Alice Miles
Win Sky+HD for a year and a trip to Barcelona
The Church of England's argument about the consecration of women bishops reminds me of nothing so much as the Labour Party's debate over Clause Four. That, too, was marked by obscure references to past conferences; to articles and sub-clauses of previous resolutions.
This is no coincidence - there always was a religious tint to the Labour Party. As the historian Ben Pimlott wrote of Labour's creation: “The Socialist Commonwealth was more than merely analogous to the Second Coming: in the imagination of speakers and audiences there was a blurring and a merging of the two.”
That blurring thrives today. In many families and areas of the country, “being Labour” is not a political position, but a faith. They might not actually be called Articles of Religion, but that is what the articles of Labour's constitution were.
It became immediately obvious when somebody (Tony Blair) challenged it, that Clause Four of the constitution was an anachronism. So too was it apparent, as the bishops cited obscure religious clauses this week, that refusing female access to the higher reaches of a Church that claims to represent England in the 21st century, is an outdated, discriminatory (and illegal, I would have thought) practice. No matter what the doctrine says.
Just because it was obvious doesn't mean that it was easy to change. So the Church and the Archbishop of Canterbury deserve a resounding cheer this morning, for facing down resignation threats from the traditionalists, and for refusing to sit on the fence and compromise over women bishops. The proposal for “super-bishops” to cater for traditionalist parishes who object to a woman was rightly rejected as still discriminatory.
I suspect that, as Rabbi Jonathan Romain wrote of his own experiences in a letter to The Times yesterday, we shall look back in a few years' time and wonder what all the fuss was about; just as most people reading Labour's old Clause IV (4) today would laugh that it retained such a place at the heart of a party aspiring to power - it was printed on every Labour membership card - in Britain in the late 1990s.
David Cameron has yet to experience a Clause Four moment. In part, this is his party's fault, not his: Tory members lack the religiosity of Labour's and it is harder for their leader to find sacred cows to slay. For all their opinionated harshness, Conservatives will bend easily to win power (except on Europe, where he has not challenged them).
Yet Mr Cameron feels that he has decontaminated sufficiently the Conservative brand by talking about compassion and green issues for a while that it is now safe for him to show his hard Tory core. So this week he excoriated the poor, the fat, the drug-addicted, the poorly educated, the drunk and the indebted as feckless, irresponsible, “twisted” - as no less than immoral. He nastily elided those whom it is easy to condemn - the drunk or addicted, the healthy but workshy - with the poor: “We talk about people being ‘at risk of obesity' instead of talking about people who eat too much and take too little exercise. We talk about people being at risk of poverty, or social exclusion: it's as if these things - obesity, alcohol abuse, drug addiction - are purely external events like a plague or bad weather.”
Compassionate? That? How dare this man with every chance in life from the start, tell an overweight and pregnant teenager with little literacy, whose own mother is an illiterate drunk who never gave a damn about her education or her physical welfare, and whose only chance in life are the teachers, social workers and benefits staff trying to help her - how dare this man tell that woman she doesn't deserve that help?
Do not tell me that is not what Mr Cameron meant. His language could not have been starker. Indeed he acknowledged himself that it is impossible to find the words to say it sensitively. Enough of understanding, time now to judge.
Give me your tired, your poor,
Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free,
The wretched refuse of your teeming shore.
Send these, the homeless, tempest-tost to me
- and I will tell them it is all their fault.
Beware the politician who reaches for religious phraseology. It is “our mission”, Mr Cameron said, “to heal the wounds”.
“We can and will bring hope and aspiration to places where there is resignation and despair.” Where there is darkness, let there be light. “I want the strength of our commitment to inspire faith.”
It sounded like Mr Blair but it was far more condemnatory than he would ever have been. Hell, it was more condemnatory than Michael Portillo or Peter Lilley in their most ill-judged moments.
The speech was embraced by the Tory evangelical Tim Montgomerie, editor of the ConservativeHome.com blog, who linked it with a church view of poverty - something that can be defeated by morality, and has been worsened by the “liberal Left's social experiments”. Christian conservatism comes to the UK.
And like the Conservatism that the country so roundly rejected in 1997, it doesn't include, it excludes. The exclusion zone of Mr Cameron's uncompassionate Conservatism is wide. It encompasses not only the lazy and the drunk, but a vast array of other miscreants - the fat, the poor, the poorly educated, people with broken marriages behind them, the products of those relationships.
