You forget that his beliefs *are* illiberal. Accepting them within LibDems gives ammo to homophobes, who can say:->
Neither. Has. Farron. He's spoken very positively about LGBT rights & dignity.
-
-
If so, I would retract my objections (irrespective of his actual beliefs). However, his views on sinful homosexuality are clear to everyone.
-
So he must go. However much he believes in LGBT rights & liberalism. Well, its the libdems loss.
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
But I don't think we'll agree so better leave it. We're just stating the same points increasingly vehemently.
-
I still think liberalism is defined best by people subordinating private beliefs to universal human rights.
-
I agree with you. The key word here is "private". If you air your views, then they are political statements (if you are a political leader)
-
How much harder do you think he could have tried not to do that? What more do you think he could have done?
-
I don't blame him. He got ambushed. However, having let people understand that he thinks gay sex is a sin, his position became untenable.
-
(For me, at least). A politician is there to achieve goals for people. Saying that *undermined* gay acceptance.
-
Don't misunderstand me. If all Christians were like Farron, the world would be a better place. Also, I still voted for his party.
-
So let's put this in perspective. These are the super high standard fit for leaders.
End of conversation
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.