# US, UK, Religion and Politics **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [March 4, 2006, 7:03am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/us-uk-religion-and-politics/347026 "2006-03-04T07:03:51Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 3
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [March 7, 2006, 6:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/us-uk-religion-and-politics/347026/41 "2006-03-07T18:16:36Z")
> [@Pjen](#): > > That could well lead to PR and an end to the extreme swings we experienced in the 1950s-1980s between party elites. It occurs to me that (based on what I’ve read) both Labour and the Tories are, in their present formations, coalitions of different tendencies, forced together by the electoral logic of the first-past-the-post system. If PR were adopted, making it possible for smaller parties to make it on their own, is it possible Labour would split, into a leftist “Old Labour” party and a center-right Blairite “New Labour” party? And the Conservatives would split into a Thatcherite pro-business-interests party and an Old-Tory traditionalist party? ---
**Author:** ![Pjen](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/3d9bf3/32.png) [@Pjen](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Pjen)\ **Post date:** [March 7, 2006, 6:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/us-uk-religion-and-politics/347026/42 "2006-03-07T18:28:02Z")
> [@BrainGlutton](#): > > It occurs to me that (based on what I’ve read) both Labour and the Tories are, in their present formations, coalitions of different tendencies, forced together by the electoral logic of the first-past-the-post system. If PR were adopted, making it possible for smaller parties to make it on their own, is it possible Labour would split, into a leftist “Old Labour” party and a center-right Blairite “New Labour” party? And the Conservatives would split into a Thatcherite pro-business-interests party and an Old-Tory traditionalist party? More than likely. Both are unwieldy coalitions. The splits, however, are not likely to be even. The Labour Party would be likely to have two parts- the larger centrist and the smaller left wing. The Tory Party would be largely a Business oriented party with a small and currently rapidly dying off Traditionalist rump. There would be some natural flow from extremes to the Lib/Dems and some the other way. Whatever happens, there would of necessity be coalition government (as we currently have in Scotland under PR) or a minority government. Both require negotiation and compromise. ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [March 7, 2006, 6:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/us-uk-religion-and-politics/347026/43 "2006-03-07T18:40:35Z")
> [@Pjen](#): > > The Labour Party would be likely to have two parts- the larger centrist and the smaller left wing. The Tory Party would be largely a Business oriented party with a small and currently rapidly dying off Traditionalist rump. And which of those four would the LibDems consider their most natural allies and/or coalition partners? ---
**Author:** ![Pjen](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/3d9bf3/32.png) [@Pjen](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Pjen)\ **Post date:** [March 7, 2006, 6:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/us-uk-religion-and-politics/347026/44 "2006-03-07T18:50:12Z")
> [@BrainGlutton](#): > > And which of those four would the LibDems consider their most natural allies and/or coalition partners? The Lib/Dems are not far from mainstream Labour on Economics and Industry, but are closer to the more libertarian strands of the Tory Party on Individual Rights and Freedoms. Other potential partners include the Greens, the Nationalists (at least the Welsh and Scots Nats) and any other smaller non-extreme parties that might thrive under PR. It is worth reminding you that the breadth of mainstream British politics start at the far right of the Democratic Party and go quickly off the scale of US Liberal Politics. Most British Tories would not be that uncomfortable in the right and mainstream of the Democratic Party in the USA. I am relatively moderate left in Brit terms and very libertarian in Brit terms, but I would be on the extreme outer wing of the Dems in the States. ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [March 7, 2006, 6:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/us-uk-religion-and-politics/347026/45 "2006-03-07T18:56:12Z")
> [@Pjen](#): > > The Lib/Dems are not far from mainstream Labour on Economics and Industry . . . By “mainstream,” do you mean Old Labour or New Labour? ---
**Author:** ![Pjen](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/3d9bf3/32.png) [@Pjen](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Pjen)\ **Post date:** [March 7, 2006, 7:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/us-uk-religion-and-politics/347026/46 "2006-03-07T19:05:37Z")
> [@BrainGlutton](#): > > By “mainstream,” do you mean Old Labour or New Labour? Most of ‘Old Labour’ has aged and gone, or just gone. Even the remaining Left Wing MPs are talking a different language to that of thirty years ago. The split now is very much ‘Modern Left’ (Everyone to the left of the Blairites) and ‘Blairites’ - Moderately centrist to Moderately rightist. By mainstream I mean all of the Blairites and a good portion of the ‘Modern Left’. ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [March 7, 2006, 7:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/us-uk-religion-and-politics/347026/47 "2006-03-07T19:17:43Z")
> [@Pjen](#): > > Most of ‘Old Labour’ has aged and gone, or just gone. Even the remaining Left Wing MPs are talking a different language to that of thirty years ago. So, no chance of the old Clause 4 being restored? Ah, well . . . ---
