CROSSING THE MINEFIELD The Same Sex Relationships Debate - An Ordinary Evangelical’s Journey

CROSSING THE MINEFIELD

The Same Sex Relationships Debate - An Ordinary Evangelical’s Journey

Part One – A 40 Year Journey

 

In these pieces I’m looking at my own near 40 year journey with the issue of same sex relationships. There are plenty of more scholarly pieces out there and plenty of more heart-rending, mind-blowing testimonies. This is just a summation of a very ordinary evangelical Christian’s search for truth on this important issue. I offer up what I’ve found in case others find any of it helps them on their own journeys. 

Same sex relationships is an issue for churches today like no other, because of how it directly impacts the lives of millions. It’s a minefield of an issue for churches, threatening to blow apart congregations and even whole denominations. And for many gay or bisexual people it’s a literal life and death issue. For traditionalists, "practicing homosexuals" are heading for hell unless they repent. Revisionists see the painful rejection many gays and lesbians have experienced has pushed them into deep depression and attempted or actual suicide. It's caused many more to simply reject a gospel they believe has already rejected them.

 

Little wonder many Christians and many church leaders want to keep as far away from the minefield as possible, terrified that if they enter it they’ll see themselves or others blown to pieces. 

But people are dying out there and I believe our God calls on us, not to sit on the fence, but help Him save them by removing the mines. As a very ordinary evangelical Christian, for nearly 40 years I’ve journeyed across this minefield, trying to hear our Lord’s instruction. And I’ve ended up crossing the minefield in both directions.

I've come to this issue with no particular sword to sharpen. I’m very much heterosexual. Although I’ve known a number of gay and lesbian people, none of them have yet become close friends or family. And neither my upbringing nor my early church experience gave me any strong steer on this issue

I’ve never been afraid to take positions that might clash with expected orthodoxy. And I’ve always been prepared to be pretty vocal in expressing those views, even when (maybe especially when!) I know others will disagree with me. 

 

For example, in my late 30s I was one of only two members of an Anglican church PCC who voted to veto any appointment of a woman priest on the grounds I considered this contrary to scripture (not a view I hold now!)

But I’ve always been prepared to re-examine my views when presented with evidence challenging them. And my examination of the evidence has sometimes led me to change those views and openly admit I’d got it wrong.

 

For example, over nearly 40 years I’ve changed from being an evolutionist to a young earth creationist and now somewhere in between, and from being a strong opponent to women even teaching in church to being very happy to be led by a female pastor. Yet all the while I’ve held the same high view of scripture.

In exploring different issues I’ve earnestly sought to be guided by what I believe God is saying through His Word. I’m not a theologian (a 38 year old A level in Religious Studies really doesn’t count!). I’m just an ordinary evangelical Christian who fully accepts the Bible, as originally written, as God’s inerrant, authoritative word for our lives: “All scripture is God-breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness …” (2 Timothy 3: 16 NIV).  

 

But I’m also very aware that His word is “the sword of the Spirit” (Ephesians 6:17 NIV). And we should always use His word alongside the other great gift He sent to guide us, His Holy Spirit, “the Counsellor” (John 14: 26 & 16: 7 RSV), who “will guide you into all the truth …” (John 16: 13 RSV). To try to use one of those gifts without the other is like trying to use an arrow without its bow. We won’t hit the truth target without using both together.

I’d been brought up by my mum to believe in Jesus and was confirmed aged 13. (I even believe I experienced at that time a divine calling to be a writer). I fell away from any commitment around the time my parents divorced. But at 16 I gave my life back to Him, along with my brother and best friend. He had drawn me back through an Anglican youth group, led by some lovely, gentle charismatic Christians. (Oh, and as well as Jesus I met there my gorgeous girlfriend, who later became my wife).

At that time my understanding of what scripture said on any issue  came from just one version: the 1984 edition of the NIV. Although it actually stands for the New International Version, as far as I was concerned it was the Nearly Infallible Version! I can remember my condescending disapproval of those in our youth group, including my girlfriend, who preferred the “kid’s version”, the Good New Bible. I also had no time for the old Authorised, King James, Version, because it spoke in an outdated language that alienated a modern audience. Whereas the NIV was just as accurate, being based on the latest research, but using modern English. And, after all, it was even endorsed by the man who’d introduced myself, my brother and best friend to "the truth" of Calvinism! (Much to the alarm of our youth leaders).

This was several years before the Internet was invented (yes, I am that old!). So there was no option to check different versions on the bible app on your phone and no ready access to guidance on interpreting scripture, alternative views or historical context. Other than my trusty NIV, my guidance came from discussions with others at church, my IVP New Bible Commentary and the odd conservative/Calvinist/charismatic books and audiotapes I was leant.

So my exploration of same sex relationships and other issues was all based on these limited sources. Of course, the Holy Spirit was in there too somewhere, but it wasn’t always clear to me when He was speaking or what He was saying.

When I looked at my trusty NIV, the Bible was very clear about same sex relationships. The Old Testament had not only strictly banned sexual acts between men, it told us God found them "detestable" (Leviticus 18: 22). Jesus had said nothing to reverse that. In fact, the New Testament went further, because it extended the strict ban on same sex acts to women, as Paul clearly warned that "homosexual offenders ... will NOT inherit the kingdom of God" (1 Corinthians 6:9). So, there was no distinction between male and female homosexual acts.  