In my life I have been neither a Tory nor a regular churchgoer. I have no more desire to be a Conservative minister than to be a minister of God. Funny, though, that just as the Church of England drags itself into the 21st century and offers to include me fully, a Conservative Party that wants to represent Britain in the 21st century firmly slams the door. Because you're not perfect enough. You're not in our gang.

Alice Miles has been with The Times since 1999. She began as a Parliamentary Sketch writer before becoming a columnist, writing mainly on politics and national issues such as education and health. She won Columnist of the Year in 2007.
Explore your passion for food with the delights of Thai, Indian & Chinese cooking
In our new series, Tony Hawks takes a dry, wry look at modern life - junk mail, interminable meetings and snooty sales assistants
Read the training tips and advice that helped our London Triathletes
Read our exclusive 100 Years of Fleming and Bond interactive timeline, packed with original Times articles and reviews
The latest travel news plus the best hotels and gadgets for business travellers
Shortcuts to help you find sections and articles
2007
£30,000
2006
£14,337
2008
£39,937
Great car insurance deals online
c.£75,000
GlosFirstmeansbusiness
Gloucestershire
£32,795 - £41,545
Universitry of Southampton
Southampton
£
£32,795 - £41,545
Universitry of Southampton
Southampton
Competitive Package
Npower
West Midlands
1 & 2 Bed apartments
From £249,995
Great Investment, River Views
Great Dubai Investment Opportunities
from £89,950
low-cost ownership homes in London
Las Vegas SALE!
£POA
With Ramblers Worldwide Holidays!
£POA
List your property with two leading travel websites
£POA
Great travel insurance deals online
Contact our advertising team for advertising and sponsorship in Times Online, The Times and The Sunday Times. Globrix Property Search - find property for sale and rent in the UK. Milkround Job Search - for graduate careers in the UK. Visit our classified services and find jobs, used cars, property or holidays. Use our dating service, read our births, marriages and deaths announcements, or place your advertisement.
Copyright 2008 Times Newspapers Ltd.
This service is provided on Times Newspapers' standard Terms and Conditions. Please read our Privacy Policy.To inquire about a licence to reproduce material from Times Online, The Times or The Sunday Times, click here.This website is published by a member of the News International Group. News International Limited, 1 Virginia St, London E98 1XY, is the holding company for the News International group and is registered in England No 81701. VAT number GB 243 8054 69.
It is very difficult to totally eradicate OT/NT references from ones speech. But it is also extremely offensive for Christianity to assume a person can't distinguish between moral and immoral acts without the influence of the Bible or scripture.
Andrew Milner, Karuizawa, Japan
Pathetic! It's one thing to quote from Lazarus' moving sonnet but another to use it to ridicule the pronouncements of a politician realistic enough to admit that the root of the many problems afflicting developed societies (despite the abundant opportunities found there) is essentially a moral one.
SD Goh, PJ, Malaysia
"how dare this man tell that woman that she doesn't deserve help?" Er, that's not what he said. He said that it was up to her to choose to accept help, to choose to try. I view that as supporting her dignity. Better than saying that the woman is a helpless victim incapable of making any real choice.
Rowan, Oxford,
Alice,
having been by far the best columnist in the paper for the last 3 - 4 months this piece really does you no credit. Knee-jerk reaction tosh.
Bill, Truro,
We the Muslims in UK are suffering because we do not have special courts for us. For instance, divorce are difficult in the British law and takes years while by the Islamic law it is very easy. We can not make relations out of marriage and we can not get marride because the delay of divorce.
Mohammed, London, UK
Even if what David Cameron said was true, being drenched in privilege from birth means he's not very well qualified to say it. Nowadays an increasingly better educated electorate are well able to see this dichotomy juxtaposed with the hypocrisy and immorality of our own politician's lifestyles.
David Curtis, London, UK
Grow up Alice, a society without an understanding of right and
wrong won't survive, but be taken over by something worse.
The 7th century christian church in North Africa became
liberal not knowing what it believed, islam came in, church
dissapeared. Yet the Greek orthodox church survived islam
Amanda, Exeter, England
I had begun to hope that self-righteous scribblers who, as a means of berating Conservative philosophy,wilfully ignore the obvious difference between self-reliance and selfishness, had finally been banished from fhe pages of at least the more thoughtful papers,but evidently not.Just ignore her.
