Tim Farron, former leader of the Liberal Democrats, was in the news again on Wednesday. He gave a long interview to Christian Radio about what it is like to be a Christian in politics.

Although it is not 100 per cent clear from the interview, Farron states he regrets not saying during the General Election campaign that he believes gay sex to be a sin. Such a belief is in accordance with orthodox Christian theology. Instantly the Twitter outrage train got going, saying he was obsessed with gay sex.

In fact, this takes up a tiny amount of time in what is a very interesting and wide-ranging interview on Christianity and politics. Farron would have spent zero time discussing it during the election were it not for the media obsession with gay sex.

I did notice many Liberal Democrats condemning Farron for his Christian beliefs, proving once again that not only are the Liberal Democrats not that democratic, they are not very liberal either. Tim Farron has voted to promote the LGBT agenda recently – but this is not enough. These bullies don’t just want his votes, they want his soul too. If they had any power, we would be living in a totalitarian nightmare.

The interview itself is an important contribution to the God/Caesar debate.

  • Le Fox

    Christians are always ‘obsessed with gay sex, but when they talk about sex and sexualization all the time, people are mum. Hypocrites.

    • Malcolm Marchesi

      I’m a Christian , many of my friends and family are Christian , we seldom talk about gay sex and when we do it is usually as a result of some icon of the LGBT lobby or (equally as boring ) some virtue signalling politician , banging on about the latest insult that has been levelled at them . Personally , I don’t give a hoot about anyone’s sexual orientation but I do object to the subject being shoved into my face every day . If I’m obsessed with anything , it’s my own prospects for eternity , I simply don’t have the time or the inclination to stick the boot in to anybody else !

    • Bridget

      I hear Christians talk much more about love than about sex. But sex, like love (of which there are several kinds), has its good and bad effects, no matter your preference. That’s what tends to concern Christians, those of my acquaintance at any rate. Sex is everywhere, on TV, in the papers, on the internet. The world seems to worship it, that’s what worries Christians.

      • Little Black Censored

        The taxpayer funds promiscuity of all kinds, homosexual and heterosexual. Smoking tobacco, however, or even looking at it is almost outlawed.

    • Horsey_Mc_Horse

      Post modern sexual radicals use the ‘obsession with gay sex’ to stop normal discussion. Considering the awful ghonorrea, syphillis, superbugs, taxpayer funded gay disease drugs like pRep, the awful aids stats and suicidal tendencies which are as a consequence of ‘gay sex’, is it any wonder?

    • LoveMeIamALiberal

      You’re merely projecting your own obsessions on to other people.

      • Le Fox

        So, going by your logic, does this not mean you are obsessed with the Christians who are obsessed with gay sex?

        • LoveMeIamALiberal

          No, as I’m responding to a comment made by you (and keeping it short and to the point), by my logic there’s no evidence I have any obsessions.

          • Le Fox

            Your argument was that I was obsessed with a group of individuals on the basis of merely talking about it. By default, you are also obsessed with Christians being obsessed over gay sex, but think that by you saying so, you are not obsessed without naming or defining this obsession in the first place.

          • LoveMeIamALiberal

            Why are you so obsessed with trying to prove that Christians are obsessed with sex?

          • Le Fox

            I’m not. Maybe you should try reading my original comment again before leaping to conclusions? You have eyes. Use them.

          • LoveMeIamALiberal

            You mean your original comment that began ‘Christians are always ‘obsessed with gay sex’. Yep, no trying to prove Christians are obsessed with sex there.

          • Le Fox

            I was being sarcastic in that comment. I was making a ploy on how LGBT activists react to Christians and their attitudes on sex.

  • Owen_Morgan

    Farron should have had the courage to speak up for his faith before. The pre-LibDem Liberals liked to present themselves as something akin to God’s own party, albeit more in Wales than in Farron’s Westmorland. He certainly shouldn’t have to defend his beliefs on air, but a more robust attempt to have done so from the start might actually have prevented his being dogged by anti-Christian voices all this time. If these voices originate within the LibDems, has it ever occurred to Farron that he joined the wrong party?

    • Barry Guevara

      The voices, it must be said, aren’t necessarily ‘anti-Christian’.

      • simonstephenson

        The “anti-Christian” voices are by definition anti-Christian, although it is of course true that it is possible that Mr Farron has also been dogged by the voices of people who are Christians.

