What would Jehovah say?

Written By: - Date published: 3:39 pm, January 20th, 2009 - 39 comments
Categories: uncategorized - Tags:

Reports from Hawkes’ Bay confirm that the Exclusive Brethren broke its rule against voting to ensure a National/ACT victory last year.

The Exclusive Brethren regards the last of us ‘worldly’ types as sinful heathens destined for hell, so they try to avoid us by living in compounds, running their own schools, and not participating in activities such as voting. It seems, however, that not all heathens are created equal. They would rather have a government run by a bunch of right-wing heathens than left-wing ones. The Exclusive Brethren has put a lot of money into supporting right-wing election campaigns in various countries. Why do they love the Right so? Being ultra-conservative bigots they find a natural home there, of course, but there is also a financial interest – a National government will increase State subsidation for their schools, while Labour imposed a cost by requiring that kids be taught by registered teachers rather than religiously-correct amateurs. 

In 2005, the EB secretly worked with National to run a parallel campaign (which was the subject of Nicky Hager’s Hollow Men, caused Don Brash’s resignation, and gave rise to the Electoral Finance Act). Of course, even a million dollars of secret support was not enough to get National into power in 2005. So, this time the EB’s leader, the Elect Vessel, visited New Zealand before the election and, it seems, gave the order that church members break their own principles and vote National. EB members were seen voting in several Hawkes’ Bay locations (HB is an EB stronghold for some reason).

Nothing wrong with that, of course. I would encourage all people to vote (although, I might encourage the EB to first join us in the post-Enlightenment world). But it is interesting to see the lengths National’s extreme religious supporters were willing to go to get them into power. I wonder what they will get from Key’s government in repayment.

[lprent: added a missing ‘not’]

39 comments on “What would Jehovah say? ”

  • Comments are now closed

  1. Tigger 1
    20 January 2009 at 4:04 pm

    National will run the same PR campaign with religions as the Bush government did in the US. Bush appeared pro-Jesus but in reality was anything but… National are doing the same thing – they’re not actually a religious lot but have and will PR themselves as pro-faith (Key saying he’s happy to see religious organisations like Ian Grant’s running family based programmes for example).

    Hey, now that Key is back has he made any comments about Israel?

  2. ropata 2
    20 January 2009 at 4:04 pm

    No doubt the EB were tired of Labour’s antipathy and scapegoating. The electorate obviously were not swayed by your silly rhetoric this time around.

  3. Ray 3
    20 January 2009 at 4:17 pm

    I doubt that the EB will even get as much as the unions got from Labour
    They cost them the 05 election

  4. @ work 4
    20 January 2009 at 4:34 pm

    They also have a powerful spot light above thier school in Johnsonvile that points right down the road and makes it very dangerous driving past at night.

  5. coge 5
    20 January 2009 at 4:38 pm

    Steve, do you know if any of the other churches backed Labour? Would you have a problem with that or just turn the other cheek? This anti EB stance seems rather evangelical, in your dismissal of their doctrine.

    [who said I have a problem with the EB backing National? It’s their right and my right to draw attention to it and any quid pro quo they get in return. I do dismiss their religious doctrine as bigoted nonsense as do you, unless you are EB, in which case I doubt commenting on blogs falls under the permitted uses of computers. Don’t see how my stance could be seen as evangelical, though. Perhaps a dictionary is is order? SP]

  6. the sprout 6
    20 January 2009 at 4:52 pm

    sp
    I agree with your predictions on how National will present itself to the religious right, which is not of course all the religious groups.

    It does seem odd that the EB decided to vote considering their offical renunciation of wordly activities like voting. I mean, if the telephone is evil, voting must be off the scale. So they must have had a pretty poweful motivation to risk damnation for the sake of electing a man with Jewish ancestry.

    “[EB spent] a million dollars”

    I heard it was a LOT more than that in reality.

  7. ieuan 7
    20 January 2009 at 4:59 pm

    Did just the EB men vote or were the woman also allowed to vote?

  8. coge 8
    20 January 2009 at 5:08 pm

    So Steve. What exactly is your doctrine?

    I don’t know much about the EB’s, but I do know they are entitled to their beliefs. Thankfully we live in a free country.

  9. the sprout 9
    20 January 2009 at 5:11 pm

    coge,
    being entitled to your beliefs isn’t the same as immunity from those beliefs being questioned.
    and faux-liberal as you may be, you might even admit that some beliefs are more questionable than others.

  10. coge 10
    20 January 2009 at 5:19 pm

    The sprout, the same could be said about many religions. We are all equally entitled to our beliefs. Please don’t tell me you disagree with this. Legislating against thought would not be popular among your fellow Kiwis.

