tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3952108899218764633.post8725388695759400835..comments2024-02-28T22:03:19.609+00:00Comments on A Scottish Liberal: Student protest leads to anti-LGBT MP standing downAndrewhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02027368242570244912noreply@blogger.comBlogger8125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3952108899218764633.post-23185436617822074172017-05-05T19:16:50.417+01:002017-05-05T19:16:50.417+01:00Anonymous - please take a look at some of my older...Anonymous - please take a look at some of my older blogposts!<br /><br />As for the party line - again, check the blog!<br /><br />As a former deputy editor of an LGBT news outlet, I know about both Tim's record and those of almost every other significant politician. I've addressed this enough times, and my own writing is the only real source for the oft-quoted Salvation Army interview in 2007. Believe me, I've been far from uncritical.<br /><br />The vote you are referring to (from 2007) is actually isolated. Taje a look here: https://www.theyworkforyou.com/mp/11923/tim_farron/westmorland_and_lonsdale/divisions?policy=826 Nowhere else has he voted like this on this specific matter, and he has since said he regrets that vote. Otherwise he's supported LGBT equality with the exception of one abstention on the third reading of the Same Sex Marriage Bill - and that was because of the Spousal Veto, and how it affects trans people. He consistently opposed Section 28. He's spoken in favour of ending the blood ban. He was the first leader to speak out against what's currently happening in Chechnya. Theresa May has done none of these things. <br /><br />All I'm asking for is context. I don't actually know what Tim Farron believes now. I am uncomfortable with the way he ahs expressed his faith at times, and with a couple of his votes (and yes, he expressed regret about one of them in hindsight). But there's a difference between privately believing something is "sinful", whatever that actually means in practice, and going into a school making public value judgements about specific groups of people.<br /><br />I retain reservations about Tim Farron. But I don't think for a minute (as an LGBT person) he's going to vote against my rights. He hasn't in the last ten years, so what should change now?Andrewhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02027368242570244912noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3952108899218764633.post-43382113746592590472017-05-04T18:07:27.896+01:002017-05-04T18:07:27.896+01:00I was an active Lib Dem member for more than 20 ye...I was an active Lib Dem member for more than 20 years. My local party even gave me an award at one stage, for God's sake. I still vote Lib Dem locally on a personal basis, and I still voted Lib Dem nationally in 2010 after I had left the party. Not in 2015, and not in 2017 either, though.<br /><br />Farron voted to allow discrimination on the grounds of sexual orientation to continue. That is the clearest example of his record of failing to support LGBT rights in parliament, but it is far from an isolated example. <br /><br />Anyway, I presume you know how he's voted, and if you don't it's easy enough to find out. If you are willing to present that as a good record on LGBT issues, that probably tells us as much about your attitudes as it does about his. If you were saying he had been misguided in the past, but had changed his mind, that would be a different matter, but evidently you feel compelled to toe the mendacious party line.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3952108899218764633.post-36864819079658787702017-04-30T21:37:44.761+01:002017-04-30T21:37:44.761+01:00Well, voting records are an accumulation of votes ...Well, voting records are an accumulation of votes on a range of different issues.<br /><br />For example, Theresa May is being criticised for her voting record on LGBT rights. But the objectionable stuff comes before 2004 - more recently she's been very good on such things as same-sex marriage and was one of the most consistently vocal Tory supporters of it. Has she changed her mind? Possibly - she seems to suggest that. But it's also true that the votes pre-2004 were not on the subject of same-sex marriage. It's possible to agree with extension of rights in some areas but not others. There's always historical context to consider. Tim gave his "reasons" for the vote in 2007 but also suggested he'd vote differently now. <br /><br />As for the "pretty good" comment, even TheyWorkForYou states Tim "generally voted for equal gay rights" and "almost always voted for allowing marriage between two people of same sex". That is pretty good. Not perfect, but hardly terrible. As I've said, much better than many who are criticising him. <br /><br />The "record in the past" you're talking about was a single vote. Was I happy with it at the time? No. But the comparison with Andrew Turner to me seems more than unfair - Tim would never behave like that. <br /><br />I suspected you might a Lib Dem voter. I don't necessarily blog to appeal for votes, though! Andrewhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02027368242570244912noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3952108899218764633.post-80055265555906910032017-04-30T13:49:38.282+01:002017-04-30T13:49:38.282+01:00"Voting records aren't a singular express..."Voting records aren't a singular expression of opinion. They develop over time."<br /><br />Then don't say his record has been good. Say his record in the past has been bad, but he's changed his mind since. Or, rather, he _says_ he's changed his mind. <br /><br />Or whatever. I won't be voting Lib Dem this time, I can tell you that.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3952108899218764633.post-10480181767334262882017-04-29T16:38:53.840+01:002017-04-29T16:38:53.840+01:00I've got a history of commenting about the way...I've got a history of commenting about the way Tim expresses his religious views. I don't agree with him in several respects. But theologically speaking there is a difference between "sin" (which is a religious term) and moral wrongness. That's not a political defence - I'm actually studying for an MA in theology. <br /><br />There are, of course, different expressions of liberalism. I'm a liberal Christian. Tim isn't - he's politically liberal but religiously conservative. Much as I don't buy his religious perspectives, I don't feel it's necessarily impossibly to be political liberal while an Evangelical Christian.<br /><br />That said, my main point wasn't about making "a distinction between sinfulness and moral wrongness" but drawing attention to the context. There's a difference between evading an unwelcome question and peddling prejudicial untruths to a class of 16 year olds. If Mr turner had kept his views sensibly quiet he'd still be in a job.