And my girlfriend's Good News Bible, if anything, was even more damning. It not only said homosexuals wouldn't "possess God's kingdom" but described them as "perverts". So, the bible was clear that a homosexual lifestyle was the sort of serious sin addiction that went to the heart of your life. It was like with the rich young ruler addicted to his riches, which Jesus required him to give up before he followed Him. Unless gay people repented of their own sinful lifestyle they couldn’t become Christians and were headed for hell. It wasn’t a conversation I relished having with a gay person, but luckily I didn’t know any.

I discussed the issue with my brother and best friend. We were all in no doubt that God told us through His word that gay sex was fundamentally wrong and must be repented of to be saved. This also fitted with what we instinctively felt was right. So, that must be the Holy Spirit confirming this as true, right?

By contrast, I felt rather less comfortable about banning women from teaching or leading in church. This was quite a topical issue in my home church, with the Church of England then debating the issue of women priests. Our rector and youth leaders were very pro-reform. Yet I had no choice but to oppose women priests, or even preachers, because that’s what scripture told us: “I do not permit a woman to teach.” (1 Timothy 2:12)  And I understood God had made men and women to be complimentary partners, with men dominant over women in both marriage and the church. So marriage could only ever be between a man and a woman, and women  should never preach or lead in church. I saw that this was all part of God’s natural order. And I also saw a clear biblical connection between women in leadership and homosexuality; neither had a place in this divine natural order.

So, in 1985 I’d no doubt it was impossible for gay people to be saved unless they’d repented of all homosexual activity. 

 

In 1986 I started my law degree at Nottingham University. I found all fellow Christians there shared this same "biblical" view of homosexuality - both at the Christian Union and my church, Cornerstone Evangelical Free Church.

I also soon “learned” what made people gay or bisexual or even want to change their gender. Contrary to “the myth” the pro-gay lobby taught, people were not born that way. They were made that way through childhood experiences: difficult relationships with one or more parent or childhood trauma, such as sexual abuse. Of course, in the absence of the yet-to-be born internet I had no ready means of checking any research to support that theory. I also didn’t know anyone who was gay (as far as I was aware). So, I really had no frame of reference.

But this "unarguable biblical" and "common sense" view against homosexuality was now coming under serious attack from opponents of the gospel. They were actively promoting acceptance of a gay lifestyle, even trying to spread this "moral disease" to children, wanting homosexual couples to adopt children of their own. I spoke out strongly against this in my family law tutorials. I got the expected hostile reaction from some fellow students. But I quite enjoyed taking the flack “for the sake of the gospel”.

And the whole homosexuality issue was becoming a real political battleground. As a social democrat normally I couldn’t stand Maggie Thatcher’s policies. She elevated the greedy rich higher and trampled the poor down lower, quite contrary to the biblical priorities of helping the poor and oppressed. But I had to admit she’d got one thing right – clause 28 of her Local Government Bill that would ban local authorities from promoting homosexuality.

In one of his hour long sermons our church’s senior minister, Peter Lewis, roundly condemned a very dangerous book apparently being read in London primary schools, Jenny lives with Eric and Martin. Cornerstone wasn’t the sort of church where people normally shouted “Amen” in response to the sermon. You had to go to T Street Pentecostal Church if you wanted to do that sort of thing. But I nodded very firmly in agreement. 

And (to my shame) I was becoming increasingly convinced God had sent AIDS as a gay plague, a view I openly shared.

But by 2015, I’d come to see things very differently. In the 30 years between 1985 and 2015 my faith in Jesus and His word had remained solid. I was even still a Calvinist (well kind of), still believed in a historical Adam and Eve (but 10,000s of years ago). And I still believed that everyone who rejects Jesus is headed for eternal destruction (but not eternal conscious torment). But during that time my understanding of what God thinks about same sex relationships had transformed.

I’d come to believe:

• God had originally made men and women to be similar, equal, mutually supportive life partners, albeit biologically capable of procreation.
• It was only after and because of the Fall that women were made subservient to men.
• The Fall also fractured and changed the original created order. So e.g. some people were born deaf or with 12 fingers or with a same-sex orientation, i.e., gay or bisexual.
• Most people, whether straight, gay or bisexual, still had the same God-designed need as Adam and Eve for a permanent life partner, including a sexual relationship, i.e. marriage.
• Christ’s death and resurrection has brought a new kingdom, abolishing the law and ultimately restoring men and women to full equality (although it took time to get there).
• Celibacy is a higher calling, but  only for the minority who have a special gift, and not to be forced on anyone.
• Marriage is the way most people are called to do life and is particularly recommended to prevent sexual sin.
• The Old Testament certainly did condemn as an abomination all sexual activities between men, but it condemned in similar terms various activities Christians regard as normal and Christ’s death lifted the law's strict requirements 
• The only same sex activities  condemned in the New Testament were abusive, promiscuous acts between men, often associated with religious idolatry
•  Very probably no part of scripture said anything at all about all female sexual relations.
• The Bible’s writers knew nothing of same-sex orientation and never addressed the issue of same sex marriage.
• However, in Christ’s new kingdom marriage between same sex couples is permissible because they can fulfill His new higher law of love, the essence of marriage no longer requires dominant/subservient partners nor procreation and in Him there is "no male and female".
• The ultimate scriptural test true or false teaching is the teaching's fruit. Overwhelming the fruit of traditional marriage teaching has been bad for gay people and others; the fruit of inclusive marriage teaching has been good.

