Have UKIP suggested we allow Christians to oppose gay equality?

I read a pink news article that headlined ''UKIP wants to create 'conscience' law for Christians who oppose gay equality''

This is very very misleading. Now UKIP are a Libertarian party. Which is about freedom and choice. Meaning a pub could allow smokers in if they choose to.... another could say no smoking. A businessman could prefer British workers to non British workers etc etc. This is a consistent theme with UKIP.

First off there is no Christian manifesto. It was just a document given to Christian Churches on the specific things to do with Christianity UKIP propose.

Now within UKIP are some traditional elderly people..there are some strong devout Christians. They are uncomfortable about gay marriage. Now while the PC thing to do is call them bigots and hound them for their disgraceful homophobic attitudes, the reality is only 7 years ago we had Barrack Obama say this....Watch the first 8 seconds..

Now a lot has changed since then, however many Christians still feel the way Obama did in 2008. Many do believe marriage is between a man and a woman. They do not agree with gay marriage. Should that mean we outlaw gay marriage or go back to how it was before? No, of course not because that would be grossly unfair to gay people. You may not agree with gay marriage, but having the right to deny others to get married is totally not libertarian. And Christians in UKIP understand this.

However onto the actual point, should we hound Christians who believe gay marriage isn't right, or don't agree with it? No.  That's their individual choice, it's what they believe. Contrary to many people's opinions, a lot of these Christians do not hate or dislike gay people.

Now the problem comes where Christians are forced to comply with something they do not agree with. Refusing to serve or involve yourself with someone because he is gay is simply not acceptable, because that is truly unfair, and truly intolerant. 

However not wanting to be apart of a gay marriage ceremony after having worked in a field your whole life when the gay marriage law was rushed through, meaning Christians who had careers in fields in marriage now had to do things they weren't comfortable with or would be fired, it gives them protection so they wont lose their livelihood due to a law not fully ironed out.  

Stories like this http://metro.co.uk/2015/03/01/christian-worker-who-was-sacked-after-airing-views-on-gay-marriage-will-fight-dismissal-5084577/ the woman here would be given protection. Because this seems like hounding Christians. But of course within reasonable parameters. Reasonable is the key word here. You cannot get away with openly discrimination against gay people, and that is certainly not what it's about.

And what UKIP propose is to give these people leeway, so they can in the workplace say I'd rather not be involved with that or do that, and somebody else can......

Now this will effect very few people and cause a limited number of incidents. The majority of Christians probably have no real issue with gay marriage. I am a Christian I simply do not care, and I wouldn't have any objections to being involved in a gay wedding. I'm sure most Christians don't. But there are some who do, and they do not do so out of hatred but purely religious belief.  

We have two conflicting sides here. One thinks gay marriage is wrong and shouldn't be allowed, we should have civil unions, but marriage is between a man and a woman.

And the other suggests Christians should be forced to treat gay weddings like any other and not doing so is discrimination and breaks equality laws and they're bigots etc etc etc.

I see UKIP's proposal as the perfect solution. It obviously allows gay marriage and doesn't disrupt the progress made with gay rights, but it also caters for and respects the views and beliefs of devout Christians.

Suzanne Evans cleared this up on the BBC Asian network. There is no Christian manifesto. That's what the media labelled it, there was just a document which outlined UKIP's aims to help the Christian community who have felt let down by successive governments. 

I personally see Halal meat as barbaric. But we allow it under religious exemption, the same with Kosher meat. 

I personally don't like abortion and I'm glad it's in our laws that a Christian doctor can refuse to be involved with abortions if he chooses or thinks it's wrong, we cant force him to do it or fire him, he has the right with religious freedom to say I don't want to be apart of that.

And this proposal from UKIP for Christians similarly is a religious freedom issue as well as a libertarian choice. Within reasonable parameters obviously. 

There are a lot more gay people in UKIP than I imagined when I first joined the whole UKIP scene, I came across so many gay people, I was pretty surprised, and I would like to know their opinion on this. Also I would like to know Christians opinion on this, UKIP or not.

Have UKIP suggested we allow Christians to oppose gay equality?  Fiction

They have proposed a simple religious freedom tweek in the workplace which will allow Christians to be free not to be involved with a gay wedding if they so choose. 

Did UKIP Candidate BIll Walker refer to Gurkhas as parasites?

So today I came another smear story involving UKIP. The source appeared to be hope not hate, which is supposedly an anti-racism organization, However it's really more of an agenda driven hate group funded by far left unions and linked to Labour.

They appear quite desperate for any UKIP smear stories. This one is pretty bad though, even for their standards.

Here is their headline

So where is their evidence for this?

Apparently twitter which is odd as Bill Walker isn't on twitter. Nevertheless there was an account setup by some mischievous individual and here is the tweet from which they deduct the headline from

The account is in a conversation with Keith Parkins a very big supporter of the green party who tweets a hell of a lot, so may not be too quick to spot a spoof account.

