Thursday, November 08, 2007

Gordon Brown is not a godly man

Somebody very close to me keeps referring to Gordon Brown, our prime minister as a 'godly man'. I expect this rather generous description has something to do with the fact that Brown's father was a Church of Scotland minister and his profession to be a Christian.

But, no he is not a godly man. I think this is clear from his policies.

What is godly about all this pro-homosexual legislation? I am not one of these Christians who gets obsessed over the Gay issue and makes that the most pressing issue of the day. However, I do not see how a Bible-believing prime minister could preside over a government which is so committed to the pro-homosexual agenda.

If Gordon Brown is a godly man, why do we hear nothing from him about abortion? If a person supports abortion, they are ungodly no matter what church they go to or where they stand theologically. I do not accept as godly a prime minister who thinks that the slaughter of unborn children is not the great crime of our age.

I appreciate that in British politics it is difficult for a politician to oppose abortion. I appreciate that a Labour prime minister might be unable to get the support of his party to oppose abortion. However, if Gordon Brown really was pro-life, I would like to see some sign of that. I would like to see some indication that he was opposed to abortion on principle. I have never seen such a sign.

Gordon Brown is not a godly man. A godly man could not have played a senior role in Blair's government and a godly man could not preside over the legislative programme that is coming in under Brown.

The Labour government is the Devil's government.

7 comments:

Chris said...

Amen.

We have the same dynamic with George Bush who lays claim to being a Christian, but whose vigorous prosecution of a war that benefits his friends mightily and his country and the world scantily gives voice to the lie that is his faith.

Dyspraxic Fundamentalist said...

I am not sure I share your anti-war stance.

I view war as a raison de etat. The question is whether the Iraq war had a good enough raison de etat. I am quite unable to say with certainty.

Chris said...

A "War on Terror" is in the national interest in many respects ( I wasn't suggesting that it isn't), but I am certain that these are not the primary reasons the President is engaged in it, and for that, I find fault with him.

Dyspraxic Fundamentalist said...

I believe Kissinger was critical of the Iraq war and he knew a fair bit about foreign policy.

Rose~ said...

peaceniks

:~)

Dyspraxic Fundamentalist said...

Not me.

I just can't make my mind up about the war.

Have the results justified the costs involved?

Dyspraxic Fundamentalist said...

I am sure if Palm Boy visits he will give some convincing arguments for the Iraq War.