    So, what led to that huge change? I believe it was the Holy Spirit speaking to me, but certainly not in some sudden Damascus road revelation. It happened gradually, but with hindsight these were some of the key interventions causing me to question my position:

 

•      In 1990 my brother lost his once fervent faith after getting in with “the wrong crowd”. One of the thoughts that turned him away was: how could he believe in a God who hated gay people when He must have made them that way?
•      In 1999 the shocking news that Roy Clements, the leading evangelical preacher, who’d baptized my wife and best friend, had left his wife and children for another man.
•      In 2003 two eye-opening experiences at Spring Harvest during talks about same sex relationships: a gay woman, visibly hurt by the traditionalist message, asked me, “but what if you’re just born that way?” Andrew Marin’s surprising testimony about his ministry bringing gay couples to Christ without leaving their partners.
•      The following year my even more surprising experience of helping lead a gay man to Christ and finding what God needed to change in his life wasn’t his relationship with his boyfriend but his relationship with alcohol.
•      Between 2005 and 2011 discovering I’d misread the Bible’s true message about the role of women.
•      From 2013 onwards my (heterosexual) teenage daughter’s challenges about whether I’d also misread the Bible’s true message about same sex relationships.

These challenges caused me to look much more deeply into what God’s word actually said; not simply the word as sometimes inaccurately translated in our modern translations, but what the original Greek and Hebrew meant in its context at its time. This was essential to then understand how the Holy Spirit, our counsellor, means for us to apply it today. This also involved a clearer understanding of the dynamic nature of God’s word. God’s truths revealed in His word are eternal, but God always intended that the application of those truths should expand.

The biggest transformation of course came with Christ’s death and resurrection, fulfilling the old way of the law and leading to the outpouring of His Spirit. But even after Pentecost, in the New Testament we see the ongoing expansion of God’s kingdom on Earth, not just numerically but in transforming old structures and roles; accepting eunuchs, ending the division between Jews and Gentiles, the increasing emancipation of women and early pointers to liberating slaves. 

And His word and His spirit have remained dynamic. He did not intend for us to be stuck in a first century social time warp, with men keeping slaves and dominating women. And so since then Christians, heeding His Holy Spirit, have read in His word calls to further transform society by fully emancipating women, abolishing slavery, and relieving poverty. Even as much of our world darkens, I came to see He wants us to pray and work to bring His light to the Earth’s darkened corners and liberate more captives. And I came to believe that He is now calling us to liberate LGBTQ+ people from the exclusion and oppression they have suffered from the church and wider society. 

My final change of view came in 2015 through a book my daughter challenged me to read: Matthew Vines’ God and the Gay Christian. This has since become the “go-to” apologetic for revisionists and the “deceptive devil's work” for traditionalists, for many of whom its very title contradicts scripture.

I wouldn’t say I found he'd got everything 100% right, but a good 95%. I'm deferring discussion of his case and my conclusions for now. But I'd recommend reading his book for yourself, rather than relying on what others report and (sometimes) misreport. And read it with an open mind, as I did, asking the Holy Spirit to guide you into truth.

What I found was a very carefully and prayerfully researched book, written very accessibly with balance and sensitivity. Matthew, like me, is no theologian, but the person that spoke from these pages was clearly a very intelligent, Christ-centred, bible-focused young man, who also happened to be a (single) gay man (and with an excellent relationship with both his parents by the way).

It felt like Christ was speaking to me through these pages: Don’t call unclean what God has declared clean. Set the oppressed free. I realized that in my own way I'd contributed to the injustice the Church had committed towards those who'd done nothing wrong but happened to be born gay: all the hurt and exclusion they'd experienced because of how evangelicals like me had treated them due to an overly simplistic reading of scripture and a failure to listen to what the Holy Spirit was really saying through God’s word.

In one small act of repentance I publicly “outed” myself on Facebook as an affirming evangelical and the reasons why. It was the least I could do towards correcting the injustice to gay people that in my own small way I'd contributed to. Some of my Christian Facebook friends fervently agreed with me. Some fervently disagreed. Most kept their counsel.

A few years later a young lesbian couple had started regularly attending our church’s services together with their infant son. They seemed a lovely couple and I was really pleased they’d seemed to have found a welcome in our church after much painful rejection from both personal and church family. The test for our church came when they asked our pastor if he would agree for the church to dedicate their son. He was minded to agree. However, for some traditionalists in our church there was only a short step between blessing their child and blessing his mothers’ relationship. Happily, a large majority of the church voted to allow the dedication.

We’d already committed ourselves to helping set up a new church. But I’d hoped we’d left our old church on a gradual road towards greater inclusivity. Sadly, the subsequent retirement of their pastor marked an about turn in the very opposite direction. By a large majority the church voted to only accept a new pastor who fully accepted the traditional understanding of marriage.

I didn’t engage further with the issue for a few years. I was now a convinced affirming evangelical. However, I was seeking publication of my fantasy novel in the USA, Magi-Legends of the Space Ark. I’d failed so far to find any takers in the mainstream, possibly because it was too “religious”. I was now trying the smaller but well-established US Christian literary market. I was well aware any traditionalist agents and publishers would run a mile from any writer with the “wrong” view on this issue. (Shamefully) therefore I took down all previous social media posts supporting same sex relationships. 

