Open letter to David Cameron MP

An open letter to David Cameron MP

As Prime Minister you have a responsibility to both serve and lead our country. Britain has been led by the teaching of Christ in the past and when Britain has followed the teaching of Christ and the whole law of God, Britain has prospered. You and previous Governments have tried to move Britain further and further away from the law of God and teaching of Christ and we are paying the penalty.

I urge you to turn from your wicked aims back to the law of God – the whole law of God. (1)

I have been reminded in recent weeks of parts of Gods law you may have forgotten:

• Do not... curse the ruler of your people (2)
• Do not give any of your children to be sacrificed (3)
• Do not lie with a man as one lies with a woman (3)
• No-one is to approach any close relative to have sexual relations (3)
• All these things were done by the people who lived in the land before you, and the land became defiled. And if you defile the land, it will vomit you out (3)

Blessings and curses (4) are offered up to every nation.

Blessings of prosperity: safety; peace; fear driven away; terrorists removed; victory in our battles; population growth; the blessing of God

Curses of terror; disease; blindness; lifelessness; our enemies will benefit from our hard work; our enemies will defeat us; those who hate us will rule over us; we will flee even when no-one is chasing us. But God calls on us to repent/to turn from wickedness to Him. If we do this the curses will be removed and the blessings given, if we do not, the curses get worse!

Are these blessings and curses relevant to us in Britain? We once were a prosperous and peaceful nation – when we followed God’s law. As we have turned from God’s law we have experienced the loss of blessing and the beginning of the curse. Terror and diseases are haunting many in Britain. Our enemies are prospering while we work long and hard. We are being defeated by our enemies in the battlefield. You as leaders show us on a daily basis that you hate us! You encourage us as society to be afraid of terrorism even though for the vast majority of us, there is NO danger!

The actions of your government and previous governments and our actions in following you have brought our nation under a curse. This is evident most clearly in the loss of our prosperity and the fear of terrorism that has possessed us.

By choosing a course of liberalism you have ignored a key set of warnings:

Everything is permissible – but not everything is beneficial.

Everything is permissible – but not everything is constructive. (5)

Under God’s law I am guilty. In recent months I have cursed you for the wicked laws you have passed. I ask your forgiveness and I choose to turn away from wickedness. I choose to pray for you and your government to turn from wickedness and do what is right.

I urge you to turn away from wickedness and repeal wicked laws.

Abortion

Each year 200,000 children are sacrificed in the UK for the cause of liberalism. Britain has slaughtered Seven million children since abortion was made legal in 1968. We have made the Nazi’s look incompetents in the way our country has succeeded in killing innocents over such a sustained period.

Abortion is utterly incompatible with human right to life. From the moment of conception a new human life is formed – completely independent of the mother.

Why are these children killed? Your government’s statistics make for cold, heartless reading. (6) Rarely because the mother would die during birth.

Let me be clear: we as a country have failed these women; the fathers of the children killed have failed these women. Instead of providing them the support and encouragement they needed, we have turned our backs on them. We need to offer support and offer encouragement to all pregnant women. All life is precious. I have friends who suffer from the same disabilities used as justification for abortion. The lives of my friends and many others (remember the Paralympics in 2012!) prove that disability can be overcome and great things can be achieved by ALL people.

It is said as an argument for abortion that by legalising it we protect women. Would we say this about any other crime? Shall we make child molesting legal to protect older men and women? Shall we make rape legal to protect men? Shall we make murder legal to protect the murderers?

I urge you to repeal the abortion laws with the exception of where it is certain a mother would die giving birth. Let us as a country provide support to any women who feel trapped, isolated, abandoned or afraid.

Men and Women should be challenged to commit to each other before having sex; should be advised the consequence of sex is to have children; that sex is not and has never been simply for pleasure – that it has an awesome responsibility in creating children; that children are wonderful and it is a blessing to have them. We as society should provide support to every Mother and every Father.

Unlawful Sexual Relations

Your Government and previous Governments has set itself against this country and against God by seeking to encourage dangerous sexual acts.

You have lied to the British people deceiving them into thinking there is such a thing as “safe sex.” The reality is there is only a very limited situation where sex is safe and even then it is a responsibility as sex is the means by which children are created. Reading through Leviticus 18 I am horrified at how far you and Governments before you have twisted the law in recent decades. We still follow much of Leviticus 18 in our marriage laws: the assumption being that men and women will abstain from sex until they are married!