The conversation tone is that Nepalese refer to these people as parasites, and they're in Aldershot with bad hygiene living a lifestyle that makes them miserable & helps nobody. For those unaware the Gurkha's staying here hasn't worked out too well. http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2835216/Joanna-Lumley-s-legacy-misery-fought-allow-retired-Gurkhas-Britain-heart-right-place-Five-years-say-s-backfired-terribly.html

The Bill Walker account tried to style out what was said to come across as a genuine account and like he'd been caught out making a bad comment. This makes me think it's a pretty sinister attempt to smear UKIP or particular Bill Walker, because they've deleted the account soon after this. Which would mean people cannot check out the account and see if it was a genuine one.

However if you look on Google Cache you can see the account had just 37 tweets, barely any followers and of the tweets it did make, several were clearly designed to make Bill Walker look like an idiot or a racist in some kind of way.

3 of the 37 tweets were retweeting Britain's First. For those who don't know, they're a far right group. 

Another two were also plain stupid, the BBC link, links to this http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-birmingham-32287545

There's also a link to a story claiming Hitler won the 2nd world war, and a few odd retweets

Then there's the convo with Keith Parkins. 

So of the 37 tweets, the majority were in some way designed to make Bill Walker look bad. 

So I figured out the origin of this also. Bill Walker has a fund me page http://www.crowdfunder.co.uk/billwalkerukip and they ask you to put in your facebook and twitter. Now he has a facebook but not a twitter. But he must have just put in billwalkeruk for the twitter also. Someone has seen his fundraising page and seen he hasn't got a twitter and made a twitter account with the sole intention of making him look like a racist or idiot or whatever at some point, hoping somebody would pick it up. And hope not hate ever obliging to smear UKIP with anything, eventually picked up on one of the tweets.

You can view all the twitter here on the google cache http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:8cdfHbKqLqgJ:https://twitter.com/billwalkeruk+&cd=1&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=uk

Also it's interesting, because Keith Parkins is a very big greens supporter, and you had some idiot claiming what he said proved UKIP are intolerant morons. Which beggars belief.

You can view that convo here. https://twitter.com/keithpp/status/587980321016131584

Here's Keith's twitter https://twitter.com/keithpp/with_replies You can see he appears to be a huge Russell Brand fan & Greens supporter and nothing to do with UKIP at all. Which he even confirms here.

 Most UKIP smear stories tend to originate like this. You get people reading a blog lying, or mistake someone nothing to do with UKIP as UKIP, and this narrative circulates, yet the truth is often a lot different. Even after Keith Parkins stating he's nothing to do with UKIP. Rosamund still kept associating him with UKIP. It's pretty bizarre.

Did UKIP Candidate BIll Walker refer to Gurkhas as parasites?

No. Fiction. 

A Greens supporter did, and a spoof setup account echoed it, leading to a hate group running a false headline for their 100th false smear story. 

EDIT - A lot of people in response to the smear story have blasted Bill Walker for insulting people who fought for our country, Bill Walker is a former soldier, he fought for our country, so before you insult him, make sure it's legitimate. 

EDIT 2 - It seems like Bill Walker did have a twitter awhile ago but deleted it after some controversy, and this gave somebody the chance to make it again which they did on April 10th, hence the tweets. I hope that explains it for everyone.  It's quite possible the person behind it is Joshua Bonehill who has done this kind of thing a few times now...but no confirmation on that.

Last Edit - Seems the google cache now shows something different, so the person must have made more tweets and followed more people just before he deleted the twitter.

When I originally saw it, here is how it looked - 

You can just about see 37 tweets. 

Here was the first one - 

So the first tweet was highlighting a UKIP woman Diane James saying on LBC, she admires Putin's love for Russia. Admiring Putin is obviously seen as a sketchy thing to do.

The next is a link to an express article claiming Hitler really won WW2...just 3 tweets later it starts to retweet Britain's first

Then looks to retweet race angles 

Followed by the screenshots I gave earlier. 

So the 37 tweets really cover praise for Putin, Somewhat bizarre remarks on Hitler, a retweet which speaks of a rude black girl, retweeting 3  times Britain's first & it's leader. 

It's not worth really arguing this case any longer, it's pretty clear how setup this is.  When Joshua Bonehill did make a site called UKIPvoice & a twitter pretending to be Alex Wood I think, he literally went on about blacks being apes or homosexuality being horrible, there was barely any normal talk at all, it was a very obvious troll, shockingly people fell for that too. And here is similar, the fact the person had the account for 25 days or so before HnH or someone picked it up is the only odd thing, so it seems more like somebody was using UKIP to try and highlight Keith Parkins & make him look bad, so this possibly is a local vendetta or troll. 

Make up your own mind, but it's definitely nothing to do with Bill Walker, whom I have on facebook and simply his posts are very dissimilar to the ones here. 

Here is a message from Bill Walker 

''The accusations made against me were false as you may have already read on FB. I will never have a twitter account again, it brought me grief twice and that was two times too many. I deactivated my account in early March and someone took the name and setup an account on April 10th then closed it again quickly after making the accusations etc that appeared on Hope not Hate. Thanks for writing to me to clarify things. Regards Bill''

UKIP is a 'Wasted' vote - Fact or Fiction?