    • 39 Pontiac Dream

      Farron sold his soul for 30 pieces of silver but isn’t the only politician to do so. Apparently, there are Muslims and other Christians in the House of Commons who, like Theresa May, have stated that they don’t have a problem with gay marriage/sex – a direct contradiction to their faith. They tend to spout out the same lines when it comes to gender and sexual identity. They do this, of course, purely for political expedience and, I’m sure, if the pressure decreased on them, later in their careers (just as it has with Farron), then they will most probably double back on what they previously said.
      How they can align their faith with themselves is beyond me. Either renounce your faith and you can say what you like or keep it and be honest.

      • Little Black Censored

        “…there are Muslims … who … have stated that they don’t have a problem with gay
        marriage/sex.”
        Are they really good Muslims protected by taqiyya, do you think?

  • TheRightToArmBears

    Any MP willing to concede sovereignty of this country to the Berlin/Brussels Axis has lost their raison d’être, and thus their proclivities in any direction come into question.
    Farron has always been a slave looking for a master, and found one in Brussels.

  • Jenni Wren

    Says woman writing a column about gay sex.

    • simonstephenson

      Er … perhaps you could explain why you have reached the conclusion that writing a column about something is sufficient evidence to make the claim that the writer has an obsession about it?

      You see, there’s a small section of the general population who are beginning to see a worrying tendency growing wherein the routine response to someone communicating an unwelcome opinion is to attempt to besmirch the standing of the communicator of this opinion through making false allegations of character faults and shortcomings.

      Of course, this sort of unhelpful and destructive approach has always been widespread in school playgrounds, and other places populated by those who haven’t yet developed the art of valid thinking, but what I consider to be so alarming is how widespread it has become amongst classes of people who as little as 30 years ago would have been considered to have rejected such stupidity for what it is.

      • Jenni Wren

        I hope you don’t mind, but I am copying & pasting this post elsewhere to prove my point. Oh the irony.

        • simonstephenson

          Post it wherever you like.

          Maybe, like me, your intended recipients would be interested to read your justification for having reached the conclusion that a writer of a column about a particular subject can be claimed to be obsessive about that subject. And, if you fail to come up with a valid justification, perhaps an admission that you are just partaking in the sort of ad hominem character assassination that seems to have become the starting point of so much modern argument.

          • John Standley

            Post of the day!

          • Little Black Censored

            Oh the irony of using the expression “Oh the irony!”!

          • John Standley

            ??

    • JabbaPapa

      Bloody sockpuppets !!! — blocked.

    • DespiteBrexit

      What a stupid comment.

  • Barry Guevara

    I was an evangelical Christian for just over a year until I saw sense.

    While gay sex was never a subject that people talked about all the time, it did come up fairly regularly and generally in a very particular context. Nobody I saw ever condemned it in the manner of Ian Paisley bellowing from the lectern, but there was a clear statement that people thought it was sinful and ‘loved’ the sinner. This tension between seemingly ‘nice’ everyday people saying things which seem, to modern ears, to suggest a level of intolerance and also to suggest that they are prepared to pronounce on a problem which does not affect them.

    I’m not gay, but it’s this last one that, in particular, meant that I could no longer stick with the church. It felt like a paradox that was too big to ignore and I know a number of perfectly devout perfectly intelligent Christians who say that celibacy is too big a burden for them to carry. And I believe them. Why would I ever expect gay people to do something that would be beyond me? That would mark me out as some kind of loon.

    That is the light in which Farron is seen and, while I have a certain respect for the man’s principles, he’s in the wrong job.

    • Busy Mum

      Nobody is saying that ‘gay people’ have to be celibate. ‘Gay people’ have never been forbidden from getting married to somebody of the opposite sex.

      • Barry Guevara

        That’s… weak.

        • Busy Mum

          How so? Maybe a thief finds the temptation to steal your wallet too big a burden to carry.

          Anyway, Jesus said that all those who are burdened have to ‘Come to Me and I will give you rest’.

          • Barry Guevara

            You meet someone of the same sex. You fall in love. What should you do?

          • Busy Mum

            Resist temptation?

          • Barry Guevara

            No further questions.

          • JabbaPapa

            How so? Maybe a thief finds the temptation to steal your wallet too big a burden to carry.

            Reminds me of the time a thief in Rome tried to run away with my sackful of 650 books … 🙂

      • Guglielmo Marinaro

        I take that you’ll be perfectly happy for a man who is sexually attracted only to other men to marry your daughter. Or will that be OK only if it’s someone ELSE’S daughter?

        • Busy Mum

          How on earth would I know my daughter’s suitors’ inner temptations?

