from its creation. The Myth of the 4 redlines ha been created so that it seems there is no need for a referendum because there is no major shift in power to Europe. I think the EU being able to sign treaties is a major shift in power and a loss of sovereignty and an obliteration of democracy in this country. The EU remains obscure, distant, and undemocratic. I want to be ruled by British MPs under British Law issued from Westminster.

Call me what you will; reactionary; xenophobic; old fashioned, I don’t care. It is my right as a citizen to choose those that govern me; the EU parliament is hardly representative my home constituency is the entire southwest region! This treaty has further empowered Brussels bureaucrats at the expense of out own governments.

The EU needs to be clearer about its aims and purposes, there then needs to be a full and frank consultation with the public to see if they want to be apart of that. This hasn’t happened and we have been signed into the unknown. We have been a free country for longer than anyother in Europe but it would seem that we are increasingly becoming province in a EU state.

If you’ll allow me this flippancy, it would seem Hitler and Napoleon have won out, French and German domination of Europe is becoming increasingly a reality.

The EU is becoming too powerful and remains unaccountable to the person on the street. I want to be governed from London by British people, under British laws. God save the Queen over Ode to Joy anyday.

Banned!

In a shock move the BBFC has refused to give

Manhunt2 a classification in the UK. This has not happened since the 1980s. I may no go on to sound a bit old fashioned but I really do not care. I am glad the BBFC has decided to finally take a stand.

As a lover of the arts I fully understand the implications of increased censorship and the negative affect it can have and that imposing an interpretation on a piece of art and then deeming it unsuitable for everyone is generally not a good idea. However I think the BBFC in this case is justified.

The video game makers are becoming increasingly daring with their subject matters and it is becoming more and more unpalatable. For example prostitution, abuse of women, petty crime, gun crime knife crime, murder and rape are all becoming common topics in video games. I would severely question the effectiveness of the age restrictions on these games as they are often flouted. More recently we have had the Sony game where Manchester Cathedral is used as a background to gun fighting. This desecration of a church in a game is totally unacceptable and perpetuates violence.

I must now admit that there is little evidence linking violence in the media to actual realised crime of course there is not, how can you pin point one thing that causes violence. However it is my opinion that this exposure to children and young adults at worst influences them into a violent lifestyle and thus an act of violence and at best desensitises them to this violence. These games make crime especially worryingly rape and murder all seem rather blasé, scarily the norm.

In our increasingly violent society we should be making every effort to curtail the glorification on violence even if it is in an electronic art form. Even if there isn’t a link I am not sure I want to live in a country where children get their kicks from bludgeoning someone to death on the alter. (no link to Thomas Beckett intended)

I congratulate the BBFC for its sensitive, liberal and balanced recent history, this shock banning by them just goes to show how disturbing this video game must be. Let’s have violence in our society confined to the history books.

Apartheid: education not race.

Scottish Education minister Fiona Hyslop has announced that she is going to spend £25 million pounds recruiting extra primary level teachers to reduce class sizes from 30 to 18. This announcement comes in the shadow of the revelation that Scottish students will no longer pay tuition fees at all. us English however are stuck in over sized classes and paying 3 grand a year at uni. This surely isn’t fair.

Scotland in general since devolution has become increasingly confident in asserting its individuality from England. This has shown itself in many of the services it provides. For example free nursing homes. I have one point to make. If Scotland wants these higher standards of public service it can bloody well pay for them!

We all know the constitutional mess this government has created with Scottish MPs and voting, well it would seem now that they have created a system where Scotland gets a significantly higher standard of service and we English pick up the tab. Perhaps Financial devolution is needed too so that Scotland and the SNP can have a reality check.

A Free NHS?

The Party has at last started to unveil its plans for public services. After the Grammar debacle it is refreshing to see some new policies. The main ideological thrust behind the proposed reforms seems to me to be giving people in the NHS more power to run it. The heath secretary would appoint a governing board.

This is a really positive step, as it would make sense that those delivering services would know what is needed for patients and for the benefit of staff.

However there are fatal flaws with giving too much autonomy to the people as it were. Locally run services can struggle to see a bigger health picture leading to increased disorganisation. It is important also to make sure that autonomous boards do not duplicate services. Furthermore a board that is heavily accountable will be less likely to make tough decisions.

The increased scrutiny of patient outcomes that the party is proposing makes much more sense than top down targets. Targets have increased services, but they have demoralised staff and not taken into account the quality of treatment the patient receives.

