While I do not wish to be guilty of counting my chickens before the eggs are hatched, perhaps it is no bad thing to visualise the success of my application to seek permission to apply for judicial review against the Conservative Party's irrational and improper decision to expel me for behaving in a way that was claimed to by the Secretary of the Board of the Conservative Party to be "wholly inconsistent with its aims, values and principles" while
- refusing to tell me what they are;
- being unable to tell me what they are;
- apparently claiming that the puffery contained in David Cameron's Foreword in their 2010 General Election Manifesto amounts to a Statement of Principles, let alone Conservative Party principles;
- being unable to show me in any way at all how my behaviour or beliefs were contrary to the principles of the Conservative Party, whatever they are.
God, if He exists, would surely approve of what I am trying to do, get Conservatives to declare what exactly it is that they stand for.
God, if He exists, would disapprove deeply of any nation in which gay marriage is legal. His disapproval might reach Sodom and Gomorrah levels, who knows, and we are not that far away from a still active volcano in Iceland.
God, if He exists, would be horror-stricken and incandescent that such a morally offensive proposal should come from a male Conservative Prime Minister, of all people.
In the light of such indecently liberal interpretations of what Conservative Party principles might be, I think it would be just easier of we made the Koran a baseline for Conservative values simply because the punishments are a lot less harsh than the punishments in the Old Testament. The Church of England used to be known as the Conservative Party at prayer. Now, however, the Church of England is liberals not at prayer condoning if not actually encouraging extramarital sex.
Applying the Goldilocks principle described at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Goldilocks_principle therefore, the Koran would be the happy medium.
Clearly, the difficulty in practising Conservative values is because they have never been properly defined. Because no one knows what they are, no one knows when they are being strayed from.
It is therefore easier to point to a book that is considered morally authoritative that also contains hang 'em, flog 'em principles so beloved of Conservatives of the old school.
Direct democracy ie government by referendum would tend to give expression to the will of the people. This would come under the Koranic principle of Shura. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shura
A 20% flat rate income tax would be welcome to many hard-pressed businessmen choked by red tape told that tax avoidance is now considered by an increasingly corrupt and irrational government to be the same as tax evasion. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Khums
What possible objection can men and women have to giving men the option of having up to four wives?
Or to lashing SSMs 100 times in public to discourage women from being sluts and becoming single mothers who are a burden on the state?
Only the feminists and liberals would object. But then they would, wouldn't they?
The point is that they are not Conservative and none of their silly ideas should be taken seriously by a properly-run Conservative government with proper Conservative principles.
1 comment:
The Conservative Party has no principles.
I believe it was Sir William Harcourt, a 19th century Liberal Chancellor of the Exchequer, who said that "the Conservative Party had never yet taken up a cause without betraying it in the end"
Post a Comment