Member of Parliament who opposes “Sunday” Sports (No. 2) Bill
I wrote to Mr Robert MacLennan, M.P., for Caithness and Sutherland at the beginning of January, informing him that I was strongly opposed to the above Bill for obtaining Horse Racing and certain Betting rights on the Lord’s Day. I informed him that all members of the Free Presbyterian Church of Scotland in Caithness and Sutherland were of this mind, as the Bill was promoting the violation of the law of God.
I received the following letter from Mr MacLennan:
House of Commons
11th January 1988
Dear Mr Sinclair,
Thank you very much for your letter of 6th January, about the second Reading of the Sunday Sports (No. 2) Bill, on 29th January.
It is my firm intention to seek to preserve the Sabbath in the future as I have in the past, by voting against any measure before Parliament with the purpose you describe.
I appreciate your having taken the trouble to write me about this matter.
With kind regards,
Robert MacLennan.
I think Mr MacLennan’s letter is indeed encouraging in a day when so many throughout our nation are completely indifferent to bringing this matter of opposition to the transgression of the Law of God (which is sin) before our Government.
(Rev.) Robert R. Sinclair
Abortion (Amendment) Bill
Mr Alton’s Bill to amend the Abortion Act by reducing the number of weeks of pregnancy in which an abortion can be performed received 296
votes in favour against 251 votes opposed to it. The Bill goes to its Committee stage during which it may be slightly amended. The Bill, if eventually passed, will only have a slight effect on the large number of abortions practised each year on grounds other than those warranted by Scripture. However, it would be a step in the right direction and is welcomed as such. Mr Alton is a Roman Catholic and may also entertain those views of the Roman Catholic Church on abortion which are not biblical.
Princess Royal’s Comment on Aids
Addressing a Conference of Health Ministers from 150 countries, the Princess Royal referred to Aids as “a self-inflicted wound.” This comment raised a storm of protest even although the Princess Royal went on to say that the real tragedy is the innocent victims, people who have been infected unknowingly, perhaps as the result of a blood transfusion. How clear it is from such protests as these that men, faced with the consequences of their own evil conduct, refuse to accept the guilt of their sin. The Terence Higgins Trust, an Aids charity, said that “Aids is the result of a virus and is no one’s fault,” while another Aids organisation spokesman said: “We reject as divisive and discriminating the Princess Royal’s categorisation of some people with Aids as ‘innocent victims’ which implies that others are guilty and deserving of their illness.”