In favour of the conditional



And often in such a closely fought race, she believes, the desire not to let the other side triumph often proves the strongest motivating factor: “It’s not what you’re voting for, it’s what you’re voting against.”  “The longest walk – Election battleground: Enniskillen”

That phrase caught my eye in a long article on the BBC news website.  One in a series of articles looking at “swing” constituencies across the UK in our upcoming General Election.

“It’s not what you’re voting for, it’s what you’re voting against.”

There is something very profound in those few words.  Something of our sophisticated, educated and cosmopolitan nature.  Us homo-sapiens – the top predator – the species above all species.  Evolved or created – either way we run the show.  And mostly we vote against rather than for.



Evolved or created?  Rather than “does it really matter” the debate rages still.  Debate that votes against and thinks it is voting for.

“For” … what exactly?

Perhaps the title of “biblical correctness” – the spiritual high-ground in a war of words in votes against rather than for.

If you are not with me you are against me.  I come not to …. but to …  All those correct words that are defended to the death.  Keeping my your belief pure.  Keeping your my impure (incorrect) beliefs out.  Voting against you rather than for Love.



For if we actually voted for Love (i.e. the definition of Love being “unconditional”) then we would not need (or desire) to vote against quite so much.  If we actually voted for Love – then being “correct” would be irrelevant.

And that is because being correct is really – REALLY – easy.



I simply say that I am correct and you are not – and I am then correct (and you are not).  Job done!

Yet I have not voted for Love – I have voted against Love.  That is irrelevant to Love. That has nothing to do with Love.  That is not Love.

Being right – being correct – is inward looking – is inward rewarding – is insular and static.  And THAT is not Love at all.

I am right.  You are wrong.  You must join me for I cannot and will not join you.  You must change because I am right and you are wrong.  The bible says so.  The same bible you are reading.  Just you’re reading it wrong.  Whereas my reading is right.  Which makes me correct. 

And that is why love is not enough – that is why love will never be enough.

Love never makes decisions of right and wrong.  Or at least when it does it is always the wrong decision because it is always incorrect.  Always means I have to put down the bible and just Love.  There is no future in that.  It’s not even correct.  The bible says so.  And the bible is God.  Whereas Love is just wishy-washy intentions and no rules.

And every time we vote against Love (in defence of being right and correct) – and that has nothing to do with Love.



Coming towards Christmas the decorations are going up, the retail feeding frenzy is underway, the carols and party classics are everywhere … A Love-Fest as best we know is happening.  And the voters-against will have none of it.

It is a heathen hijacking.  It is biblically incorrect.  We must all go to church and pray and ask forgiveness.  We must reach out to those not yet saved so they may be saved and know Love as we know Love.

We – who have re-defined love to be “conditional”  A created-Creator conditional definition that extracts unconditional in favour of the conditional.

Because then we all know where we are and who we should love and how we should love and when we should love AND when we don’t need to.  And we justify that by voting against Love – and for (biblically correct) conditions.

And we call that Love ???

My dilemma is that Love is not that (even the bible says so).

And I have never understood why we vote against Love and for selective conditions.

Maybe because we NEED this to be correct … 



Happy Christmas-countdown.


2 thoughts on “In favour of the conditional

  1. I’ve heard that phrase before and found, more often than not, it is spouted by those who either don’t have an agenda, or know the agenda they have would not be popular. I’m sure it was used by the Pharisees when they tried putting down Jesus’ teachings.

    Liked by 1 person

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.