I think this is a right move for the party to focus less on a privately run autonomous NHS to state independent system. This is the future of our public services, local independence with a more benevolent centralised system, which would be there to inspect and insure quality.

The Satanic Sir.

Salman Rusdie author of The Satanic Verses has been given one of the highest honours this country can bestow, a knighthood. This has caused uproar in the Islamic world particularly Pakistan where the foreign minister said that if someone launched a suicide attack because of the knighthood they would be justified because they would be defending the honour of the prophet Mohammed.

We have become accustom to hear such outlandish comments form extremist governments, but Pakistan has never been included in that. It is a worrying move for such an official to condone suicide bombings. The Islamic world has at best called us insensitive for giving out such as award. However these critics fundamentally do not understand our thinking. We award people regardless of what they write or create of believe. The satanic verses and much of his other works have been received well critically and just because it offends a religion does not make it unworthy of recognition.

Many Islamic countries have yet to develop an ideology away from dogmatic theocracy to a much more plural society, this is demonstrated in much of the Islamic world’s reaction to this book. The question is how far do people on the ground believe that writing a book could be grounds for suicide bombings? I fear that it maybe quite high if educated government officials think so.

Islam needs to go through an enlightenment phase. During the 18th century religion was being challenged by science this questioning of Christianity has led to a moderate tolerant faith. Many Islamic countries still operate a very 16th century style of worship and this needs to change. Islam needs to moderate itself and fast.

I am glad we can have the fullest expression of all views in our arts culture and society and that no one faith claims supremacy.

The United States of Europe: through the back door

Number 10 has announced that the “amendment” treaty will not go to a public referendum. This downgraded treaty however will have many of the rejected constitution’s points. This is mostly a greater transfer of power away from Westminster; a European Foreign Minster (the position will be this in effect but be named something less controversial) and a permanent European President.

My own personal opinion of Europe is that we need it to be a forum for discussing united policies towards such issues as international crime, the environment and pollution and the movement of people. Europe has also had a positive impact on Human Rights. More importantly we need an EU to maintain free trade.

What I do not like the idea of however is a British elected government having to bow to the will of Brussels if we as a people or our government does not agree with policy. This treaty is taking us towards that by allowing for majority voting. The constitution would have made the EU a treaty signing power; this would have removed a fundamental right of government to decide what it agrees too. Now this was obviously rejected but the aim is still the same, it is just Merkel has realised to achieve it you need an in-between step.

There has not been a referendum on Europe in this country for many years now, it is time that any major changes in European structure need to be ratified by a vote of confidence from the people.

Europe needs to change its structure because of enlargement, but it should do this not as a dictatorship but by persuading the European people’s of why it should exist, what it wants to achieve and why it needs to change and to what.

The problem with the EU at the moment is that it does not link with the people, is not accountable and it lacks a focus. Europe must remember that it is a servant of the people and it is about time it gave us a voice.

Blair has a point…

     

My initial response was cynicism. But on second thoughts, and after having read Tony Blair’s speech to Reuters, I realise he makes a point that needs making.

I agree with his analysis.

Digital technology has allowed for 24 hour news coverage, and the internet has intensified competition between newspapers in a declining market. These changes over the last 10 years have brought about a change in reporting that marks a significant break with the past. More reactionary reporting with less emphasis on the facts and more on the meaning, despite this being opinion based, is the result. Not that this is anyone’s fault, but rather the inevitable response of the media to market changes.

Although he admits New Labour’s complicity in the media’s response to these changes, Blair argues that the shift has made the job of governing far more difficult than 10 years ago.

That said, Blair is short on solutions. But here’s one: Perhaps we could cut the BBC’s funding, and pass the money saved on to private channels that excel in a particular genre. One genre backed up by BBC incentives could be news reporting. Perhaps this would be enough to encourage more cautious reporting without having to introduce a tougher legal framework?

Left turn?

  

I could actually have got this right.

I blogged on this page on Thursday about those in the Labour Party who see the transition of power from Blair to Brown as an opportunity to shift the party to the left.

Commentators such as Polly Toynbee are now advocating further redistributive policies. In an article for the Guardian Toynbee emphasises the redistribute policies of the Blair Government, such as funding to alleviate child poverty. Similar policies she argues, would be just as popular.

This may be so, but Labour should remember that their shift to the right was just as vital in making them electable. Too greater emphasis on redistribute policies, and not enough on economic competitiveness or widening choice within the public sector, could lose Labour the centre-ground.