Yet you want to redefine marriage, to reduce its value and destroy its purpose. Marriage is a commitment between a man and women WHO ARE LEGALLY ENTITLED TO MARRY! There are many examples given in Leviticus of people who are NOT allowed to marry: Family members; close relatives. We are told NOT to have sex with both a mother and a daughter. Not to marry our wifes sister while our wife is alive. We are told not to commit adultery with our neighbour’s wife.

And finally, men are told not to have sex with other men and we are not to have sex with animals.

Our society has despised and belittled these laws for too long and we are reaping the consequences. Sexually transmitted diseases and infections are crippling many in society. The more we lie to people about “safe sex” the worse the situation gets! (7)

From 2002 to 2011 the following increases in sexually transmitted disease were recorded in England alone:

• Chlamydia: a 135% increase in recorded infections! 1.3 million people infected with Chlamydia in nine years!
• Herpes: an 81% increase in recorded infections! 225 thousand people infected with Herpes in nine years!
• Syphilis: an 87% increase! 26 thousand people infected in nine years.
• Anogenital Warts: only a 21% increase but 714 thousand people infected over nine years!

Millions of people in the UK are at risk of sexually transmitted diseases because you keep lying to them and telling them sex is safe. Sex is only safe between a man and woman in a long term committed and faithful relationship. Marriage is understood by the whole of society to provide a clear boundary for protecting relationships.

Yet you lie to our children, you lie to us as adults, you want to destroy the boundary of marriage which protects sexual relations between a man and a woman.

Instead of spending millions on redefining marriage I urge you to spend millions on replacing current sex education to include recommendation on abstinence from sex until you are married. This will have the result over the next ten years of dramatically reducing the numbers of sexually transmitted diseases our NHS is struggling to treat. This will be a massive saving for the economy and will have a dramatic effect on the health of the nation.

I urge you to withdraw the Marriage (Same Sex Couples) Bill. You have no mandate to change the definitions of marriage.

In the last general election I voted Conservative. I have been a floating voter my whole life, having voted Liberal; Labour and Conservative over the years previously. I assert that Government exists at the will of the people and to serve the people. I did not give you a mandate at the last general election to redefine marriage. I guarantee that if you continue to dictate to this country what we should believe about marriage I will fight against the Conservative Party at all future elections.

Yours sincerely

Mark Anderson Smith BSc MBCS

(1) James 2 v10

(2) Exodus 22 v28

(3) Leviticus 18

(4) Leviticus 26

(5) 1 Corinthians 10 v23

(6) https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/127785/Commentary1.pdf.pdf

(7) http://www.hpa.org.uk/web/HPAweb&Page&HPAwebAutoListName/Page/1201094610372

Everything you knew about climate change may be wrong...

Came across a couple of articles on climate change this week.

The first one is interesting: Harrison H. Schmitt and William Happer: In Defense of Carbon Dioxide. As a quick read this played to my scepticism of media who blinkeredly tell us carbon dioxide is the main cause of global warming. Lifecycles of the sun or oceans are rarely factored in despite having a massive impact on the environment.

A quick Google search reveals the contrary view. I read both articles and now what should I think? The contrary view is the mainstream view yet I still see no real arguments - nothing that admits our solar system and planetary environment is complex.

So, onto Allan Savory: How to fight desertification and reverse climate change



On its own, the Wall Street Journal article is just a point of view, but placed together with a well researched analysis by Allan Savory and I find evidence that takes into account the complexity of our environment.

The humility of Allan Savory is immediately compelling. For him to admit he got it wrong big time is an amazing confession and then to devote his life to finding out why is inspiring!

There is no greed evident here. No Big Oil conspiracy. Simply an honest and practical attempt to resolve one of the biggest problems our world faces: desertification.

Who is Phil Plait? Reading his bio on Slate.com he claims "He is a skeptic and fights the abuse of science, but his true love is praising the wonders of real science." Admirable and yet he comes across as arrogant and I have yet to meet an arrogant person I can trust.

Here are some questions for Phil Plait and anyone else who professes to love "real science":

If billions of hectares of land could be transformed and recovered - how much carbon dioxide would be taken out of the atmosphere?

If the majority of desertified land could be reclaimed and turned back to green - how would this impact global warming?

If desertification could be reversed - would the increase in carbon dioxide and one percent increase in global temperature matter?

