Home » ARCHIVES

18 December – John Key on the Electoral Finance Bill

6 January 2008 15 Comments
  • Share/Bookmark

15 Comments »

  • Ken said:

    Interesting. You are now endorsing a political leader who doesn’t believe in a god, and accepts evolutionary theory. What one must do in politics. Your sponsors must be squirming. Reminds me of the Stalin-Hitler non-aggression pact!

    However, more seriously, my post on Intelligent design and scientific method is now up. Your comments are welcome – after all definition of scientific method has been a key question at debate.

  • admin said:

    Cheers Ken. Very busy at present but will look at it asap.

  • admin said:

    Btw, where did u get that info re John Key? This is a man that goes to church, but doesn’t believe in God!!! I understand he is Jewish too for what it is worth.

  • Ken said:

    TV interview soon after his election as leader of the National Party

  • Gareth said:

    did he actually say he didn’t believe? Good on him.

    Just curious but is he catholic like the rest of the national party :-)

  • admin said:

    I am getting mixed messages about Key. It would be good if you could site a source. From above comments, he appears 2 b an atheist/agnostic evolutionist Catholic. Go figure?!

  • Ken said:

    First of all – he’s a politician. That means he can be quite obtuse at times, trying to judge public reaction. He was asked did he believe in a god on a Sunday morning programme (Agenda, I think – it enables extended interviews and comments). He said that he didn’t, but equivocated for a while – obviously trying to judge what his answer meant politically. But he did say, in the end, that he didn’t believe. (In the USA, of course, there are obviously many politicians who are not theists yet refuse to admit it because of the religious hysteria in that country).

    I think you should revise your endorsement of Key and find someone more consistent with your strong anti-science, anti-evolution and pro-fundamentalist sponsors.

  • admin said:

    Gee, thanks 4 the tips Ken :-)

  • GarethV said:

    Perhaps you could try Destiny, Kevin Copland, or Graham Capill :-)

  • admin said:

    More great advice .. keep it coming :-)

    I think you mean Copeland btw, and he IS a Catholic, but not a Nat.

  • Ken said:

    Does your endorsee have to be a nat?

  • admin said:

    No not at all. I’m not saying “Vote National” — however, this post does at least give people a window into John Key as potentially our next PM.

    I think Ken, that many Christians long ago gave up on the art of thinking. Just look at most of our churches — inward looking and intellectually vacuous. Any education on these matters has got to be good imo.

    The first century church won against all odds — a tiny handful of people with an incredible message against an enormous empire. Today we are losing against all odds due to ignorance and apathy. Harsh words perhaps, but true :-)

  • Gareth said:

    Indeed mostly true but don’t you think the might of the Roman empire may have had something to do with Christianities success?

    I think they gave up on the art of thinking not that long ago though. early church thinkers were certainly cutting edge, compared with todays, resurrgent fundementalists.

  • admin said:

    No, the persecution was what made Christianity strong, not the political (thru Constantine). That is the dilemma for the state — persecute the church and make her stronger (think China, 2008) or ignore her and take a risk. I suspect the former is coming — it is called God’s Judgment and is long overdue in the West.

    Re fundamentalists — I think u r misreading that one too. The liberals (e.g. Spong) ‘appear’ to be smart but get thrashed in debate by fundamentalists (e.g. the Spong/White debate).

    These descriptions are pretty vague so make of it what you will :-)

  • Gareth said:

    You may be right in the sense that persecuction caused a concetrating of community.

    It’s hard to see how Christianity would have spread through the world though without Constantine’s ‘conversion’. It helped him to victory though, who knows what would have happened if he hadn’t put crosses on his banner…

    Spong is a terrible debater no doubt about that. But he is an old man and probably not at his sharpest these days. You’re right though he gets a hiding in a debate.

    Fuzzy thinking, I’d say. Spong’s not the best example of a liberal. Sometimes he even professes belief in an afterlife. really no longer valid as comment on this story though…

Leave your response!

Add your comment below, or trackback from your own site. You can also subscribe to these comments via RSS.

Be nice. Keep it clean. Stay on topic. No spam.

You can use these tags:
<a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>

This is a Gravatar-enabled weblog. To get your own globally-recognized-avatar, please register at Gravatar.