**Author:** ![Walloon](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/fbc32d/32.png) [@Walloon](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Walloon)\ **Post date:** [March 8, 2006, 1:24am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/us-uk-religion-and-politics/347026/48 "2006-03-08T01:24:26Z")
> [@e-logic](#): > > Anyone who seeks to jusitfy the deaths of 30,000+ people on the basis that “God told me it was OK” is totally deserving of public mockery. Who or what are you talking about? ---
**Author:** ![tagos](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/bbe5ce/32.png) [@tagos](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tagos)\ **Post date:** [March 8, 2006, 10:01am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/us-uk-religion-and-politics/347026/49 "2006-03-08T10:01:16Z")
> [@Walloon](#): > > Who or what are you talking about? Tony Blair - closet Catholic - recently let on that he and God are on first name terms and in close agreement on the need to attack ME countries on specious grounds. ---
**Author:** ![Pjen](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/3d9bf3/32.png) [@Pjen](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Pjen)\ **Post date:** [March 8, 2006, 10:19am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/us-uk-religion-and-politics/347026/50 "2006-03-08T10:19:38Z")
> [@tagos](#): > > Tony Blair - closet Catholic - recently let on that he and God are on first name terms and in close agreement on the need to attack ME countries on specious grounds. At least he didn’t call it a **crusade**. Now that would have been crass and no politician would have done that and offended Islam, would they. Oh, sorry, forgot about Bush. 🙂 ---
**Author:** ![tagos](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/bbe5ce/32.png) [@tagos](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tagos)\ **Post date:** [March 8, 2006, 10:32am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/us-uk-religion-and-politics/347026/51 "2006-03-08T10:32:29Z")
> [@Pjen](#): > > At least he didn’t call it a **crusade**. Now that would have been crass and no politician would have done that and offended Islam, would they. Oh, sorry, forgot about Bush. 🙂 We’ll have to hope their imaginary friend isn’t now telling them how easy an invasion of Iran will be. ---
**Author:** ![EAF1](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8e8cbc/32.png) [@EAF1](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/EAF1)\ **Post date:** [March 8, 2006, 11:14am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/us-uk-religion-and-politics/347026/52 "2006-03-08T11:14:03Z")
Returning to the original question as to the lack of religion in UK politics: too many examples of the negatives that result from a religion in politics. Most obviously, Northern Ireland is somewhere religion is seen to be part of the political process, and doesn’t seem to have benefitted from that. Historically - the Jacobite rebellions. James VII/II was forced off the throne because of his religion. Bloody Mary didn’t go down too well. Bound to be plenty of others. ---
**Author:** ![Walloon](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/fbc32d/32.png) [@Walloon](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Walloon)\ **Post date:** [March 8, 2006, 3:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/us-uk-religion-and-politics/347026/53 "2006-03-08T15:03:34Z")
> [@tagos](#): > > Tony Blair - closet Catholic - recently let on that he and God are on first name terms and in close agreement on the need to attack ME countries on specious grounds. I’d be interested in reading the exact quotation(s) where Tony Blair says he believes in attacking Middle East countries on “specious grounds”. Or, are those your words? ---
**Author:** ![tagos](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/bbe5ce/32.png) [@tagos](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tagos)\ **Post date:** [March 8, 2006, 3:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/us-uk-religion-and-politics/347026/54 "2006-03-08T15:15:42Z")
> [@Walloon](#): > > I’d be interested in reading the exact quotation(s) where Tony Blair says he believes in attacking Middle East countries on “specious grounds”. Or, are those your words? Of course they are my paraphrase. I find your disengenuous post verging on trolling. Google. Blair + Parkinson should do it. Then try Blair +‘dodgy dossier’ or ‘plagiarised from the internet’. Then you’ll know all about ‘specious’. Blair and Bush both knew at the time they were making shit up just to fight a war decided upon around about 30 minutes after the first plane hit the WTC. No democratically elected politician has any business making decisions with any participation by characters from bronze age mythology. People who talk to imaginary friends and decide it’s okay to kill people on that basis need locking up, not electing. ---
**Author:** ![Wallenstein](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/b5a626/32.png) [@Wallenstein](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Wallenstein)\ **Post date:** [March 8, 2006, 3:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/us-uk-religion-and-politics/347026/55 "2006-03-08T15:16:04Z")
> [@Walloon](#): > > I’d be interested in reading the exact quotation(s) where Tony Blair says he believes in attacking Middle East countries on “specious grounds”. Or, are those your words? Tony Blair believed he was right to go into Iraq, because the decision was made in good faith on the basis of faulty intelligence. Well… that’s his story anway. He also said that even though the intelligence was later shown to be false, it was still the right thing to invade, if nothing else because the world is better without Saddam. It seems like you’re spoiling for a fight over this? 😕 Not sure what your beef is… there’s no little doubt that the UK govt exagerrated the case for war (particularly around WMD). There’s also no doubt that the war has involved many lives lost. People find it hard for a christian to be happy with that - as I do, to be honest. ---