Andrew Johnson, London SW16,
Here comes the left, biting at the Tories when they actually suggest that the wasters of this country should actually take responsibility. Why? Becaues the Tories want to help people help themselves. Labour want to keep them poor, on benefits, so they vote labour.
David, Cambridge,
This article is a good example of intolerance and lack of thought. What David C said was sensible and measured; Alice Miles should get out more.
Len, St. Andrews, Scotland
All Cameron was saying was that people are able to choose a lifestyle & if that lifestyle turns out to be damaging, then some personal responsibility applies. Society is not fully to blame. Life chances DO differ but each person has a responsibility to make choices that will improve their situation
Donna Walker, Effingham, England
"How dare this man with every chance in life from the start... tell this woman that she doesn't need any help?" Would it have been OK if someone poor said it?
Background doesn't determine what someone dares to say, that is called freedom of speech. Why does being rich justify silencing Cameron?
Ben, Hitchin, Herts,
I'm surprised that Camoron didn't also have a go at smokers who inflict cancer and heart disease on themselves. Think of the money for middle classs tax cuts if the NHS refused to treat these people. Or perhaps there would be a reaction led by the Press if we left people like us to die.
Heath, Odiham, england
This is all rather reminiscent of Bridget Jones at the Law Society Dinner in "The Edge of Reason"
Mike Fowle, Felixstowe, UK
Taking responsibility for your actions is a fundamental part of democracy and freedom - this is what Cameron is saying, and what the freedom-hating socialist PC brigade running the country fears.
Peter, London,
Good point and well made. Regardless of whether you agree with Cameron's stance that we should take more personal responsibility for our actions politicians shouldn't be going around espousing moral rhetoric and telling for us who is good and who is bad it's just not their place
Hamish, London,
There is no poverty in Britain. This cannot be said often enough no matter how much it angers the welfare lobby (good easy jobs for soft degrees there). Our 'poorest of the poor' have standards of living better than surgeons in the third world.
Eric Skelton, Cardiff, Wales
This typical feminine view lies at the root of so many of the problems of our pitifully emasculated society. We need the firm - even sometimes harsh and apparently uncaring - masculine drive to keep people responsible, self-disciplined and constructive. Life is not all soft options.
Bernard, Norwich, UK
An indian friend of mine got angry on hearing how bad life was for the underclass in Britain. She said they get a home, enough to eat, tcan educate themselves to degree level. She said if you want to see real child poverty go to the streets of India not a tower block in London.
Andy, uk,
"how dare this man tell that woman she doesn't deserve that help? "
He's not saying that. He's saying that if she hadn't been overweight and pregnant, and her mother a drunk, she wouldn't need so much help, which after all has to be paid for by the rest of us.
Alex Swanson, Milton Keynes, UK
Opinionated harshness? It doesn't seem like David Cameron is quite in Alice Miles's league yet.
Miles should give him lessons.
Christopher Chantrill, Seattle, USA
You're not responsibie for the circumstances you are born with or the things that are thrust on you.
But you are responsible for what you say and do.
As for Cameron's comments he seems to saying take responsibilitty for your actions or inactions as the case may be!
John Goode, Welwyn Garden City, UK
Nonsense. Love and personal responsibility are two sides of the same coin. Treating people as responsible adults is not "excluding" them, it is empowering them.
NBeale, London, England
Leave the church alone! It's OK the way it is, let women's libbers and the homosexuals start their own church. their lust and ego will destroy the church of england as we know and love it.
kit, seattle, usa
Yes, I don't quite see how Cameron's "chide a chubby" speech squares with "hug a hoodie".
Craig Strachan, Los Angeles, USA
Here is the characteristically toxic 'compassion' of the left. No, let's not talk about the real behavioral problems of the dysfunctional. Let's blame them instead on Tory voters. And let's wrap ourselves in smarmy self-righteousness at the same time. Who cares the damage we do?
Malcolm, Medina, TN, USA
It is about taking responsibility for yourself and should be commended. For too long we have tried to find excuses to explain social problems, which has exacerbated situation. Society should offer support but not a free ride.
Edward, Geelong, Australia
This is just stupid - get out into the real world. Of course external events and luck play a part in one's situation in life, but please don't try and say that 99% of the fat people I see are deprived, or that most of the crowd outside the social security wouldn't improve their chances with a wash.
Peter, Cambridge,