                                                I suspected during the last so many days until the election the Tory media & Cameron would ramp up ''A vote for UKIP = ''Insert unwanted thing here''
 
                                                Today it officially started. Two Murdoch owned media outlets, Sky News and The Sun both ran similar stories.

                                                The Sun found a 'White Van Man' named Dan. And got the headline ''Don't waste votes on Ukip''

While Sky News found Kellie Maloney who said. ''Don't waste your vote on UKIP'' 

If anyone knows how journalists and the media work, they essentially ask you questions that give them the headline they want. They're very skilled at basically getting people to say what they want them to say.

Notice the use of 'Waste' by both? Clearly they've been asked a question which involved the word waste in some capacity thus their self created narrative is portrayed as other people's.

The online reporter of the Daily Mirror(@mikeysmith)said this on TV a week ago ''Yes I speak to Ed Miliband daily, I just got off the phone with him now in fact'' 

We can confidently presume David Cameron has the same level of contact with those at The Sun.

For those unaware, the Daily Mirror are heavily backing Labour. The Sun, it's chief rival newspaper...is backing The Sun...so it's like a war between the two biggest selling daily tabloids on who will win. It's not about people to them, or actual genuine politics, merely the egos of the owners of the newspapers who want to show who has more power and who can influence people the best.  Rupert Murdoch's The Sun have been backing the winner of the election every single time. A record they do not want to lose.

David Cameron has been saying ''A vote for UKIP is a vote for Miliband''

And more recently ''A vote for UKIP is a vote for the SNP/Labour''

As a chief election strategists revealed ''The most successful election tactic is making people fear the opposition'' That gets the most votes they have found. 

So you can see why he's uttering that rhetoric. I suspected the nearer we'd get to election day he'd ramp that up and also get his media to heavily support/echo it, and so it's proved today with the first of many days where you'll be 'informed' a vote for UKIP is 'wasted'

Is a vote for UKIP a wasted vote?

During this campaign the Tories and Labour have constantly kept issuing new promises, new deals, new anything they can to influence polls which haven't really moved too much for either of them. Their desperation is similar to their panic during the Scottish referendum election when a poll revealed for the first time Scottish people would vote yes to leave, and suddenly they ran to Scotland promising the world.

These people are reactionary's who don't really have solid principles... they just want your votes, therefore when UKIP grew, they realized they had to respond, and suddenly we've seen the Tories continually copy UKIP policies and try to appeal to UKIP voters.

We've seen Ed Miliband and Labour reveal they got immigration wildly wrong, and admitted they let far too many people in.

None of these two party's would have done any of this without UKIP polling high and UKIP votes increasing, this alone shows it's a complete myth that a vote for UKIP is wasted.

Now the actual stories themselves?

The first from The Sun is hilarious. It's now been proven that the party working class people vote for the most is UKIP.  So why didn't they interview a white van man voting UKIP?  Why didn't they interview one of the majority who are tired of Labour/Conservative lies?

The Kellie Malonie story is a little sad, but essentially we have a quite troubled person(if anyone saw this person on big brother, you'd know) and this person wants media time, they want to be in the headlines again, they want publicity for their transgender cause, and here you have a journalist who's obviously fished out a story and got Kellie Malonie to say exactly what they wanted her to say..and thus present it how they did.

The whole thing stinks and precisely shows why I personally never used to vote until UKIP came along. It's one big smokes and mirrors from agenda driven people looking to fool the public into their own egocentric ideals rather than let people decide to vote for what is best for them and what they actually support.

We listen for years on how ''It's good for democracy'' That we have more than two parties challenging for votes or seats, yet then when election time does come, they do their best to tell you a vote for a party that's not one of these two is 'Wasted'  Doesn't make sense at all does it?

In recent days a few Tory members have been tweeting that ''Nigel Farage told UKIP voters to vote Tory in seats UKIP cant win'' Linking to a Telegraph(Known by many as the Torygraph) article which attributed quotes to Farage saying ''I hope people use their vote wisely''  In fact Farage was calling on others to vote UKIP in close seats, the complete opposite of their claim. 

His logic being many Labour & Conservative lifelong voters tell him they like UKIP's policies, but they're loyal to one of the other, so essentially his point was the higher UKIP representatives in parliament the more likely you'll get UKIP friendly policies in someway or another.

Rand Paul recently said ''Misinformation is a great tool in politics''  And thus why so many in politics constantly throw out misinformation. As long as on polling day they get your vote, they don't care that they lied to you. 

Hopefully a lot of people can read this and see through the deceit, because you're going to be getting similar stories again and again, from the same publications more than likely as well.

UKIP is a wasted vote - Fiction. 

The irony is -  I have spoken to many people who think a vote for Labour or Conservatives is a wasted vote. Not much between them, rarely anything changes, both have a huge history of expenses scandals, pedophilia & broken promises.