An open letter to Gregg McClymont MP

Dear Gregg,

I am writing this as an open email to be published on my blog: http://my100goals.blogspot.com

I understand you will have another opportunity to discuss and vote on the Marriage (Same Sex Couples) Bill next week.

I ask you to vote on my behalf against this bill.

Understanding that every person has their own point of view and right to have a say in this matter, I also urge you to vote for the following amendment to the bill: New Clause 9 which calls for a referendum on the redefinition of marriage. (http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/bills/cbill/2012-2013/0126/amend/pbc1261203a.953-959.html)

I have reviewed some of the other amendments which have been proposed and am horrified to read in one a plan to repeal the Marriage Act 1949: http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/bills/cbill/2012-2013/0126/amend/pbc1262603a.1109-1111.html

While I recognise that Marriage legislation has changed some of the definitions of Marriage from a legal perspective over the last century, for the Government to repeal the Marriage Act of 1949 in its entirety without any public consultation or forewarning is a despicable act.

As you will be aware, the Labour party have no mandate to redefine marriage in any way. None of the electorate was informed of these plans prior to the election. The Government has no mandate to redefine the meaning of 24 million marriages.

We the people have a right to decide whether changes should be made to this vital institution. Marriage does not belong to the Government.

The Government ignored half a million legitimate responses to the consultation which stated opposition to the policy. This clearly demonstrates the consultation was a sham.

Why are supporters of the redefinition of marriage afraid of a public referendum? Why was redefining marriage not mentioned in the Queen’s speech? Why is the Government unwilling to publicise their intentions to redefine marriage?

It is deeply concerning that MPs are attempting to change the concept of marriage in such an underhand way.

Have you informed the people of Cumbernauld, Kilsyth and Kirkintilloch East of how you have voted previously to redefine marriage?

Will you be advising people through your newsletter or on your website of how you have voted and plan to vote?

Again, I ask you to vote against this bill on my behalf and for what I believe is a majority of the electorate.

Yours sincerely

Mark Smith

The Kindness of Strangers

Last month I stepped outside my comfort zone and stood at the entrance of our local Asda handing out leaflets and talking to strangers.

Why does anyone ever choose to hand out leaflets to strangers? Often it is for a good cause, in this case: Bethlehem: House of Bread

Set up by a couple in our church, Bethlehem was their response to increasing poverty in Cumbernauld. Bethlehem is a food bank. Up to fifty families a week now benefit and over 1,300 food parcels have been given out since Bethlehem was started in September 2011.

Bethlehem is run volunteers who also contribute to the food bank. The concept is delightfully simple: buy a few extra items in our weekly shop - whatever we can afford; then bring those extra groceries each week. Those who can afford to donate money which buys more groceries. Then, each week, the food bank is opened up and parcels distributed to whoever comes along.

I cannot say I was supportive at the start. I thought it was a great idea. I was delighted this was happening. I bought groceries - though infrequently. But I don't feel I really supported the project. I often live my life in a rush and it was too easy to forget to buy something extra each week.

Until Asda made an offer...

We could man their entrance and hand out leaflets and give people an opportunity to contribute... With groceries...

Thousands of people shop in our big supermarkets every day, more at weekends. If each person donated one packet of pasta or rice or tin of stew, we could feed a hundred families! I decided I needed to be willing to do more.

So, for two hours one bitterly cold Saturday I, along with a couple of dozen other volunteers over the course of the day, handed out leaflets and gave the community a chance to contribute to help the poorest

It was much as you would expect. Some were interested and chatted; some were in a rush; some happily took the leaflets while others did not. I've run my own gauntlets of leaflet distributors and steered well clear so fully understand the reluctance to engage.

Yet many hundreds of people listened or read the leaflets and understood the very simple message: we are all in this together!

Standing there, watching women carry out a shopping bag that they had asked to be kept separate so they could drop it in a trolley; men carefully lower a heavy bag so it didn't crush the groceries underneath; families give up some of their weekly shop so that others would not go hungry, it was a humbling experience.

There are a lot of generous people in the world. People who told us they had been in similar need themselves in the last few years. People who don't have much themselves but know there are others worse off than they. People who have plenty and are glad to share.

By the end of that Saturday, over ten shopping trolleys were filled with essentials that have since been distributed to families who needed that generosity.

Families who are strangers to me and to the hundreds who gave that Saturday in Asda Cumbernauld.

