Based on the One News article tonight, Gordon also has the leadership skills of an idiot. Why would he criticise/demean the party he is about to co-lead like that? He is truly an amateur. Others have pointed out the recent faux pas of responding to an answer to a question not yet asked, plus there was a blooper when he initially left UnitedFuture (can’t recall the specifics sorry).

Like Dick hubbard, I have no doubt he is a genuine bloke (putting aside political tendancies), but he clearly does not have the leadership, nor political nouse required of him. Shame really.

the MSM love a little Christian bashing so we could expect a process of discreditation to begin regardless of how well or otherwise the launch went.

http://www.stuff.co.nz/4206405a6160.html

” Wallys of the Week
September 13th, 2007
No 1 Wally award goes to Gordon Copeland. NZPA reports on how he put out a press release criticising the response to a question, hours before he actually asked the question!!
Independent MP Gordon Copeland was mocked in Parliament today for putting out a response criticising an answer to a question, hours before the question was even asked.”

I’d have thought voters would expect a ‘Christian’ Party to be honest and display some integrity in comparison to the usual performance of politicians, but these people are screwed before they are even off the ground.

[DPF: I can like and even respect an MP, but still criticise them for specific events. I don't know why so many people have a hard time with that]

Which of course has nothing to do with either fear of homosexuals, or of holding an alternative opinion at odds with the homosexual lobby.

Steve Taylor
http://www.ddp.co.nz

These people in this government are evil and insane. Just what sort of person would make a statement like this?

People do this all the time, many people have a low view of adultery and consensual adult incest and necrophilia. They are of the opinion that if people have inclinations to do the wrong thing they should keep it in their pants.

Holding to an opinion contrary to yours on what sexual conduct falls into the realm of ok and what is in the realm of not ok, does not mean that they are suffering from a psychosis or that they hate and fear people who commit adultery or incest.

A disproportionately high number of paedophilic acts are homosexual. Likewise, most burgularies are committed by darker skinned people. Most serial killers are white men. Most child beaters are women.

Facts are facts. There is no need to hide from speaking them because of sacred cows.

I’ve always struggled with how someone can disagree with a sexuality. It’s like disagreeing with someone’s eye colour. Bizarre…

Oh, and I’d love someone to tell me their personal story of when they “decided” to be straight.

Plenty of Presbytarians would have plenty of time for the new Christian party which is most certainly not a Destiny thing (the likes of Mayman and Westra are a tiny tiny minority within Presbytarian NZ), the concept was not driven by Destiny but by remnants of Future NZ and Christian Heritage.

That said the presbytarian ministers are probably Reformed Church ministers. The Reformed Church is not fundamentalist either but it is more conservative than Grace.

Destiny has been on the verge of merging with another Christian party for some years – in fact they got close with Christian Heritage but there was not enough room at the top for the two egos and later under Ewan McQueen’s leadership it didn’t fly because Destiny wanted to call too many of the shots and CHNZ, the party with more experience and historical support, couldn’t live with that. Destiny it seems has now seen the light.

Before anyone jumps to conclusions, I have nothing to do with this new party and at this point am unlikely to. Given it has been driven by Future NZ who are far too statist for my tastes, I am not likely to unless the rumours about the mass sign up of ex CHNZ members are true as they are considerably more right wing and might be able to drive the policy in the right direction. We will see.

What I was most heartened by was John Key’s comments. National must not alienate itself like it had previously to the right of centre and beyond Christian vote which is far bigger than most think.

Very good spotting,
New rules for Religious discrimination in NZ.
Muslims OK Falun Gong NOT OK
Catholic OK EB’s NOT OK
Destiny NOT OK Copeland and co ????

TO QUOTE TODAY
I think the Minister of Justice has made it clear a number of times that the intention of this legislation is to capture people like the Exclusive Brethren, not the Catholic Church as in the example the member has pointed out—that is, the Catholic Church going about its normal process of issue-based discussion, and not supporting a particular party but simply explaining an issue. The member wishes he could find an example like this to make it stick but, I am sorry, he cannot.

Then he went on further with Cullen and said

Hon STEVE MAHAREY: The substance of the question from Mr English was why the Catholic Church would worry. My answer was that it would worry if it was being communicated to by people on the National benches about this issue in a distorted way, as it has been. That is the source of the problem.
Hon Dr Michael Cullen: Will the Minister ensure that the bill is amended so that the Catholic Church’s campaign can proceed, given the facts that thanks to Working for Families this Government has cut child poverty by two-thirds and the National Party opposed the Working for Families package?
Hon STEVE MAHAREY: I will ensure that that takes place, because of course this is the kind of good news that the National Party does not like but that ought to be told right across New Zealand.

I thought the EB’s were simply raising issues as well but Catholic’s now will be provided for so could the
Labour trolls explain how the poor taxpayer could be enlightened on the difference????
I think your Yellow Star reference has some very alarming and sinister warnings for NZ. Could we have a reality check here is this 2007 or 1937.

What does the VRWC think of this now.???

Hating and fearing people who are homosexual.

No its not. It means fear of sameness (swot up your Greek).

Anyone care to deny it exists?

Yes. I will deny that your definition of it exists.

Disagreeing with something does not entail hatred or fear.

Yes, I do wonder who are the Presbyterian ministers allegedly featuring on the ‘Board.’ Certainly not Revs Margaret Mayman or Rinny Westra. Of the Presbyterians I know at the conservative end of the spectrum, Destiny would be too tough for them to contemplate an overt relationship. I suspect the ‘presbyterians’ might be part of Grace Presbyterian, an ultra conservative fundamentalist grouping which left the mainstream Pressie church a few years ago. Good luck to them.

I’ll rephrase Question No.2 (You obviously forgot to answer Q1)
If I suggested that Homosexuals tended to abuse children, then retracted it but said the tend to cover for their Gay friends when they molest kids. Would I be regarded as Homophobic?

P.S And again this is merely a hypothetical question.

You seem to have strayed from the “Human Rights Commission on Electoral Finance Bill” thread. But there are a couple of questions for you, from various people, and still unanswered. Any chance of you responding to those before your girlfriend picks you up?