But I was recently called to re-examine my position on same sex relationships. The Church of England has been debating Prayers of Love and Faith. Meanwhile, Baptist churches, like mine, have been asked by our union whether individual churches should allow their ministers to enter same sex marriages. Our church's small leadership team therefore arranged an open discussion about same sex relationships.

In preparation for that, on recommendation from our previous church's pastor, I read Love is an Orientation by Andrew Marin; the same guy I’d heard 20 years ago sharing his amazing ministry among the gay community of Chicago. As a young conservative evangelical Christian he received God's call to this mission when, remarkably (I'd say miraculously), three of his best friends came out to him as gay at the same time. Notably, Andrew still refused to express any opinion about where he stood on same sex relationships. He simply shared Jesus with the gay people of Chicago in a loving, non-judgmental way. He described leading hundreds of gay people to Christ and then let His Holy Spirit do the rest. He believed it was His job, not his job, to convict them of any sin in their lives, whether sexual or otherwise. A few individuals described the Lord leading them away from same sex relationships. But many more remained in same sex relationships, yet testified to Christ enriching their lives and relationships.

 

For me this chimed with what Matthew Vines had written and my own very limited personal experience of leading a gay man to Christ 19 years earlier. There were arguments to be made for both the traditionalist and inclusive interpretations of scripture. But wasn’t the real truth test in the fruit? By their fruit you will know them, said Jesus. Hadn’t God Himself spoken what He thought on this issue through His Holy Spirit? By the transformational difference He’d made in the lives of gay people who accepted His gospel, even when they remained in same sex relationships? 

I also read a more deeply theological work, Bible Gender Sexuality, by the theologian James Brownson. James had gone through his own interesting journey on this issue . He'd always accepted the traditional evangelical position about homosexuality and marriage without ever seriously questioning it. Then he was hit by a lightning bolt: his 18 year old son came out to him as gay.  His son was a happy, popular and successful, Christian young man, brought up in a loving home, with a great relationship with both his parents (much like Matthew Vines). He fitted none of the traditionalist models for how people could be "warped" into homosexuality by negative childhood experiences.

James felt forced to properly examine what the Bible really had to say on gender and sexuality in a way he never had before. He didn't jettison any scripture, which he still fully accepted as God's word. But he carefully researched the evidence to get the most accurate understanding he could of the key Hebrew and Greek verses. He then tried to discern the underlying moral logic of those verses given their cultural context and how they applied to us in our different cultural context today. And he did this in a systematic way to understand how these verses fitted within the whole arc of scripture and the direction the Holy Spirit was leading us to in God’s Kingdom on Earth. His overall conclusions were very similar to Matthew Vines'. 

I must confess to skim-reading James's quite lengthy chapter 11 on Paul's use of the Greek word for nature ("physus"), because by this point it was only a day before our meeting. What I hadn't realised was this was probably the book's most important chapter!

The meeting was not easy. Different views were passionately expressed by myself and others.

 

Those arguing for the traditional interpretation did so from a place of genuine faith and love, including for gay people. Their essential case was:

• All same sex physical relationships were a serious sin contrary to scripture, which prevented people being saved. 
• Marriage between people of the same sex could never align with God’s will, because marriage could only be between a man and a woman in complementarian roles that modelled Christ and His church. 
• People were not simply born gay;  it was something that happened to them due to human influences and choices. 
• It wasn't sinful to have a same sex orientation but it was sinful to choose to act upon it.
• People with such an orientation needed to be helped and healed from that condition, if possible, or if not to accept a life of celibacy.
• Unless they repented of any same sex physical relationship it wasn’t possible for them to become Christians. 
• To allow or encourage gay people in same sex relationships wasn’t loving, because it was perpetuating them in something that did them a great deal of harm, physically and spiritually.
• If you then let same sex couples bring up children this would harm those children. 
• It was only in western churches, they claimed, where the church was contracting, that this biblical view of same sex relationships was being challenged. In the rest of the world, where the church was actually growing, this position was universally accepted.

Following the meeting there was a Whatsapp exchange of Youtube videos. I shared what I thought was an instructive video from Matthew Vines. Someone else shared a video from a traditionalist speaker that she’d found particularly helpful in understanding the Greek and Hebrew in the key verses.

So far I’d heard nothing to change my views.There was almost nothing I hadn't said myself 20 + years ago. But, as I’d freely acknowledged, I was either wrong now or wrong then, so I was clearly capable of getting this issue wrong. Scripture encouraged us to “test all things”. I needed to be as sure as I possibly could be about what the Lord’s will was on this really important issue.

I prayed: Lord, please give me wisdom. Was I right in what I first believed or what I believed since or is the truth somewhere in-between? And so I searched and researched, I thought and I prayed. The pieces that follow are the outcome of that search.

Although I’m no theologian, in re-examining this issue, I’ve brought my own skills and experience to bear. This includes over 30 years as a successful litigation lawyer, used to weighing expert, documentary and witness evidence; a rather obsessive and dogged personality, looking at things more exhaustively and exhaustingly than most people do or can (often to my wife’s despair!); and my blessing and curse to often see and join the hidden dots invisible to others (but admittedly occasionally seeing dots that aren’t really there at all!). None of this guarantees I’ve got it right. I can only try my best to find the truth on any issue with (I hope) the guidance of the Holy Spirit.