A huge thank you to Asda Cumbernauld and to the people of Cumbernauld who showed (and I've no doubt are still showing) such kindness and generosity!

Just another Easter

Last day of school before the kids break up for Easter. My seven year old was allowed to take a DVD in with her - the teacher asked if any of the children had an Easter DVD. Half the class must have answered: Hop.

Hop must have as much to do with Easter as Santa Claus does with Christmas.

I sent her in with The Chronicles Of Narnia - The Lion, The Witch And The Wardrobe. Now there is an Easter story:

The creator of all things returns to find a world enslaved by an evil force. A human male turns traitor against the creator, choosing to value greed and power above all other things. Despite this treasonous act, the creator agrees to allow himself to be exchanged for the traitor and offers himself as a willing sacrifice.

The traitor, now forgiven, is set free.

The creator is horribly and brutally killed.

All hope seems lost until... the body of the creator disappears.

Two human girls search for the body and then meet the creator - magically and miraculously brought back to life: a willing sacrifice who shed his blood could not be kept dead!

The creator then leads an army to set free others who have been enslaved and ultimately conquer the evil force.

This weekend I choose to celebrate Jesus Christ: a willing sacrifice in my place; punished for my sin; killed but death unable to hold onto him; returned to life and power and awesome glory.

I'll be interested to see what film my daughter watched today. The Chronicles Of Narnia - The Lion, The Witch And The Wardrobe is not a Universal certificate: Parental Guidance advised.

What does Easter mean to you?

Beware of the Leopard

The Hitchhiker’s Guide to the Galaxy might have this to say about the Scottish Government’s consultation on Marriage and Civil Partnership (Scotland) Bill:

The Scottish Government will claim the Scottish people have had ample time to read the draft bill and sixteen (count them) annexes. This will have been of no use to the millions of Scots who were never informed there even was a consultation.

The Scottish Government will claim the draft bill was freely available and could be printed out. This will have been worthless to the 29% of Scots (Digital Participation in Scotland: A Review of the Evidence) who do not have personal Internet use. That is almost one third of adults in Scotland who have been disenfranchised from taking part in the debate on Marriage and Civil Partnership.

The percentage goes up dramatically when you look at lack of Internet access for the elderly and the poorest in Scotland: 52% and 42% respectively.

Over the last month I’ve helped almost two dozen people respond to the consultation on Marriage and Civil Partnership (Scotland) Bill. These were a wide range of people, some professional working people, others unemployed; many are intelligent but a few had learning difficulties and one had aspergers syndrome making it hard for that individual to concentrate. They were a wide age range as well: from early twenties to seventies. Every single person struggled as I had to understand the complexities behind each of the eighteen questions posed.

The few people who actually had access to a computer and the free week to read through the bill, the annexes, the associated research and other materials and who did not commit suicide during that process may have shared some of the conclusions my friends shared with me and want to ask these questions:

• Why is the Scottish Government discriminating against the elderly?
• Why is the Scottish Government discriminating against those with learning disabilities?
• Why is the Scottish Government discriminating against the poor?

I sat with a young man who has aspergers as he tried to respond to the consultation. I believe his views on the consultation are as valid as those of any MSP; any journalist; any activist from Stonewall. He is intelligent, able to form reasoned arguments and has an opinion. Yet he found the consultation questions and statements to be deliberately and frustratingly confusing.

Not having aspergers myself I found myself no more able to understand the reasoning or so called justification the Scottish Government are using to propose this bill.

Several of my friends are retired. Together we helped one woman who has never used a computer in her life to respond to some of the questions. Without our help she would not even have been able to open the link to begin her response.

The Government bill aims to redefine a core aspect of society; will impact every single person in Scotland and will place hundreds of thousands of people in direct conflict with the Government.

So why is the Government not holding a referendum? Why is it that every single person in Scotland is not being given the opportunity to vote on whether this bill should be made law?

Is it because the Scottish Government knows (as the UK Government also knows) that the vast majority of people are opposed to redefining the meaning of marriage?

I would love to end with a snappy one-liner, perhaps be thankful the Scottish Government did not paste their draft bill to the underside of a filing cabinet, in a disused lavatory, with a sign on the door saying ‘Beware of the Leopard,’ but Douglas Adams said it first.

Time to balance the books

I only caught a few soundbites from today's UK Budget speech but that was enough to confirm neither David Cameron or his Chancellor George Osborne has any real interest in budgeting.