Toynbees’ slightly one-sided view of New Labour policy in an attempt to force the party to the left, is however, representative of a broader intellectual movement within centre-left circles.

In an article for Redbrick, I write about Lord Anthony Giddens’ book launch at the European Research Institute. Giddens was the intellectual guru behind the Third Way, and in his address to the ERI he also emphasised the redistributive polices of the Blair Government and advocates a further push, including a super tax on the rich to fund child poverty schemes.

That said, Giddens showed a greater awareness of the political parameters than some in the audience, who seemed somewhat frustrated by Giddens’ unwillingness to go any further. For example he opposed any increase in inheritance tax.

Nevertheless this leftward drift, however slight, is beginning to impact on Labour policy. The Labour deputy leadership contest is a case in point. As the candidates jostle for position, we see an emphasis on New Labour’s redistributive polices and little on New Labour’s commitment to enterprise or economic competitiveness.

This doesn’t look good for Labour. It is fine to have social justice policies, but they must blend well with a commitment to economic competitiveness.

It will be a test of Gordon Brown’s judgement and leadership if he can hold out against this leftward drift and keep a centre-ground course. Swing seats across the country could depend on the outcome.

Want to get rich? Get Banged up…

The BBC has revealed that HMP Service has paid out over 2 million pounds in compensation to its inmates this is a gross miss-use of taxpayers money and should be stopped.

Prisoners deserve to be treated fairly, with respect and have access to medical treatment. An external body to make sure it is working properly should regulate this. However they do not have the right to take the prison institution to court. They have forfeited normal rights by committing a crime, they must submit to the prison service.

I am not advocating the mistreatment of prisoners but I feel that ti is morally wrong for a prisoner to come out of prison half a million richer than when he went in. perhaps a better idea is that the if a prisoner is awarded money because of the failings of the system the money should be spent on improvements in that person’s prison not going into his own pocket. The prisoner therefore benefits due to an improved prison environment and the state is not rewarding criminals.

What is even more ridiculous in my opinion is the compensation awarded to heroin users who are forced to go cold turkey inside. Whilst this is a horrendous thing to have to go through it is necessary for the state to take a firm hand and not when, but to completely cute access to drugs in prison. Prisoners must accept that when inside they loose certain rights and it is not for the state to compensate in anyway for that. They need to be fed, safe, healthy and warm with access to rehabilitation, nothing else. If this is not provided for them they have the right to complain but not the right to get rich.

Present suggestions . . .

So the cabinet have been asked to cough up £80 each for Blair and Prescott’s leaving presents? With my maths that works out at £1880, so just under £900 pounds if split evenly.

 What do you think they should be given?

Comical suggestions welcome

Lost in translation

Ruth Kelly’s calls for cuts in translation expenditures are a long overdue attempt at encouraging integration, however they have not fully addressed the problem. David Davis highlighted that the Conservative party had proposed such a measure while redirecting the money saved into English languages classes.

It’s all very well that Ruth Kelly suggests such a policy, but the present state in this country is that English as a foreign language classes are massively oversubscribed with waiting lists going into the months.

There are massive problems with racial inegration, segregation occuring in many areas of the country and one of the major reasons behind this has to be the inability for people to communicate. Cutting costs are necessary, but most will be in sectors which it really isn’t possible Hospitals Courts and Police, if you cut funding you merely make the system more efficient. What needs to happen is stricter rules on language barriers in citizenship and more open and easier access to English language courses.

A case of who blinks first…

       

Both political parties are determined to hold the centre ground. This is where swing voters are swung, where majorities are made, and where elections are fought and won.

There will enevitably be people in both parties who will attempt to pull them to the left or right of the centre ground, depending on the party. However, given the importance of holding a centre ground course, the leader who manages to resist and hold course consistently, will win the next election.

I can see why the Tories thought that attacking grammar schools might be a way to show the party has changed. However, it allowed the more right wing elements of the party to force not so much a u-turn, but certainly a clarification that confuses what should have been a clean break with the past.

To hold a firmer centre ground course, Cameron should have stuck to improving education for the many not the few. Grammar schools need not have been mentioned.

Though, I like to think this was just a hitch. And anyway, Labour are far more at risk from a leftward drift than the Conservatives are from one to the right.

Labour have been holding a centre ground course pretty consistently for ten years, and no doubt some in the party see this watershed as an opportunity to shift the party to the left. After ten years in power and three massive election wins, some will forget what made Labour electable after 18 years in opposition.