The traditionalist speaker’s video my friend shared focused on the key Old Testament passages concerning same sex relationships. He did this as a direct response to Matthew Vines’ case, which he sought to dismantle piece by piece. I listened very carefully, pausing to make sure I’d understood what was said and making extensive notes, including points to research and check against evidence he quoted, just as I would with an expert’s report in one of my cases. I then researched the available evidence to see if they supported his conclusions or the affirming position or somewhere in between. (See what I found in my part three).

I then recognized I needed to watch his second video on the key New Testament passages (which my friend hadn't shared). I carried out the same painstaking process for this. (See what I found in my part four).

I then felt I should see what insight I could get from a very wise, old evangelical theologian and teacher I greatly respected, John Stott. He had passed onto glory in 2011. But not before  he had shared his own wisdom on the issue in a book simply entitled, Same Sex Relationships. John had been a, if not the, leading evangelical teacher in the country at the same time when his friend, Roy Clements, had his own flourishing ministry in the 1980s and 90s.

As a student, like many others, I'd been greatly blessed by his seminal work, The Cross Of Christ. John had also helped found the great global evangelical work of the Lausanne movement. But he wasn't afraid to step outside traditional church teaching where he believed it was contrary to scripture. And he had certainly influenced my own change of view over the nature of hell to being a place of eternal annihilation rather than eternal conscious torment. 

I already knew John had taken a conservative view of same sex relationships, because I was aware that back in 1999 he'd written to his friend Roy Clements, urging him to repent of his sinful same sex relationship and return to his personal and church family. At the date he died John's views would have aligned with my own but our views had clearly diverged since. However, his wisdom had previously caused me to change views on other issues. I was therefore keen to read what he said on same sex relationships in case he showed up things I'd overlooked or misunderstood on the issue and caused me to see that my recent view was not God's view. He hadn't persuade Roy Clements but perhaps he might persuade me.

Within my parts 3 to 6 I will include my own understanding of John Stott's case and whether and why I agreed or disagreed with him.

But I realized there was plenty more I needed to explore outside scripture. Both sides said that what confirmed their position was God’s position was the fruit of these two different teachings, good and bad. After all, this is scripture’s own test for true or false teaching (Matthew 7: 15-20) as applied by the apostles themselves (Acts 10: 44-48). To do that involved me looking into areas as diverse as medical science, human genetics, zoology, social sciences, anthropology, ancient history and literature.

On none of these things do I claim to be an expert. You’d need to have PhDs across multiple subjects to claim expertise on all these things! However, as a litigation lawyer, I was well aware that experts often disagree and I believe my legal experience has prepared me quite well for weighing opposing expert evidence. (See what I found in part five).

In my final part (part six) I set out my overall conclusions and my reasons for them .    

But before then, in my part two, I want to look at how we prepare for entering this minefield. How can we best set ourselves up to hear Gods voice? What trips and traps do we need to look out for and avoid? Where can we find lode stars to help guide our way?

Just as importantly, how do we deal with disagreement? However sure we may feel that we’ve got this issue right, being right isn’t enough. It’s possible to be right but do it entirely wrongly; with arrogance, bitterness and derision, rather than with the grace and humility of our saviour. How do we disagree “well”?

After all, although it might not feel like it sometimes, we’re actually on the same side here. Our real enemy we’re fighting is Satan, against whom we’re trying to save lives from being blown up by his land mines. Though sadly we don’t always agree on where those mines are laid.

But if you’ve accepted the church’s traditional teaching on same sex relationships, I’d challenge you to re-examine that position, just as others challenged me. Ask His Holy Spirit to guide as you look afresh at the evidence of His word, as originally written, and the evidence of the fruit of the different teachings, scripture’s ultimate test for true or false teaching (Matthew 7:15-20). 

If having re-examined the evidence you conclude your position was right, then you’ll have a clear conscience to stand by that and encourage people away from harmful same sex relationships.

But I hope ,if you properly examine the evidence with a truly open heart and mind, you’ll find the church has got its traditional teaching about same sex relationships wrong; just like it once got it wrong over slavery and women. And I hope, like me, you’ll hear the Holy Spirit calling to us, just as He did for slaves and women, to free gay and bisexual people from the chains we've put around them.  

Election Day 2019: Just A Fool's Hope?

Election Day 2019

Summary

On Thursday this country stands at a pivot point in its history. If victory is handed to Boris Johnson I believe we are headed for a disastrous hard or no deal Brexit, the break up of the United Kingdom, ravaging Climate Change unchecked, deeper austerity and privateering of our public services, causing many of them to collapse and poverty becoming endemic. Much of this damage will be permanent and can't simply be righted by a future government.

Sadly, it's now clear from the polls that Labour can't win a majority. The only way to prevent this evil being released on our nation now is to vote for a Labour minority government, working co-operatively with others. Our only hope for achieving that is voting tactically for the party best placed to beat the Tories in your constituency. In most places that will be Labour, but if you live say in Brighton that will be Green and in Guildford Lib Dem. And if you're a Lib Dem living in Boris's own constituency of Uxbridge you've got to vote Labour to get him out (wouldnt that be fantastic?) and if you're a Labour supporter in Esher to remove Dominic Raab it's got to be Lib Dem. (And they are real possibilities btw). If you're not sure have a look at the tactical voting websites:
https://www.peoples-vote.uk/ or https://tacticalvote.getvoting.org/
Also worth looking at the final huge Yougov MRP poll at constituency level :
https://yougov.co.uk/uk-general-election-2019/
Or even explore a tactical vote swap at:
https://www.swapmyvote.uk/about

A Fool's Hope?