  11. Felix 11
    20 January 2009 at 6:11 pm

    some beliefs are more questionable than others.

    Possibly, but I can’t see how the EB’s particular brand of mumbo jumbo bullshit is any more or less questionable than the beliefs of the catholics, baptists, mormons, muslims or any of the other freakish cults which we (as a society) pretend are reasonable.

  12. QoT 12
    20 January 2009 at 6:28 pm

    I don’t think anyone’s saying the EB don’t have the right to vote, or openly fund political campaigns.

    What you can say is that people who claim to be Above Worldly Things and then break their own religious doctrine in order to get better tax breaks are hypocritical wankers.

  13. Peter Burns 13
    20 January 2009 at 6:52 pm

    “Above Worldly Things”

    Is that why Miss Clark was never charged for her criminality?

  14. Ma 14
    20 January 2009 at 6:56 pm

    they also bend their own rules in running their businesses (telephones, computers dealing with the ‘public etc). Money first.
    I grew up in Hastings and went to school with many of them at Hastings Girls’ High. My mother worked for some pre-children. She said the teenage ones always seemed to know the tune and words of the latest songs and the older ones would happily have conversations with her when the others weren’t around.

    On the otherside tho’ I have heard of a EB owned business that sold tractors up Dargaville way that was told by the company supplying a certain brand of tractor to them that they had to stop ripping out the stereos before on-selling to customers otherwise they would lose the right to sell their tractors.

  15. Scribe 15
    20 January 2009 at 6:57 pm

    Reports from Hawkes'[sic] Bay confirm that the Exclusive Brethren broke its rule against voting to ensure a National/ACT victory last year.

    Which reports are those, Steve? Can you link to them or direct us where to find them?

    Being ultra-conservative bigots they find a natural home there, of course

    You’re all class, Steve. Don’t worry, Labour might get back in power by about 2017.

    So, this time the EB’s leader, the Elect Vessel, visited New Zealand before the election and, it seems, gave the order that church members break their own principles and vote National. EB members were seen voting in several Hawkes'[sic] Bay locations (HB is an EB stronghold for some reason).

    Seen by whom?

    I wonder what they will get from Key’s government in repayment.

    Probably not as much as they’d like. As some have said, National’s MPs are not exactly religious conservatives. I’m sure the EB — and others — would like to see the civil union and prostitution reform legislation repealed, for example. That won’t happen.

  16. Max Call 16
    20 January 2009 at 6:59 pm

    Most of them as individuals are nice enough but as a group are scary

  17. higherstandard 17
    20 January 2009 at 7:07 pm

    “Most of them as individuals are nice enough but as a group are scary”

    Sounds like parliament !

  18. Rex Widerstrom 18
    20 January 2009 at 8:31 pm

    Being ultra-conservative bigots they find a natural home there, of course,

    Oh, I thought for a minute you were referring to Hawkes Bay, and was about to point out their Messiah’s Second Coming had occured in Wanganui 😀

    And tsk, Steve, surely you’re familiar with the dangers of saying ‘Jehovah’.

  19. Steve Pierson 19
    20 January 2009 at 8:49 pm

    scribe. if i tell you my sources every time you ask i won’t have sources any more

  20. Pascal's bookie 20
    20 January 2009 at 9:23 pm

    Rex;
    They think Michael Laws is the Messiah? That really is nuts.

  21. Phil 21
    20 January 2009 at 10:10 pm

    They also have a powerful spot light above thier school in Johnsonvile that points right down the road and makes it very dangerous driving past at night

    Which one’s that?
    Can’t say I’ve ever had a problem like that driving in J’ville…

  22. Felix 22
    20 January 2009 at 10:24 pm

    Maybe it’s not a spotlight…

  23. dave 23
    20 January 2009 at 10:56 pm

    Scribe. if i tell you my sources every time you ask i won’t have sources any more
    Steve, reports are not sources. They are reports.Which is what scribe asked. If there are no reports you should not have said “Reports from Hawkes’ Bay”. Sources don’t ” report”.

  24. Pascal's bookie 24
    20 January 2009 at 11:08 pm

    “Sources don’t ‘ report’.”

    googling “a source reported” tells me otherwise.

  25. the sprout 25
    20 January 2009 at 11:27 pm

    “Maybe it’s not a spotlight ”

    yeah that’ll be the Burning Eye Of God searing into your soul. often feels a bit like sun strike.

  26. Piggy Muldoon 26
    21 January 2009 at 3:42 am

    coge January 20, 2009 at 5:08 pm

    “So Steve. What exactly is your doctrine?