<br /><br />Voting records aren't a singular expression of opinion. They develop over time. And yes, I was very critical about that vote by Tim 10 years ago. But if you look at how he's voted since - it's been generally good with a few question marks. As I said, it's infinitely better than many who are castigating him. <br /><br />"Opposing discrimination should be fundamental to liberals". Unsurprisingly, I agree. But it can only be challenged when it is expressed, for example in the way that Andrew Turner did. When people hold views privately, and send out confused signals, it's more difficult.<br /><br />However, I have had several conversations with Tim Farron about his voting record, LGBT rights and the way he has sometimes expressed his religious belief. I'm certainly not silently permissive!<br /><br />Andrewhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02027368242570244912noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3952108899218764633.post-70347689757282392672017-04-29T08:54:27.624+01:002017-04-29T08:54:27.624+01:00Thanks for your reply, but I have to say I find th...Thanks for your reply, but I have to say I find these attempts to draw a distinction between sinfulness and moral wrongness - and to shuffle sin off into a religious zone separate from everyday life - utterly unconvincing. <br /><br />Frankly, I don't see how someone can be "a liberal to their fingertips" and at the same time to believe that it's offensive to their god for homosexuals to express their relationships physically. It almost seems as though Tim Farron is trying to convert human society to liberalism, but is happy for his god to remain a bigot.<br /><br />And as for Farron's voting record - no, it just can't be described as "pretty good" when he voted against the regulations outlawing discrimination on the grounds of sexual orientation. No one would be described as having a good record on race if he'd voted against outlawing racial discrimination. Opposing discrimination should be fundamental for liberals, and every time a Liberal Democrat describes Farron's record as "fantastic" or "superb", or even "pretty good", I can only wonder why.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3952108899218764633.post-70891003275160078922017-04-29T01:18:09.764+01:002017-04-29T01:18:09.764+01:00"Homosexuality is wrong and a danger to socie..."Homosexuality is wrong and a danger to society"<br />"Gay sex is a sin"<br /><br />They are completely different statements. <br /><br />I disagree with them both, of course. But the first of these, made by Andrew Turner, contains a value judgement that determines a specific group of people are - to use his words - "a danger to society". He's making a discriminatory distinction based on orientation, and suggesting that such orientation causes anti-social behaviour (and probably worse, but he doesn't seem to have elaborated). <br /><br />"Sin" on the other hand is a religious term. As it's simplest, it's something that separates man from God. Christians believe various things to be "sin" - jealousy, anger, being quick to judge, and so on. No doubt many Christians think extra-marital relationships are sinful, but they wouldn't advocate discriminatory treatment to people in them or seek to legislate against them.<br /><br />Ultimately what is and isn't sin is, for non-religious people, a question of meaningless value, framed as it is by theological subjectivity.<br /><br />"Does one of these statements really put the other into perspective?" Yes. The context at least does. One was a question someone was uncomfortable with answering, in relation to their private beliefs. The other was a statement of opinion, with no factual evidence in support, which singled out a particular group as being dangerous on the basis of sexual orientation. <br /><br />If someone was ever invited into my school or workplace and stated unequivocally that a group I identified with was "dangerous", I'd take issue with that. If someone privately thinks I'm "sinful"; well, I don't think I'd care too much. What Turner did effectively amounts to misusing his position to advance homophobia. Tim Farron has never done that.<br /><br />I don't know if you're familiar with my blog, but interestingly I've been among the more vocal critics of how Tim has expressed his religious belief. <br /> <br />Tim hasn't been asked the "sin" question over several years. It was first asked in September 2015. I had this to say about it last year: http://scottish-liberal.blogspot.co.uk/2016/09/its-not-tim-farrons-beliefs-i-dont_81.html Personally, I can't see why he couldn't have adopted the same position as that taken by the Pope and said "who am I to judge?" <br /><br />I think Tim is very wrong if he believes same-sex relationships to be sinful. I'm not actually sure what he believes, which I think is a bigger problem - it's the honesty issue that's troubling (I mention this in my post from last year). But I think there is a real difference between privately believing something to be morally wrong and making public statements diminishing the humanity of those who take a different line. <br /><br />Tim's voting record is somewhat mixed, but it's largely pretty good and infinitely better than many of his detractors. While I might be uncomfortable about some of the things he has said (and hasn't) he should be judged on his voting record and how well he listens to LGBT groups. From my experience I would say that he does listen and has a genuine interest in understand (and advancing) LGBT issues.<br /><br />I've not been thrilled by Tim's indecision on the "sin" question. But comparing that evasiveness to an MP going into a school and making an undeniably prejudiced statement of non-truth to a group of sixth formers is ridiculous. Andrewhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02027368242570244912noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3952108899218764633.post-86228964085903864352017-04-29T00:47:11.414+01:002017-04-29T00:47:11.414+01:00"homosexuality is wrong and a danger to socie..."homosexuality is wrong and a danger to society"<br />"gay sex is a sin"<br /><br />Does one of these statements really put the other into perspective? And if so, which?<br /><br />And yet, the leader of the Lib Dems, over a period of several years, refused to deny that he held the second of those opinions. And a lot of people who should have known better pretended it would be perfectly OK if he did hold that opinion.<br /><br />And in fact, when it comes down to it, there's no particular reason a social Conservative shouldn't take that view - so long as he's honest and open about it. <br /><br />But I don't think it's a view a liberal should take, particularly if his voting record reflects a priority of defending religious perpetrators of discrimination over the victims of discrimination. And particularly if it's difficult to get him to be clear about what his views really are.<br />Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com