          • Guglielmo Marinaro

            Well, if he were absolutely honest, he might tell your daughter that he had no “inner temptations” towards women, only towards other men. (Indeed, many people, including me, would consider it thoroughly dishonest of him if he were not to tell her.) She might then tell you.

            But that doesn’t answer the question, would you be perfectly happy for a man who is sexually attracted only to other men to marry your daughter? Yes or no? Your attempt to dodge that point simply raises the further question, do you think that it would be perfectly OK as long as you didn’t know about it? Or would you consider it fine for him to marry someone ELSE’S daughter but NOT yours?

          • Busy Mum

            I agree with you re the honesty – I presume my daughter would reject the suit at that point.

            The answer is no, because a man like that has totally lost sight of the God who made my daughter, and everybody else’s daughters, in the first place.

          • Guglielmo Marinaro

            Quite apart from whether or not one agrees with your theological view of homosexuality – and I certainly don’t – you are in effect conceding that you definitely would NOT want a homosexual man to marry your daughter; that you would consider such a marriage totally unsuitable; and that other parents would be right to feel exactly the same way about his marrying theirs.

            Your assertion that “Nobody is saying that ‘gay people’ have to be celibate. ‘Gay people’ have never been forbidden from getting married to somebody of the opposite sex” is NOT therefore an appropriate response to Barry Guevara’s question, “Why would I ever expect gay people to do something [viz. commit themselves to perpetual celibacy] that would be beyond me?”

          • Busy Mum

            We are on different wavelengths. There is no such thing as a gay person.

          • Guglielmo Marinaro

            Saying that is just another of your vain attempts to evade the issue. Whether or not I share your belief about what “a man like that has totally lost sight of” – and I have already made it clear that I don’t – is neither here nor there. By affirming that belief and by agreeing with me that “a man like that” should not marry your daughter or anyone else’s, you are conceding that men “like that” (i.e. men who are sexually attracted only to other men, not to women) do exist. Refusing to call them gay, or even refusing to call them anything at all, makes no difference to their existence.

          • Busy Mum

            Of course not – ‘they’ exist as well as I do – and we are all created equal. It’s just that ‘men like that’ no longer acknowledge the Creator, if they attempt to justify themselves.

          • Guglielmo Marinaro

            “Men like that” do not need to attempt to justify themselves, any more than the great majority of men, who are sexually attracted to women, need to justify themselves. Acknowledging the Creator has nothing to do with it.

            But even if you disagree with me, as I expect that you do, that is quite beside the point in any case. The point is that your assertion, “Nobody is saying that ‘gay people’ have to be celibate. ‘Gay people’ have never been forbidden from getting married to somebody of the opposite sex” is not an appropriate response to Barry Guevara’s objection that it is unreasonable to demand that gay people commit themselves to perpetual celibacy whether they want to or not.

            You have shown that you realise this, since you have conceded that you would definitely NOT want a man who is sexually attracted only to other men to marry your daughter, and you have obviously realised also that you could not maintain any semblance of moral integrity if you were to add, “But as long as it’s only someone else’s daughter that he marries, what the hell? It’s not my problem” – or words to that effect.

          • Busy Mum

            What people ‘want’ to do is besides the point. Celibacy is quite attainable and you shouldn’t have such low expectations of people.

          • Guglielmo Marinaro

            I don’t dispute that celibacy is attainable for both heterosexual and homosexual people. It is, in fact, a perfectly valid option, provided that it is chosen entirely of a person’s free will, and not as the result of pressure from anyone else. I consider it absolutely improper to try to persuade people that they have a moral obligation to commit themselves to permanent celibacy, whether they like it or not, just because they are homosexual, i.e. sexually attracted to people of the same sex. They have no such obligation.

            Once again, you doubtless disagree, but even if you do, that makes no difference to my point that your assertion – “Nobody is saying that ‘gay people’ have to be celibate. ‘Gay people’ have never been forbidden from getting married to somebody of the opposite sex” – was not an appropriate rejoinder to Barry Guevara. Indeed, your reply, after some prevarication, to my question about whether you would be happy for a homosexual man to marry your daughter shows that you know perfectly well that it was not.

          • Busy Mum

            We have been approaching this the wrong way round. Celibacy is the natural state – marriage is the optional one.

          • Guglielmo Marinaro

            Well, that’s something that we are not going to agree on, but as before, it’s a diversion from my point.

          • Busy Mum

            We don’t need to discuss it – it’s a fact – everybody is born a virgin, and would die a virgin…..

          • Guglielmo Marinaro

            I suppose that that’s a harmless, if bizarre, fantasy, but it has nothing to do with this real world, in which real people actually live.

