Rejecting the premise

I reject the premise of that question

So often have we heard this answer from our Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern.

When she says she rejects the premise, what exactly is it she is rejecting.

A premise is a statement in an argument that provides reason or support for the conclusion. There can be one or many premises in a single argument.

So, when questioned by the opposition in Parliament, is the Prime Minister correct in rejecting the premise of a question?

Rhetorically, yes.

If the premise is false, any answer which implicitly accepts the premise will be tainted by it.

 Conversely, a response which explicitly rejects the premise, still gives a kind of credence to it, as it implies that the question is worth responding to.

Let me give you an example

Question: When did you stop beating your wife?

Answer: I have never beaten my wife in the whole time we have been married.

Question: So, you admit beating her before you were married?

After five years in government Jacinda Ardern has become very proficient at batting away questions she doesn’t want to answer in this manner.

Former Prime Minister John Key was a great practitioner of changing a narrative but was able to satisfy the question at hand.

We the people of New Zealand elect others on trust to public office, to point the country in a direction which satisfies the majority, to be fiscally prudent, to keep us safe, and to ensure we have a decent quality of life.

For over a century these people have been bestowed titles such as the Right honourable Mike Bain because being a member of the house of representatives was an honourable position.

Alas this is not the case today when we watch the actions of these honourable people in the main ring of the parliamentary private school yard, controlled by the right honourable chief bully Trevor Mallard.

Let’s go back to the question or the premise of the question.

Any question asked, doesn’t matter who asks it, deserves an answer, and shouldn’t be dismissed or batted away.

Now, its fair to say we all know Jacinda Ardern has a different perception of the meaning of truth, but I am concerned about others who are just as aspirational as she is, to occupy the Prime Ministers office on the ninth floor of the Beehive.

Enter the frame, Christopher Luxon.

Crowned as the leader of the National Party, doing ok in his personal rankings in the polls, party going well without too much drama until events in the USA drew attention back to his claim, he is a Christian.

Luke 6.44 says Each tree is recognized by its own fruit. 

In an earlier podcast I challenged Luxon’s claim of Christianity following his watered-down statements the week following, claiming he had not been to church for five years or so.

I said at the time if Luxon is going to wear the Christian T Shirt he must have the courage to walk the walk.

The Roe v Wade fall out has drawn attention to New Zealand’s liberal laws on abortion.

Luxon was quick to point out, if National were to hold power they would not relitigate the laws as they had only just been passed and would rather work on the issues such as our dying economy.

AS a Christian I was a little disappointed but knowing the mood of the country I was satisfied with his response,

Enter MP Simon O’Connor and social media.

Since then, Luxon has scrambled and deflected so many questions to restate his original stance on Abortion, which he continues to refuse to do, and this one issue has raised many flags for Luxon regarding the future.

We often compare people to trees in this country, e.g., the mighty Totara, because when one falls its impact is felt.

Luxon is by no means regarded as a mighty Totara tree whose roots are deeply grounded in the earth, but Luxon’s Christian roots look poisoned by desperation and populist politics.

It was like Luxon forgot or was embarrassed that he along with half his caucus voted against the abortion Act of 2020.

WE, all of us driven by desire, but that desire is also grounded in the belief of who we are as a person.

For Christopher Luxon, his claim he is a Christian, this is where his roots are grounded, when someone makes the claim, they have a deep burning desire to serve God, other people hold you to a higher account.

Could it be that Christopher Luxon by his action is now refuting the premise of his own claim?

Yes. I was a Christian, but no longer an active one. No longer on the team,

Bit like being a former All Black, you have “the Jersey,” but not the desire to front up to the opposition these days.

An interesting point to note.

Much has been made in the past of the beliefs of both Ardern and Luxon.

Ardern brought up and grounded in the beliefs of the Church of The Latter-Day Saints which she rejected and Luxon claiming today to be a Christian.

Ardern’s fruits are well documented, but the bible warns us that many will come professing his name.

Stay on the watch my friends, stay on the watch,

We as a nation are becoming desperate to rid ourselves of the evil that has control of this country.

Stay on the watch and be vigilant, be discerning

Matthew 7 :15 “Watch out for false prophets. They come to you in sheep’s clothing, but inwardly they are ferocious wolves.