    I don’t know much about the EB’s, but I do know they are entitled to their beliefs. Thankfully we live in a free country.”

    Yes its a real free country coge .Thats why the EB try to sue ex members who speak out .

    http://peebs.net/Community/viewtopic.php?f=33&t=2638

    http://peebs.net/Community/viewforum.php?f=33

    The EB is a real intelligent cause to put forward for thoughts of freedoms .EBism and freedoms really go together dont they.Like sweet peas of the same pod .

    Some folks even freely end up in suicide too http://peebs.net/In_Memoriam/ .

    Yes we really need these types of freedoms .We need more cults like this in this country splitting families and controlling kids with antidepressants etc http://peebs.net/Community/viewtopic.php?f=33&t=2065 .

    Great stuff ! .

    Steve what the # ?# are you really blogging against mate ??.Come on mate freedoms we want ! actually how about some religious anarchy .

  27. Grumpy 27
    21 January 2009 at 9:03 am

    Better a few EB nutters voting for National than the radical Jihadists voting for Labour.

    All parties have their nutter fringe. If enough EBs voted for National, they might even set up their own division – a bit like Labour’s “Rainbow” group.

  28. gingercrush 28
    21 January 2009 at 9:05 am

    But the radical Jihadists wouldn’t vote for Labour.

  29. Felix 29
    21 January 2009 at 9:44 am

    …radical Jihadists voting for Labour.

    Yeah, bloody liberals.

  30. Tigger 30
    21 January 2009 at 10:02 am

    Hey, that’s my extended family you’re talking about!

    Yes, radical jihadists are likely to be socially conservative ergo most likely to vote National… So THAT’S how Key got into Parliament, it was the militant Arab vote!

  31. Chris G 31
    21 January 2009 at 12:30 pm

    Jeepers, coges gettin all high and mighty about the freedom in this country, defending the freedom of nutters. refer: EB

    Hopefully you’ll welcome the next Hamas immigrants with open arms Mr Freedom. Maybe even spare a room?

    *Hat tip*

    –

    And yeah I hardly think radical jihadists who also ensure that women are covered up, stoned/raped for out of marriage relationships etc would vote Labour. Nice one Grumpy.

  32. @ work 32
    21 January 2009 at 1:13 pm

    Phil
    January 20, 2009 at 10:10 pm
    They also have a powerful spot light above thier school in Johnsonvile that points right down the road and makes it very dangerous driving past at night

    Which one’s that?
    Can’t say I’ve ever had a problem like that driving in J’ville

    Driving along Fraser Ave away from Jville, fairly darn bright, at the top of the pole beside the front gate with the 3 security cameras hanging off it.

  33. coge 33
    21 January 2009 at 2:47 pm

    This attitude to other peoples beliefs is really where the left need to reinvent themselves quicksmart.
    People are entitled to their beliefs, just as others are entitled to disagree with them. So everyone beating up on one religious group or another, what is the alternative? Thought legislation? Re-education camps? Not the Kiwi way.

    And it’s not a spotlight on Fraser ave, it’s the mother ship come to pick up the faithful.

  34. Chris G 34
    21 January 2009 at 4:21 pm

    Like I said coge. I trust you’ll welcome the next Hamas immigrants with open arms of this freedom you preach.

    Or let a bunch of anarchists move in next door to you. They of course, believe in anarchism.

  35. lprent 35
    21 January 2009 at 4:25 pm

    coge: I think that the point of the post was that some (all?) Exclusive Brethren got heavily involved in dirty politics in 2005.

    Those dodgy addresses on anonymous leaflets were electorally very dirty. There have also been persistent assertions on the left that they were heavily involved in push-polling in provincial seats (that I tend to believe – too many places and too many people).

    They did this despite a stance that said that they would not vote.

    This time it appears that they have just done what most of us do, not done dirty political tactics, and just voted. That is good.

    Now we just need to get the young to vote with ballots rather than their feet and maybe our voting percentage of the population will go up.

    The left tend to ‘believe’ that people should follow the intent of electoral law. Now about those massive anonymous donations that NACT was doing prior to 2007. I find them deeply disturbing because of the whiff of corruption. Perhaps that explains why they pushed the legislation through under urgency in December – payoffs?

  36. grumpy 36
    21 January 2009 at 4:30 pm

    Yeah Gingercrush, Tigger etc, I can’t figure it out either. All those Labour types on the pro Hamas marches and they stone women, gays etc. etc.

    As you say, there is not a lot in common – or is there? Seems the “left” have suddenly become very “right”. The sight of Minto in full support of Hamas is certainly confusing.

    Perhaps the real liberals now are the Nats (not the EBs of course).