Some, indeed, are already trying to re-write history, painting a picture of a radical left-wing government elected in 1997. Both Polly Toynbee and Harriet Harman, who appear to have joined forces, have convinced themselves that Labour was elected because of its left-wing polices, and that the party should now continue in the same direction. Toynbee comments, “ Labour was not nearly as tentative back in 1997 as [some] now imagine… Remember the £5bn windfall on privatised utilities to pay for the New Deal?”.

However, Toynbee fails to mention the plethora of Conservative reforms that Labour pledged to stick to. But then, all propaganda promotes its own version of history, with the more inconvenient parts discreetly left out.

And worryingly for Labour’s electoral prospects, it seems that others are falling for the siren song of the left. Despite Labour’s 1997 pledge to stick to the Tory’s 40% top rate of tax, Peter Hain, John Cruddas and even Hillary Benn, have indicated that they want to explore the possibility of introducing a higher rate of tax or at least ways to redistribute wealth.

Tony Blair always opposed any increases in the top rate, which a politician attempting to hold a centre-ground course should do. However without Blair’s guiding influence, and with commentators like Toynbee playing tricks with history, Labour could take a fateful turn to the left.

After being out of power for ten years, the Conservatives are probably more focused on maintaining a middle ground course, and willing to swallow modernisation, like the Labour Party did in 1997, including the likes of Harriet Harman.

To return to my title, the next few years will be a case of who swerves the most from the centre ground. The Party that blinks first will push swing voters towards the party that holds its nerve, and ultimately find themselves in opposition.

Redbrick News

CF Summer BBQ

Next thursday we will be hosting a BBQ on the vale at 13.00, we’ll supply the BBQ’s just bring some food and Pimms etc!!!!

Cottonwool Kids.

It has been in the news recently that parents are increasingly not allowing their children to play, shop or walk to school without supervision. With the media hype surrounding Madeline continuing still further I can understand this fear.

However parents must remember that slowly giving children more and more freedom and responsibility is one of the key ways they can teach their children how to be adults. Freedom to play, problem solve alone and cope with new situations alone equips the child with key skills.

Allowing children to encounter risks means they learn what boundaries are through experience and not through being told, the latter often being ineffective. They can learn what are safe risks and what are dangerous ones.

We as a country need to have strong families in which children can be free to learn about the world in a controlled environment. Perhaps getting a walking club together for school so 5 children always walk together for example. Children need to learn how to function without their parents.

The actually risks to children are not grossly higher than the past, they are minimal, but perhaps this is too much risk for some parents, but I feel they will do their children a disservice if they do not allow their children to develop both with them and without them

Love it or hate it?

The release of the new 2012 Olympic logo yesterday by the chairman of the organising committee, Sebastian Coe has sparked some intrigue as to whether the logo is actually a good one and certainly as to whether it is a strong visual representation of Britain as the host of the games in 5 years time.

It seems that the replacement for the old logo used throughout the ‘Back the bid’ campaign to ‘Make Britain Proud’ has been aimed at the younger generation. This in order to create a somewhat needed surge in interest within the games as it will follow the Beijing Olympics next year.

But there is something about the logo that may certainly attract the younger generation – the fact that it seems to appear as though it has been drawn by a child. The strange figures if cleverly deciphered as the actual numbers 2 -0-1-2 are meant to represent a ‘dynamic, modern and flexible’ image that is expected to fit in with the new media and technology that will be applied to present a fresh image of the London Olympic games.

It has inspired a wide range of opinions, mine as you have probably guessed, that the logo is ridiculous. Not only do the colours of the logo bear no resemblence to the traditional colours of the rings, but they do not present a truly British image. As far as I recall bright pink does not feature in the Union Jack…

No Sir! : A Proposed Motion to Ban the Armed Forces from Recruting in Schools.

The Biggest Scottish Teaching Union the EIS has called for a ban on the Armed Forces from recruiting in school for fear that this would promote a career with the Armed forces. The Union says that most of its members are pacifist and would not like a career path tat promotes young people being sent into conflict zones.

This is a ridiculous motion. The Armed Forces offer young people a wealth of career and life enhancing opportunities. The risks of joining are in the news every other day. Young people know what the risks are and should be allowed to explore a career choice in their school.