          • Busy Mum

            How is it a fantasy? It’s a fact.

          • Guglielmo Marinaro

            Certainly everyone is born a virgin, and IF everyone stayed a virgin, then everyone would die a virgin, but the second contingency is a purely hypothetical one. The fact that the human race is still inhabiting this planet is proof that it has not been fulfilled, so it can advisedly be described as a fantasy. It is, I suppose, logically possible that at some time in the future everyone who is born will remain a virgin, but there is a vast difference between a purely theoretical possibility and a realistic one.

          • unsubscribe

          • Busy Mum

            ??!!

    • shred

      If you really want to be born again and believe that a Palestinian buiding worker and possibly his mum, who God put in the family way, ascended to join the creator of quarks and gluons, then why not join a church in a parish where most of the congregation are gay and the vicar’s boyfriend is a gay Buddhist. Homosexuality has been common in the C of E for a long time.

    • DespiteBrexit

      “I was an evangelical Christian for just over a year until I saw sense.”.
      Based on what you say, I seriously that you were. You may have thought you were.

  • suemary

    Non Christians don’t just want to be able to do whatever they want free from any censure from Christianity they also want to dictate what Christians are allowed to believe and do

    • Barry Guevara

      You could equally say that, when it comes abortion, Christians want to dictate what other people are allowed to do with their bodies.

      • suemary

        It’s not just Christians who are anti-abortion

        • Barry Guevara

          Yes, I’m quite aware.

      • DespiteBrexit

        No, they want to dictate what people are allowed to do with SOMEONE ELSE’s body.

    • Groan

      Well I don’t really know about intellectual Atheists etc. But my observation is that most people have a sort of “parent/teenager” relationship with Christianity (in its broadest and simplest understanding). In that simultaneously with declaring they shouldn’t be “judged” and they have a “right” their non verbal communication indicates their embarrassment and petulance at being “caught” and often a disquiet in fact often “judging” themselves later . Much of the pursuit of Tim Farron looked rather like bullies enraged by the presence of someone who made them feel bad about themselves, by being “nice but dim”.

  • Sean Toddington

    I just can’t see the problem. If Farron had been up front about his beleifs, then he would never have been chosen to lead the Lib Dems. The media smelt blood and went for him. Politics is a tough game, but he paid the price for his own lack of candour.

    • PierrePendre

      Farron’s colleagues can’t have been unaware of his religiosity and his attitude to gay sex when they elected him. When Blair was questioned about his religious beliefs and his attitude to abortion, I think he said his opposition wouldn’t prevent him voting in favour of a social liberal objective. I’m not sure that his position – a familiar dilemma for politicians – would withstand rigorous ethical examination but not everyone can be Thomas More. Farron should have admitted at once that he thought gay sex was sinful and asked his challengers why he should not since it it is a traditional historical view regardless of religion. I don’t myself think it’s a sin but then I don’t take a religious view of sin. I don’t think it’s sinful for non-superstitious reasons.

      • Sean Toddington

        It was well known that he was an evangelical Christian, and I suppose it was inevitable that he would be skewered on something like this sooner or later. I guess that his colleagues were in such a state of disarray at the time of his selection they didn’t think that through. Quite amusing that Laura Perrins is writing about this as she is something of an expert herself in skewering Lib Dem leaders!

      • Little Black Censored

        Rees-Mogg dealt with this matter in an exemplary fashion.

        • Sean Toddington

          No question JRM has been very clear. How that would play out in the event of a leadership bid is an interesting question.

        • Barry Guevara

          Ress-Mogg was unambiguous, but whether his approach would have the support of the wider country may never be tested.

          • Groan

            He himself said that he didn’t believe it did. Being a democrat he would I’m sure wish to persuade them otherwise. And he might just do so! But the point was that he exercised the right to express his view as well as his assessment of how much support that view had in Parliament.

      • Nockian

        Blair has no principles, integrity or honesty. He seeks prestige and money ‘the precious, brings it to me nasty brexiteers’

  • Jethro Asquith

    There is no such thing as gay sex. The act is sodomy. The word sex is short for sexual intercourse – intercourse between the sexes. Sex requires both sexes, male and female (and there are only two – evolution does not need any others).