  37. mickysavage 37
    21 January 2009 at 4:49 pm

    Grumpy

    The left were on the anti killing of innocent women and children marches. Support for Hamas or their world view had nothing at all to do with it.

    I have tried to reconcile the pro and anti Israeli/Palestinian positions and I think I have come up with some formulas that explain the basic thinking processes of the right and left.

    The right think that the reasoning goes like this:
    Right: Israel = United States = good
    Palestine = Soviet Union = bad

    Therefore anything goes and what International Treaty?

    The left reasoning is a great deal more sophisticated and variations include the following:
    Feelings for Palestine = original inhabitants 89% of their land without cause dignity through continuous ill treatment = significant sympathy

    Feelings for Israel = considerable amount of sympathy for treatment of jews during WW2 opposition for continued land annexation opposition for sealing off borders opposition for subjecting civilian population to continuous terror = little sympathy left

    And also, Israeli deaths/Israeli population <<<>>> Hamas pop gun missile attacks.

    It is no wonder that discussion has been fruitless and views irreconcilable.

  38. Felix 38
    21 January 2009 at 5:09 pm

    Guess what grumpy?

    I don’t want people to be stoned for being gay or a whore or whatever.

    I also don’t want them run over by tanks.

    Read that over and over slowly. When you hear the angels singing hallelujah, you’re nearing humanity.

  39. Piggy Muldoon 39
    26 January 2009 at 3:03 am

    coge
    January 21, 2009 at 2:47 pm

    “This attitude to other peoples beliefs is really where the left need to reinvent themselves quicksmart.
    People are entitled to their beliefs, just as others are entitled to disagree with them. So everyone beating up on one religious group or another, what is the alternative? Thought legislation? Re-education camps? Not the Kiwi way.”

    Hear hear !! coge ….I have a belief in daylight robbery and shonky business deals purchasing white elephants ,i agree im entitled to me beliefs and people can disagree with me all they like but it wont help them while im getting away with it.
    Im thinking of extending my belief to include bank robberies and slavery of children ,its just not the kiwi way to have thought legislation or re-education camps on any of these matters really is it .

    We kiwis could learn a lot from these EB couldnt we coge with regards to matters of freedoms .

    I mean the EB have freedoms to claim tax rebates for public meeting rooms ,which they even have the freedoms in place for banning certain types of public people they dislike from entering.Great freedom that coge a real beauty pearlar in fact ! the general public freely is involved in helping fund what they dont even have the right of using ,being that the EB are such a selective exclusive bunch of chosen gods people.Separating from all evil worldly folk ,that is unless its is about receiving tax rebates that these nasty worldly folk are quite happy to help with.Real we win but they lose freedom that should never be questioned im glad you agree ,because as you say it just would not be the kiwi way would it.

    The EB are full of freedoms im sure you agree coge. Their women are FREE to choose how many children they wish to have, just as long as they dont partake in the use of any contraceptives and must always do what they are told by the men folk .Their women are FREE to dress and look however they wish ,as long as they always wear scarfs dont cut their hair including shaving legs etc.
    EB members are free as little wee birdies freedom abounds everywhere they are FREE to do what ever they wish ,just as long as they .
    1, they do not have anything to do with any family members withdrawn from by the church.
    2,they have FREEDOMS to have as many friends as they wish,just as long as they do not make friends outside the cult …opps !! church.
    3,they may choose when they wish to go to church,just as long as it is 7days a week including all day sunday.
    4,They have total FREEDOMS with housing as long as the house does not have a common wall with a worldly neighbor and the sewers pipes must not be contaminated by joining to worldly neighbors before it reaches the roadside.
    5,Members have FREEDOMS to go where ever they wish in this world as long as they dont go to any public dances , picture theaters ,hotels ,motels ,arts gallerys,etc etc etc etc etc !!.
    6,FREEDOMS to anything ,as long as it does not include radios ,record players ,computers not purchased through Bruce Hales the eb boss ,family holidays ,celebrating family weddings or birthdays to specially ,men must not wear shorts ,pets are frowned upon ,recreational fishing is a sport and so should be avoided,and + the many many other things which are all total full of FREEDOMS of course!, as long as they are not frowned upon or totally banned .

    Yes when thinking of the EB and discussing matters of freedoms etc ,i agree coge these eb folk are the prize examples of FREEDOMS and because they have such total respect for matters of freedoms we should totally respect their freedom as well.

    Some things are just spiritual arent they under no circumstances! should we ever question the beliefs of people ,i mean if a persons belief happens to be child molestation or rape for god ,who are we to be questioning .

    Its just not the kiwi way now is it ! coge.