**Author:** ![Walloon](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/fbc32d/32.png) [@Walloon](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Walloon)\ **Post date:** [March 8, 2006, 3:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/us-uk-religion-and-politics/347026/56 "2006-03-08T15:25:09Z")
From _[The Herald](http://www.theherald.co.uk/features/57508.html)_: > [@](#): > > If Tony Blair had said that God would exonerate him, or justify his actions or condone his decisions then I would be first in line to criticise his arrogance in the face of the divine; but he didn’t. If he had said (as some correspondents seem to suggest) that God had guided him to invade Iraq or that he was divinely inspired to do so I would be first in line to point out that my prayers for guidance were as valid as his and that I took an opposing view. But that is not what he said. > > What Tony Blair said was the simple truth; that he believed that one day he would be called to account for his choices. ---
**Author:** ![tagos](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/bbe5ce/32.png) [@tagos](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tagos)\ **Post date:** [March 8, 2006, 3:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/us-uk-religion-and-politics/347026/57 "2006-03-08T15:46:05Z")
> [@Walloon](#): > > From _[The Herald](http://www.theherald.co.uk/features/57508.html)_: > [@](#): > > Parkinson: “So you would pray to God when you make a decision like that?” > > Blair: “Well, you know, I don’t want to go into…” > > Parkinson: “No, but, I mean, you’ve said that.” > > Blair: “Yeah.” [God Replies](http://www.guardian.co.uk/comment/story/0,,1725799,00.html) > [@](#): > > A high-level leak has revealed that God is “furious” at Tony Blair’s attempts to implicate him in the bombing of Iraq. Sources close to the archangel Gabriel report him as describing the Almighty as “hopping mad … with sanctimonious yet unscrupulous politicians claiming He would condone their bestial activities when He has no way of going public Himself, owing to the MMW agreement” (a reference to the long-established Moving in Mysterious Ways concordat). > > Mr Blair went public about God on Michael Parkinson’s TV show. “If you have faith about these things,” he said, “then you realise that judgment is made by other people. If you believe in God, it’s made by God as well.” As is customary with Mr Blair’s statements, it’s rather hard to tease out what he is actually saying; but the gist is clearly that if God didn’t actually tell him to bomb Iraq, then the Almighty would certainly agree it was the right thing to do. > > “If Tony Blair thinks his friendship with George W Bush is worth rubbing out a couple of hundred thousand Iraqi men, women and children, then that’s something he can talk over with me later,” said God. ---
**Author:** ![Mk\_VII](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/5f9b8f/32.png) [@Mk\_VII](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mk_VII)\ **Post date:** [March 8, 2006, 6:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/us-uk-religion-and-politics/347026/58 "2006-03-08T18:47:40Z")
Britain experienced several religious revivals in the 19th c. and the respectable middle classes would have been nearly all churchgoers by the end of the century. At one time Charles Bradlaugh was barred from taking up his elected seat in the House just because he refused to swear by a deity who’s existence he did not believe in. The steep decline in churchgoing really set in after WW2 and religion became ever more marginalised in daily life as other leisure pastimes became affordable and socially acceptable. We are a much more secular society than the USA and if our politicians have religious views we expect them to keep them to themselves and not come bothering us with them. Admitting he has no belief at all wouldn’t do many politicians any harm here ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [March 8, 2006, 7:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/us-uk-religion-and-politics/347026/59 "2006-03-08T19:19:13Z")
> [@EAF1](#): > > Bloody Mary didn’t go down too well. That’s 'cause you left out the Worcestershire sauce! 🙂 ---
**Author:** ![Wallenstein](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/b5a626/32.png) [@Wallenstein](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Wallenstein)\ **Post date:** [March 8, 2006, 8:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/us-uk-religion-and-politics/347026/60 "2006-03-08T20:29:28Z")
> [@BrainGlutton](#): > > That’s 'cause you left out the Worcestershire sauce! 🙂 Badum _tish_! Back to the thread… it used to be said that the Church of England was the “Tory party at prayer”, and there certainly used to be an expectation that the Prime Minister would uphold “traditional” protestant values. Labour tended to be seen as godless socialists (or communists). Tony Blair has recently come in for criticism for allowing evangelical christians (“fundies”?) to open state-funded schools in the UK - there’s a fear that we’re going down the ID / anti-evolution route with the consent of the government. We’re turning into a US-style theocracy, and Blair’s latest utterances seem to indicate he’s right on board with it. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/us-uk-religion-and-politics/347026.md?page=2) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/us-uk-religion-and-politics/347026.md?page=4)