Tragically, Sauron in the unlikely form of the demagogue-clown Boris, has wielded his ring of power and there seems no way of stopping it- his promise to "get Brexit done" and "move on" with "the people's priorities".

Father of Lies

But this powerful promise is simply a fraud on the nation by perhaps our most dishonest and untrustworthy political leader in modern history, who even lied to the Queen to get her to prologue Parliament. Unfortunately when it comes to telling porkies Boris is rather good at it because he's spent his whole life doing it, so lying comes second nature to him and he will hardly blink. This is why his former boss at the Daily Telegraph, Max Hastings, says of him "my labrador is more fit to be Prime Minister". His personal and professional track record is as a man almost as divorced from the truth as he is from his various wives he cheated upon. He is a proven liar and fantasist in almost equal measure, sacked from two previous jobs for dishonesty as a journalist and then as a member of Michael Howard's shadow cabinet. He started his career as a journalist, making up lies about the EU, such as fake EU laws on bendy bananas and condom sizes. And in his fairly short political career he has become legendary for making bold promises he breaks as soon as those promises hit the hard stone of reality. There are plenty of examples of that from his time as London Mayor (and btw almost all boasts about his record as Mayor are fake) . And in his short 4 months as Prime Minister he has already broken his promise to the DUP that he'd never agree to a border in the Irish Sea, and, of course, his infamous "die in a ditch" pledge to never ask the EU to extend Brexit beyond 31st October (despite well knowing he was obliged to to request an extension if parliament didn't pass his deal).

Frustratingly, in this election he has mostly get  managed to away from full exposure of his dishonesty because he has wisely evaded the all seeing search lights of Andrew Neill and Piers Morgan (even hiding in a fridge to avoid Piers). It's also because his opponent in Jeremy Corbyn is just too decent to "do personal", despite the mud thrown in his own direction. The politician who comes closest to him in terms of dishonesty is Trump but to be fair to Boris he is both cleverer and less nasty. Boris is primarily not out there to harm anyone nor to follow any particular creed, even Brexit. Hence why his old mate David Cameron was stunned when on the eve of the referendum for the first time ever he "outted" himself as a leaver, purely because of his calculation that this would best serve his ambitions to be the future Tory leader and PM (whatever way the result want). And that's the thing about Boris, unlike most politicians of all colours who I believe are largely motivated do good (including his predecessor), Boris's only real motivation is Boris and what does him most good and gives him the most fun. For him being Prime Minister is all a big hoot and the lies and fantasies are all just part of the game to get and keep him there.

Sadly, the deceived, disillusioned and desperate people buying his promise that getting his Brexit done will see our communities revived, are being sold a poison that will do the very opposite (see my earlier piece: https://jeremysblog67.blogspot.com/2019/12/get-brexit-done-why-boris-wont-why-and.html?m=1  )

In its final pre-election poll on Tuesday, the most reliable poll, Yougov's MRP model, forecast a 9% Tory poll lead (Tory 43 Lab 34 LD 12) with a 28 seat majority. Sadly, a much maligned and unpopular oppostion leader seems as capable of defeating them as Tolkien's enfeebled Steward Denethor seemed of beating Sauron.

I feel a bit like Pippin and Gandalf on the eve of battle looking out across the plain at the dark storm clouds gathering as their apparently invincible opponent, Modor, massed its forces for victory and to wreak evil destruction upon the land. 

"Is there any hope, Gandalf?...." asks Pippin.

Gandalf put his hand on Pippin's head. "There never was much hope," he answered. "Just a fool's hope, as I have been told."

And yet I know how that story ends: with victory snatched from the fangs of defeat, as Sam throws the One ring into the fires of Mount Doom and thus destroys Sauron's power. 

The Ring of Power

And foolish though any hope now might seem, there is a chink of light. A move of but a few % to Labour (or Lib Dem) would destroy his power; most projections predict a hung Parliament if the Tory lead fell by 3% from 9 to 6%. In fact its estimated that less than 41,000 tactical votes in 36 marginal seats could stop him. The true ring of power that binds all the others is actually in our own hands: our vote-  to prevent hard Tory Brexit and austerity and fight Climate Change. But for there to be any hope we need to wield our votes wisely and vote tactically to defeat the enemy and prevent the evil they would unleash.

Let me be clear: I do not say Tory politicians are evil like Sauron (well not all of them!) and neither do I say that the millions who will vote for them are bad or stupid. Good and clever people can be deceived into doing bad or unwise things. I know this because I myself have been deceived more than once into voting in governments that I can now see have done great harm to our nation. I believe the Tories themselves have been deceived into becoming deceivers (and as a Christian ultimately I'd say the source of all such deceit is the hidden spiritual power of Satan). But under Boris the Tories have become purveyors of a perfumed poison they believe to be a panacea. And the destruction that poison would wreak upon our land (and has already started to) is not from some fantasy story but all too real.

Climate Change 

This is the greatest threat to all our futures. David Attenborough warns us, "if we have not taken dramatic action within the next decade, we could face irreversible damage to the natural world and the collapse of our societies". 

