Aside from that I have to wonder what this smart girl meant by "allowing" the older generation to lead the way? What is she suggesting anyway - a coup to supplant older party leaders with vibrant and violently fanatical youth? This is revealing of the fundy respect for democratic process! This sort of talk reminds me of the part in “Keeping Mum” where the prospect of a coup in the church’s Flower Arranging Committee rears its ugly head. Equally ridiculous, many CDA and ACDP supporters were champing at the bit to start placing laws to outlaw homosexuality, divorce and freedom of religion as soon as they swept that annoying little line separating church and state out of Parliament. I can imagine their disappointment. After all, these fanatics are clearly intent on using democracy to come to power - in effect using democracy as a means to end itself - a pawn to replace democracy with theonomy. What is to come? Will we see friend Colin and his ageing colleagues supplanted by younger, more enthusiastic (and more militant) fundamentalist leaders? What's a little bloodless coup between friends? Then again, what's a bloody coup between adversaries? Nothing, as long as you get to be the one to rewrite the history books afterwards. Hmm. Perhaps nice uncle Colin should be watching his back.
As for me, I need more assurance than "Vote for our party, because we have a pretty cross in our logo and because God says so" to choose which party I will support. Do they address my concerns? How do they do so? Do they make good on their promises? And do they make sense? Or do they sound like a bunch of stale recycled old religious fascists who frown on diversity, spit on gaiety and stomp on opposition? For real-world problems, they need to offer me real-world solutions - and they had better put their money where their pie-holes are - and if it happens to be pink - or at least rainbow colored, then so much the better.