  • Tee2

    I was disappointed when Tim Farron put party politics and a desire for electoral success above his Christian faith. In these increasingly sceptical and Godless times he should have used his high profile position to champion the cause of Christians who are treated these days with, at best, a sneering indulgence and, at worst, open hostility. I’m glad he has finally voiced his regret for not having the courage of his convictions.
    I remember reading a long time ago that many Lib Dems were disturbed by Tim’s faith, Christianity is at variance with their liberal left narrative. A narrative echoed by most MSM and a majority of our elected representatives. For the current nonsense re gender reassignment and alternative sexualities to flourish it is essential the liberal elites to destroy Christianity. Of course they cannot simply ban it, that would expose them as bigger hypocrites than we already know them to be, they must maintain an illusory religious tolerance. Instead they chip away at it, forcing faith schools to push their trans/gay agenda, snide articles/reports seeking to discredit Christians. Victoria Derbyshire, for instance, recently ran a couple of stories regarding Jehovah’s Witnesses, the implication of which was that all Witnesses were guilty and/or complicit in some quite nasty stuff. This type of thing happens all the time in MSM, and so of course poor Timmy didn’t stand a chance with the entire lefty elite ready to lynch him. They hounded him, knowing what he really felt but was too afraid to say, and they were not going to give up. But it wasn’t Tim’s head they wanted on a platter, it was every Christian in the land.
    Perhaps the BBC and its ilk should recall a man two thousand years ago who urged us all to follow certain values which they purport to espouse, tolerance, forgiveness, loving your neighbour… Ring any bells?

  • AR Devine

    Homosexuality is both natural and has always been with us. However, it is Tim Farron’s right to believe what he wants and as long as he wasn’t trying to force his views on others or deprive gay people of their rights (he is pro gay rights) then he was being consistently liberal. Ironically, those who hounded him were not just deeply illiberal but are the type of people who accuse people of being ‘Islamophobes’ when you point out that Islam has a much more severe attitude towards gay people that includes widespread support for proscribing homosexuality and executing gay people. Christians like Tim Farron who wish no one any ill will are a much easier target.

    • Groan

      Same sex sex has probably always been with us, the current “Gay” is a specific cultural expression. Anyway totally agree about Farron. It seems to me pretty essential to our form of democracy that MPs will take in the views of their constituents, others they consider wise and their own beliefs and try to act in the best interest of the people of the “commonwealth” (I do love the fact some US “states” are still commonwealths). It is indeed profoundly illiberal to presume that people can’t have different beliefs , after all our democracy relies on the “losers” in an election living with (though voicing criticisms) the laws then brought in.
      Even more illiberal and downright dangerous is the idea that no one can have any understanding if they aren’t from a culture, or are a colour, or don’t have the right genitals or not the right age.

    • 39 Pontiac Dream

      I agree that Tim Farron, as a supposed Christian, was an easier target than say your average Muslim who is much more hard-line on homosexuality. However, I take umbridge with your statement ‘as long as he wasn’t trying to force his views on others or deprive gay people of their rights.’ What about those from the gay community who attacked the US woman, who would not give out marriage licenses to homosexuals because her religion would not permit her to? What about the cake shop in NI whose owners were targeted because they would not bake a cake with iced lettering supporting gay rights? What about the Christian b&b owners who were fined because they would not let a gay couple stay in their establishment? There are many gay groups which would silence the views of those who do not condone homosexuality (because of certain religious beliefs). Where’s the fairness? Where’s the equality?

      • JabbaPapa

        umbridge

        Been reading too much Harry Potter ?

        It’s — umbrage.

        • 39 Pontiac Dream

          I have. 🙂
          My apologies.

    • Tee2

      Homosexuality has, it is true, always been with us, but that does not mean it is natural. If it were natural then human’s would be designed entirely differently. As it is we are anatomically made to fit man to woman for the purposes of reproduction our sexual desire for the opposite sex (as in all animals) is founded in the instinctual imperative to perpetuate the species. Indeed the very things which attract us to the opposite sex are primitively geared towards selecting the most suitable partner to be our mate and co parent of our children. No matter how far removed from our forebears human’s believe they have evolved men mostly will be attracted to breasts (ideal for feeding babies) and child bearing hips. Women on the other hand mostly look for physically strong men who fulfil the hunter gatherer image.
      Anything which deviates from the basis of sexual desire, to make babies, is abnormal. It may not be fashionable to hold this viewpoint but it is true that homosexuality is a perversion. Having said that I do not believe that perversion should be punishable by law, consenting adults may indulge in whatever sexual practices take their fancy, and I do not think that anyone should be beaten up, abused or otherwise have their basic human rights compromised because they are homosexual. However, it is not natural, it is a sin and whilst as a Christian I tolerate sin in others (remembering that I too am an imperfect sinner) I will never say that homosexuality is anything other than an abberation.