MandM has moved!

You should be automatically redirected in 6 seconds. If not, visit
http://www.mandm.org.nz/
and update your bookmarks.

Showing posts with label ACT. Show all posts
Showing posts with label ACT. Show all posts

Friday, 7 November 2008

Decisions Decisions

We have still not decided who we will give our party vote to so tonight's mission is to finally work out which party we are voting for. Our previous list of potentials has been whittled down to:
  • ACT - have Sir Roger Douglas, NZ needs him right now, they are the second most correct and most consistent out of the lot on the limited government and basic civil liberties and they have this fantastic 20 point plan but their inconsistency on life issues lets them down.
  • Libertarianz - are the most correct and most consistent out of the lot on the limited government and basic civil liberties but their inconsistency on the life issues lets them down, [UPDATE:] however, they are the only secular party who at least would remove public funding for state-sanctioned homicide, as Libertyscott states below in the comments section, "one clear point Libertarianz holds is that private health care means you wouldn't have to pay for other people's abortions."
  • National - are not Labour so they have to be looked at seriously; if their policies were closer to their stated philosophy they would earn more admiration from us but they are still better than what we have and the ethical values of their people are closer to the Judeo Christian position than the other secular parties.
  • The Family Party - Andy Moore called them the closest thing to a Christian version of ACT and I think he is right. They get things right on the life issues and fairly right on the limited government and civil liberties issues, certainly far better than the Kiwi Party or the Pacific Party and it turns out that the allegation they do not separate church and state is a falsehood promulgated by the Kiwi Party - definitely the best Christian option.
These are the four least nanny state parties that have the most going for them. Their success means a definite change of government and they are the closest fit to the biblical role of the state out of the lot - though all fall short.

We will not waste our vote. Votes for Christian parties or parties that will not cross the threshold have led to Labour continually, narrowly, winning elections because such votes are not counted. We will not contribute to this, so basically it will be ACT or National as the other two do not stand a chance.

At this stage we look like we will be voting differently but as we argue with each other that may change. Matt might see the light - well, I am still conflicted too truth be told. Not telling whose argument is whose but basically our wrestle goes like this.

A party vote for National is a vote for a change of government, you know you will bring in some social conservatives (horrid term that that is) and you might just help Stephen Franks make the list if he misses out in Wellington Central.

A party vote for ACT is still a vote for a change of government, you know you will bring in Roger Douglas and enhance the chances of NZ's economy surviving the downturn if the number of ACT MP's is decent and National needs them to form a government. A vote for ACT has the potential to pull National back to its roots and away from being Labour-Lite.

However, if there is a vote on a 'life' issue, ACT are more secularist and despite their principled ideology are inconsistent on life issues. As a Christian, can you in good conscience bring such people into parliament?

When you have no alternative, yes, as ought implies can.

But do you have no alternative? Is Labour-Lite really that bad when you consider the life issues as National are generally not consistent on them either?

Saturday, 11 October 2008

ACT Party Launch: Why on a Sunday Morning?

Given we are exploring our short list of political party's at the moment attending the ACT Party Official Launch is something we are interested in doing.

However the details below make the decision to attend difficult, from ACT's website:

The official launch of the ACT Party campaign for the 2008 election will held be
at the 1st level, Alexandra Park Complex in Greenlane 11 am on Sunday 12
October.
Hear ACT leader Rodney Hide and the ACT Candidates explain ACT's
policies.

When 11 am Sunday 12 October
Where: 1st level Alexandra Park Complex
Contact: Margaret 09 912 8633

Note the time and day of the week? One cynically wonders if ACT are trying to deliberately send Christian supporters a message; to attend one needs to choose between attending church and attending the launch. It probably just didn't occur to them.

Maybe we can make both if we take off straight after the service.

Saturday, 2 December 2006

Key a PC Socialist?

Murray certainly thinks so and I am inclined to agree from what I have heard so far from the man. Of course it could all be the way the media are reporting things but Key does appear to be pulling National more centrist and last time National were over there it was disastrous for them.

Sure, this time they are facing an incumbant govt which is steeped in scandal and so there will probably be some moderate Labour voters who might vote for what Murray has renamed National, "Labour Lite", but what of those on the centre right and further over to the right (as in correct) position?

It looks like we are left with voting National because its not Labour or jumping to ACT's two man band.

  © Blogger template 'Grease' by Ourblogtemplates.com 2008 Design by Madeleine Flannagan 2008

Back to TOP