For the EIS to say that most teachers are a pacifist is a gross generalisation, and most likely inaccurate. This motion I hope will be rejected. We have already an undermanned-armed service and should be promoting a career in it. We should not shy away from explaining the sacrifices and privileges of serving Her Majesty.

We have one of the best trained if sometimes not always the best equipped Forces in the world and we should be proud of it. The Armed Forces are a key choice that should be presented to every young person in our schools. It is clear from the success of organisations such as cadets and OTC that a career in the Forces is still a popular and relevant option.

Cameron wobbles…

      

This is getting embarrassing.

I’m not sure what David Cameron was aiming to do when he pledged not to build anymore grammar schools. Though, if he was aiming to shoot himself in the foot, then he was astonishingly accurate.

To pick a fight with your party and sack a shadow minister in the process is one thing. But to go to all this trouble and then be forced into a u-turn is quite another.

Where was the political judgement when this was decided?

Did no one think to calculate the scale of the opposition within Tory ranks? Or to ask the opinion of the shadow cabinet?

Did no one think that this was one fight Cameron might lose?

They clearly didn’t think of Dominic Grieve, who is a Buckinghamshire MP. This is significant because Buckinghamshire retained its grammar schools, and Grieve promised his constituents that if additional grammar schools were needed they would be supplied.

Cameron, having already lost one shadow minister, was forced into a u-turn, despite the argument that grammar schools “entrench social inequality”.

Less than a fortnight ago Cameron told us that he wanted to see “pupils choosing schools rather than schools choosing pupils.” His u-turn contradicts this. Incidentally, so too do the views of David Willets (shadow education minister), when he revealed that rather than parents selecting a suitable City Academy, the governors would be able to select pupils by race.

This web of u-turns and contradictions could be the unravelling of Cameron’s Education policy.

Slow news day???

Hazel Blear’s lead story on her campaign site for deputy leadership is ‘75 Young Members Back Blears’. Though I’m sure she has worked very hard to obtain that support and that young people are very apathetic these days such a small number doesn’t really seem worth mentioning, especially as our very own University’s Labour Society is 120 member strong…

One interesting observation is that 5 of those were from the University of Birmingham, including our very own Peter Mason (one of the many vice presidents of the guild) and ex-politics student Stephanie Peacock Youth Representative and National Executive Committee member.

Has Cameron Failed the Leadership Plus Exam?

  VS

The intention of this blog is to gauge really what you, our viewers have made of Cameron’s leadership over grammar schools and more broadly about his leadership in general.

Mr Johnson has accused Cameron of failing to reform the party, implying that his new brand of liberal conservatism has been too much of a shift. Do we think this true? Has David taken us down too much of a liberal path, or is this a necessary change to win swing voters?

David dealt harshly with Brady to maintain party unity and to clamp down on old views gaining a voice in the press and undermining the new Oak Tree Conservatism. I feel David has a long way in convincing the old guard that his policies are right, but I think perhaps within CF that this new liberal conservatism is a refreshing break with our “nasty” past.

The row over grammar schools has tested David’s hold on the party and so far there has been a small but insignificant mutiny in public. How deep this anger goes is unknown to me, I think perhaps it runs deeper than Cameron would like. However I think David has shown himself to be a strong leader who is not afraid of change and change we must, 10 years out of power, anymore labour spin and I might vomit.

David must hold firm to his new ideology if we are to gain power again, this affair I do not think has discredited him or weakened him. Do you feel the same?

Question: is Cameron taking us in the right direction ? my opinion is clear… yes.

Thou shall do as thy are told.

 

The most Prominent Catholic in
Scotland yesterday announced that politicians who support abortion or do not oppose it should not be able to receive Holy Communion. Whilst I am an ardent free choice supporter I think the state should make every effort to promote life and prevent unwanted pregnancies, something this Government has failed to do.

 

What I fail to understand is the Catholic Church’s, or rather this Cardinal’s complete lack of confidence in his own ideology. He has demanded a draconian change in the law to force people to obey his opinions. For a start one of the key principles of Christianity is that God gave us free choice so that if we did worship and obey it would be because of a true and pure faith not fear and oppression. Why does he not feel that he can persuade people to not want to abort foetuses through his teachings? Surely if his argument held then people would be persuaded.

 

 The church needs to realise that it must present its teachings in a modern argumentative format. Persuasion is key. Instead of forcing people through law convincing them to choose is Christ and to show them faith is the only path to a true Catholic moral renaissance and Cardinal Keith O’Brien should be able to see this.