As the cradle of the first industrial revolution, we should be the cradle of the Green revolution to put right its damage.  But what dramatic action have the Tories taken? Despite their tick box 2050 net zero carbon pledge, their actual policies have reversed most of the good work started by the last Labour government; slashing incentives for renewable energy and electric cars, virtually ending onshore wind farms, selling off the Green Investment Bank (the Tories just love selling our stuff) and doing nothing to improve home energy efficiency or discourage our addiction to fossil fuelled motoring. And the Friends of the Earth's assessment of their manifesto commitments? No effective plan, scoring a very poor 5.5 out of 45 or 12.5%. No wonder Boris didn't turn up to the Climate Change debate.

Failing public services

The Tories' ideologically driven austerity cuts have ravaged our public services. I could quote plenty of statistics, but we can see this daily for ourselves; perhaps most graphically summed up in that picture of the 4 year old Leeds boy, lying for hours on a A&E floor (Thankfully he didnt die, but doctors' research released just this week found 5,500 deaths caused directly by excessive waits in A&E over the last 3 years)

But it's not just the lack of hospital beds and GP appointments, but swelling classroom sizes, overstretched police forces leaving our streets unpatrolled, child and youth centres closed down, social and care services pared to the bone, overcrowded late and expensive trains, no buses and have you tried to use our court service recently? The Tories are promising significantly increased funding for our NHS and police. However it wont make up for their cuts. Their addiction to selling off parts of our public services, including our NHS, threatens their long term viability (billions are already sucked out in profits to private companies running much of our services). Their version of Brexit and proposed trade deal with the USA really would put our NHS on the negotiating table. Their foolish immigration policies will also make it very hard to attract the foreign doctors, nurses and carers we need (charging them to access the very services they would provide!). There would still be a large gap in our schools budgets and for all other local or public services no more money at all; austerity is "baked in" say the IFS.

Poverty

Our land's growing poverty; both material poverty and poverty of opportunity, a shocking blight in a country which is still the 5th richest in the world (albeit fast falling to 6th). Again, I could site plenty of statistics, but we can see it for ourselves in the huge numbers of working families having to rely on food banks and the homeless stewing our streets. The cause is no mystery; the slashing of benefits and other public support and failure to invest in genuinely affordable housing.

And then there's all the lost opportunities we see in the wastelands of closed factories and boarded up shops and (close to my own heart) 1,000s of  graduates with £40k debts in minimum wage jobs. And the Tories' policies to remedy any of this? Nada, zilch, is the IFS's assessment, and they forecast big further increases in childhood poverty and homelessness.

Stagnating Economy and the threat of hard Brexit

Contrary to Tory myth, the last Labour government brought about the longest sustained period of real growth until the bankers crashed the world economy (nothing to do with Labour borrowing btw which was lower than they'd inherited). Our economy has now been stagnating for a decade under the Tories with no real wage growth, held back by austerity and lack of public investment. 

Further damage has been done by the Tory-made Brexit uncertainty, causing a falling pound and haemorrhaging of billions of private investment to safer continental shores. Thus the negative Brexit effect is estimated to have reduced our economic growth by 3% before we've even left the EU. Yes there are jobs but increasingly insecure and poorly paid jobs. If you dont think Tory Brexit has already damaged our economy ask a group of recent graduates like my son and many of his friends about just how much harder it is for good graduates to get good graduate jobs now.

And Boris's biggest lie is that getting Brexit done will magically release a new era of growth and prosperity. It won't and can't. All serious economists predict that all of his Brexit scenarios (hard or no deal) can only seriously damage our economy. The awful irony of voters in Northern ex-industrial towns, whose industries were destroyed by Maggie, is that rather than Brexit magically breathing new life into their towns it can bring about new death. It's a bit like the cigarette manufacturers in the 1930s boasting that smoking their cigarettes protected your throat and voice when actually they caused throat and voice box cancer. 

The break-up of our nation

Boris Johnson's Brexit withdrawal deal would divide Northern Ireland from the rest of the UK by creating a border in the Irish Sea, directly breaking Boris's promise to the DUP (Hence they withdrew their support of him). And the division and economic damage threatened by a Tory Brexit has breathed new life into campaigns to leave the UK in Scotland and Northern Ireland. They strongly object to the English dragging them out of the EU against their will. Polling evidence suggests a hard or no deal Brexit would bring about a majority for independence in both those countries. Ultimately England would be unable to resist such pressures and both of them would likely leave the UK in the near future. And who's to say Wales wouldn't follow them? A hard Tory Brexit therefore very directly threatens the break up of our entire nation. What an irony that a Conservative and Unionist government led by a supposed "one nation" Tory Prime Minister should be midwife to the breakup of that union!

So what is the alternative? Let me say first what it's not.

If you're worried the Lib Dems would just prop up a Johnson minority government, have a reality check. In this election the very thing the Lib Dems have trained their guns to destroy is the very thing the Tories have trained their guns to defend; Brexit. (This is on a very different scale to 2010's tuition fees promise). There would be no Tory/Lib Dem deal this time.

If you're worried about a rampant Marxist Prime Minister nationalising everything, doubling out taxes or recklessly giving away billions the country cant afford, that's not going to happen either. Not just because those aren't actually Labours policies, but because Labour now have no chance of getting a majority (as the Shadow Health Secretary just let slip). To achieve that they would need leap from about -9% behind the Tories to about +12% above them- a swing of over 10%. Even in these unpredictable times we have never seen anything close to that (the last minute swings to Tories and Labour in 2015 and 2017 respectively were about 3% against the average polls and the Brexit vote about 2%). No pollster so far has predicted anything better for Labour than -6%, which would probably only just get us into hung parliament territory. And to form a government without Lib Dem consent Labour would probably require a swing of at least 6% from about- 9%  to +3%- extremely unlikely.

