The National Party

PBP are getting serious heat lately.

I just can't see her getting in.

Time will tell.

Generally speaking they do, because liberals are more likely to believe in a more spiritual and personal connection than a higher power (should you believe one to exist) than a religious one.

The problem I have with with the national party (and the similarly minded parties) - and more so than an immigration stance - is their so-called "moral" codes. They believe in law and order, but a lot of their candidates (and an ex-leader) have criminal records, frequently for violence; Dwyer's got criminal charges for violence, animal abuse and thinks it's ok for unknown men to go into creches.

They want to bring back a ban on abortion (on what grounds can someone support them if they're an athiest?) and I can only imagine what they'll do the gay and trans community if their leader remembers Mussolini with fondness. Are they doing to abandon secularism and bring back the "special place of the catholic church"?

And that's before we get to the fabricated child kidnapping events, organised riots and threatening politicians.

Yet THESE are the guys you think can be trusted with to be upstanding moral politicians…?

Why?

Sorry to jump in, but how do you proove anything about Jesus without the Bible? It's not like there were cameras or eyewitnesses.

Well, an example of Liberals using religious language/ideas is the claim in US Declaration of Independence that it is "self-evident that all men are created equal" and "that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights".

And favouring the separation of Church and State is entirely consistent with appealing to religious ideas. Remember, the orignal justification for the separation of church and state was not that it was good for the state, but that it was good for the church; separation of church and state was the cornerstone of the free exercise of religion. You can support the separation of church and state out of purely religious motivations, and lots of people do.

Obviously, there are democrats and liberals who eschew religious language and imagery but, equally, there are authoritarians and tyrants who do too — Mao, for instance, or Stalin, or the Mexican dictatorship in the 1920s and 30s.

Quotes were supplied to you where Jesus lifestyle was shown to conform to socialist principles - quotes from the only source relevant.

Lets be precise then, according to the Bible he lived in a commune - which would make him a communist by modern standards.

In the New Testament, Jesus identifies himself with the hungry, the poor, the sick, and the prisoners.[27] Matthew 25:31–46 is a major component of Christianity and is considered the cornerstone of Christian socialism.[27] Another key statement in the New Testament that is an important component of Christian socialism is Luke 10:25–37 that follows the statement "You shall love your neighbour as yourself" with the question "And who is my neighbour?" In the Parable of the Good Samaritan. Jesus gives the response that the neighbour includes anyone in need, even people we might be expected to shun.[28] The Samaritans and Jews claim descension from different Tribes of Israel, which had faced a schism prior to the events described in the New Testament.[29][30] This schism led to interethnic and interreligious conflict between the two groups.[28]

Luke 6:20–21 shows Jesus narrating the Sermon on the Plain. It reads: "Blessed are you poor, for yours is the kingdom of God. Blessed are you that hunger now, for you shall be satisfied."[31] Christian socialists cite James the Just, the brother of Jesus, who criticizes the rich intensely and in strong language in the Epistle of James.[32]

Come now, you rich, weep and howl for the miseries that are coming upon you. Your riches have rotted and your garments are moth-eaten. Your gold and silver have rusted, and their rust will be evidence against you and will eat your flesh like fire. You have laid up for treasure for the last days. Behold, the wages of the labourers who mowed your fields, which you have kept back by fraud, cry out; and the cries of the harvesters have reached the ears of the Lord of hosts. You have lived on the earth in luxury and in pleasure; you have fattened your hearts in a day of slaughter.[32]

— James 5:1–6

During the New Testament period and beyond, there is evidence that many Christian communities practised forms of sharing, redistribution, and communism. Some of the Bible verses that inspired the communal economic arrangements of the Hutterites are found in the book of the Acts.[33]

All the believers were together and had everything in common. Selling their possessions and goods, they gave to anyone as he had need.

— Acts 2, 44–45

All the believers were one in heart and mind. No one claimed that any of his possessions were his own, but they shared everything they had.

— Acts 4, 32

There were no needy persons among them. For from time to time those who owned lands or houses sold them, brought the money from their sales and put it at the apostles' feet, and it was distributed to anyone as he had need.

— Acts 4, 34–35

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christian_socialism#:~:text=In%20the%20New%20Testament%2C%20Jesus,the%20cornerstone%20of%20Christian%20socialism.

It was Christian ideals ofsocialism that influenced Enlightenment socialism

Yeah, apologies - meant "you" generally, not you personally. Bad choice of words on my part.

Not really - center right / moderate conservatism doesn't get labeled nazism anywhere near as much as center-left gets labeled communism or socialism. You just have to mention "left" or "liberal" and you get some people wading in with loony this libtard that and so on.

In this context though, it was nullzero saying, "probably because the left base their beliefs on the works of Marx and Engels…"

I mean - has anyone actually said in this forum something like "the right base their beliefs on Hiter and Mussolini"?

They are well aware of the value of twisting reality to drive an agenda though