I was talking with colleagues today about data. Some people, managers especially, like a quick an easy summary. Did we meet our targets? How are we performing against our key measures?

Others (some managers included) like as much raw data as they can get their hands on. I'm a data guy. I like the quick and easy summaries but I don't trust them unless I can see the raw data and the calculations used to provide them.

So, I spent my lunch hour doing some quick and dirty analysis of my own.

[Warning: reading any further may cause you to distrust your Government!]

Figures taken from the BBC

"George Osborne says the deficit as a share of GDP will fall from 7.4% in 2013-14"

I don't like GDP. I've never understood it or why it is used. But, hey, every day is a learning day...

"Theoretically, GDP can be viewed in three different ways:
● The production approach sums the “value-added” at each stage of production, where value-added is defined as total sales less the value of intermediate inputs into the production process. For example, flour would be an intermediate input and bread the final product; or an architect’s services would be an intermediate input and the building the final product.
● The expenditure approach adds up the value of purchases made by final users—for example, the consumption of food, televisions, and medical services by households; the investments in machinery by companies; and the purchases of goods and services by the government and foreigners.
● The income approach sums the incomes generated by production—for example, the compensation employees receive and the operating surplus of companies (roughly sales less costs)."
Source: http://www.imf.org/external/pubs/ft/fandd/basics/gdp.htm

Did that make sense? Our UK Government uses all three GDP approaches and some complicated formulas to balance them.

I interpret GDP as follows:
Production: I provide work and services to my employers worth £48,811 a year
Expenditure: My total expenses are £23,613 a year
Income: My total income is £20,000 a year

My GDP can either be calculated as a balance of those three figures or as one of them. (By the way, any thoughts on the dicrepancy between production and income...?)

UK GDP is £1,540 Billion!

Now contrast that with the estimated income for the UK in 2013/14: £631 Billion

Our production capability is far greater than the income our Government can expect to receive. But who cares right, after all, we are capable of producing £48,811 (to go back to my income analogy), so what does it matter if we borrow £3,613?

I've done this myself, borrowed money to pay for College and University courses. Borrowed to buy a car so I could go to work. All in the expectation that I would be able to earn more in future years and pay off my debts.

And that is where my respect for politicians takes a nose dive. They know we will not be earning any more for years to come, some quite reasonably warn growth will be stalled for a decade.

In today's budget Chancellor George Osborne plans to borrow £121 Billion this coming year, and £120 Billion next year.

This money is not being spent on our future. It will not better equip Britain to generate more income, it is simply maintaining a status quo.

I started to have some respect for GDP but I've lost it:

	Deficit
Deficit as % of GDP	7.40%
Deficit as % of Budget expense	15.30%
Deficit as % of income available!	18.10%

George wants you to look at the deficit in relation to GDP. It is a nice low figure. Seven percent, not too scary. The reality is that we need to look at the deficit in relation to planned expense and expected income!

18%! That is a huge amount of money to plan to borrow when there is no reasonable prospect of paying it back. Why are we borrowing this money? I don't know. Do you?

The Government appear to be saying that if we don't spend what they are planning, our economy will go into meltdown; unemployment will soar and we'll all regret it.

I believe this is a lie.

What the Government are not telling us is what they are actually spending the money on, not in the detail that would allow us to decide whether or not we actually want that money spent.

The BBC were asking last week for our suggestions for the Budget. Eighteeen percent of planned expenditure is a lot of money to cut from the economy but the reality is many households have had to cut that or worse over the last few years - and they have managed to do so!

We need a real debate in the UK about every penny Government spends. I'm sure there are a lot of ways we could cut eighteen percent from the budget without shedding a single job. There would be losers but shouldn't it be us that decide? Is the UK a democracy or a dictatorship?

Just in case you're still awake after reading that, here's some more analysis...

Population of UK: 63 Million
Adult population: 48 Million
Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demography_of_the_United_Kingdom

If we as adult citizens were to be required to pay for our national debt (£1,155 Billion) it would require £24,062.50 per person. That is today. Our Government plans to add to that figure £2,400 each year for the forseeable future.

By the time my seven year old daughter reaches 18 (just over ten years now) and is able to work, her share of the debt could be as high as £48,000.

I am not willing to let my Government continue to store up debt for my children. Something has to change.

It is time to balance the books.