Therefore to govern at all Labour will only be able to do so with the consent of other current opposition parties, including almost certainly the Lib Dems. The Lib Dems have already said they would veto Labour's more radical policies like renationalizations and would doubtless also put a break on more generous promises like the £58 billion for the WASPI women's compensation. It is far from certain that all the other parties would even allow Jeremy Corbyn to become our permanent Prime Minister.

But what a minority Labour government could deliver would be so much better than the damage Boris's Tories would do

What such an opposition grouping would likely offer are the key things they are all committed to. As the group's largest party and the only ones in actual government, Labour would be able to do many, even most, of the great things in their manifesto but not certain more radical policies that the Lib Dems or others strongly oppose. They would still be able to agree a whole host of good things that should make such a positive difference to this country:

Climate Change Action.

All the main opposition parties, Labour Lib Dem, Greens, SNP etc are committed to big action to fight this greatest threat of our time; mass tree planting, retrofitting home insulation, banning carbon cars by 2030, reinvesting in public transport, huge expansion of wind and solar, etc. On climate change policies Friends of the Earth give Labour 73%, Greens 69% and Lib Dems 67%  compared to the Tories' pathetic 12%. Labour's Green Industrial Revolution would get its green light for go.

An end to austerity/rescued public services

They are all committed to ending austerity and a big reinvestment to rescue our public services including the NHS, schools and police. The Lib Dems, still desperate to bury their shameful past as handmaidens to austerity, are hardly likely to want to stand in the way of ending it. Equally they are hardly likely to block moderate tax increases on the top 5% to help pay for this and their proposals to raise Corporation Tax are almost identical to Labour's.

Fighting poverty

They are all committed to reversing the worst of the welfare benefit cuts and again the Lib Dems are hardly likely to stand in the way of reopening our Sure Start centres or big reinvestment in genuinely affordable new homes (the SNP has already been doing this in Scotland). 

Stop a hard Brexit- let the people decide, and revive our economy

All of the opposition parties are committed to preventing an economically devastating hard Brexit and giving us a second Brexit referendum next year. They would therefore fall behind Labour's legally binding referendum to offer the public a genuine choice of a soft Brexit (minimizing any economic damage) or remain. All parties are also committed to borrowing to reinvest and revive our economy (although large scale  renationalisation won't now be part of that). 

Keep our nation together

The SNP would get their Indy ref 2 in early 2021 but settling Brexit by a soft landing version or remain would pour cold water on their yes campaign that was only revived because of Brexit. Having just been saved from a hard Brexit are the Scots really going to vote to impose the double whammy of  a double Brexit by leaving the UK and therefore also the EU? There would be a resounding No and the issue would be done. There would be no border in either the Irish Sea or across the island of Ireland and no prospect of a United Ireland.

Breathe new life into our democracy with Proportional Representation

Our democracy is broken at the moment with many feeling their vote doesn't really count, especially if you happen to live in a "safe" seat. The best way to revive our democracy is through a policy that isn't in Labour's manifesto: introduce Proportional Representation, so that the share of vote that a party is given is represented by the number of MPs it receives. It's a system that works in the rest of Europe and even in the Scottish parliament. It would ensure people can vote for what and who they really believe in wherever they happen to live- no more need for the type of tactical voting I'm advocating here. No longer would a party receiving 43% of the vote get a clear majority or a noisy minority within a major party be able to foister on the whole country a dangerous and extreme policy as the Eurosceptic Tories have done with Brexit. The extremes of Thatcherism and an illegal war in Iraq would probably never have happened. Instead the parties actually chosen by the people would have to work together co-operatively for the common good, just as they would if there's a hung Parliament come Friday. And if you think that would automatically mean a bland moderate magnolia government, think of all the good things say a Labour-Green coalition might do and how the interchange of ideas across parties could be a wonderful, creative thing. Believe it or not, sometimes the best ideas come from a party you don't support, like PR!

Back now to grim reality and the dark forces of Mordor surrounding us. I do know that the hopes of a Labour-led government are slim; a fool's hope perhaps. But I also know the end is not inevitable. The power is in our hands. It would take just a small number of people in the right places to wake up and see the peril of the poison the Tories would release on our land, hold their nose and vote tactically to defeat them; throw the ring into Mount Doom. And we'll probably never need to vote tactically again.

In most places the best way to beat the Tories is by voting Labour. But if you live in Brighton its Green and if you live say in Guildford only the Lib Dems have a hope of winning. Vote Labour here and you'll only increase the chance of a Tory victory. And don’t be put off if you’re in a “safe” Tory seat. There are always some surprise election results like last time when Canterbury voted in its first ever Labour MP. If you're unsure who is best placed to beat the Tories where you live then have a look at a tactical voting site like https://www.peoples-vote.uk/ or https://tacticalvote.getvoting.org/ .

If we fail let us at least fail trying. So that  if our children and granchildren one day ask us what  we did to prevent the damage the Tories released upon on us on that Friday 13th we will have a good answer. We won't have to admit that we voted Tory because we were blinded by the big Brexit con or the lies that the "other guy" was even worse (untrue and a false choice- the "other guy" was never going to get a majority), or we voted for a party that had no chance of winning where we lived rather than soiling our hands with voting tactically to defeat the Tories.

"Evil triumphs when good people do nothing."