 |
| |
|
|
Dracon II
|
 |
Communist Party of Apolyton
Jan 1970
time: 15:34
|
|
Kevin Rudd has begun a push for expressing Christian values in the Australian Labor Party, but not simply moral/sexual values, but a Christian social message. He describes himself as a "Christian Socialist". A good documentary done for the ABC about this subject was shown last week. Here's the transcript: http://www.abc.net.au/compass/s1362997.htm
From:
http://www.onlineopinion.com.au/view.asp?article=2879
quote:
Historically, Australians have maintained a healthy separation between church and state. In the 1890s, our founding fathers debated whether or not the federation should have any established religion. They wisely decided, having observed the European precedents, that we should not.
Constitutional separation aside, Australians have always maintained a healthy scepticism about politicians, of whichever persuasion, invoking God, the church or the Bible as their temporal authority.
Instead we have evolved in this country a healthy political culture in which political ideas and policy proposals are debated primarily in secular terms.
America is somewhat different on this score. Despite the formal separation of church and state devised by Thomas Jefferson, some American politicians have tended to wear religion on their sleeves in a way that does not sit comfortably with most Australians.
The none-too-subtle subtext in certain parts of the American political system is that the proclamation of personal religious faith of itself is a qualification for public political office.
Advertisement
Recently, however, something appears to be changing in the way in which the Australian political Right in this country is now dealing with a significant section of organised Christianity: Peter Costello's very public pre-election appearance at Hillsong, the largest Pentecostal church in this country; a Liberal MP launching his election campaign in Perth, with John Howard present, publicly declaring that people should vote for Howard on the basis that he was a Christian; and now a Prime Minister using this year's end of session valedictory address in Parliament publicly to extol the superiority of Christianity itself.
To this should be added the Coalition's national preference deal with Family First at the last election. Family First, established by the former national director of the Assemblies of God, together with other AOG leaders, allocated preferences to the Coalition in 102 of 104 House of Representatives electorates that it contested. This national preference decision by Family First resulted in bringing about Coalition wins in four and perhaps more critical marginal seats.
Is there anything inherently wrong with the leaders of a religious denomination deciding to establish a political party? Of course not. That is their democratic right. Just as it is their democratic right to allocate preferences to whomever they choose.
But in all of this, the Coalition's none-too-subtle political message is that if you are a Christian concerned about "family values" and "moral values" then the Coalition is now the natural party for you. Labor has not the slightest intention of allowing this unfolding Coalition strategy to go uncontested.
The reason for this is because it is based on the false proposition that somehow God has become the wholly-owned subsidiary of the Liberal Party.
Jesus has not suddenly become the member for Bethlehem South, the National Party member for Nazareth West or even the Family First member for Jerusalem Central. Any attempt, dog-whistled or otherwise, by any political party to imply that "God is on their side" is as historically illiterate as it is biblically dubious.
First, neither the Liberal Party nor the Labor Party has ever purported to be a "Christian" party. That does not mean that Christians were not involved in the formation of the two main parties of Australian politics. There were many. But both parties were established as broad-based, secular parties designed to operate in a democratic and secular state - a state containing within it a large number of belief systems, both religious and non-religious.
Second, the Coalition increasingly implies that it is the natural party of family values. Family values would have to be the most used and abused term in Australian politics. The Coalition seeks to give this term some sort of religious gloss.
Labor, consistent with its secular tradition, argues that if we are going to have a debate about family values, then surely a family's ability to put food on the table is a family value; surely a family's ability to afford proper health care for its children is a family value; and surely making sure our children have access to a decent education is equally a family value.
The attempt by the Liberals to hijack the term into the ill-defined ether of quasi-religious language is designed to mask the fact that so many Liberal policies are anti-family in their effect.
Ask any working family whether they think the collapse of bulk billing is pro-family or not?
Parallel to the family values phenomenon is the broader moral values debate.
Here again we see the attempt by the Coalition and others to define this term as narrowly as possible - usually in terms of sex and sexuality.
But if our starting point in this debate is supposed to be Christianity (and therefore a Christian view of morality), then my challenge to the Coalition is as follows: isn't our preparedness to feed the hungry and give shelter to the homeless a moral value; isn't our preparedness to respond humanely to those who seek refuge in this country from political oppression elsewhere a moral value; and is not our response to the 1.5 billion people around the world in abject poverty also a question of moral values?
Once again I fear that the Coalition's political strategy is to define moral values as narrowly as possible in order to mask its inaction across a much wider social and economic agenda which should equally command our moral attention.
One of the great divides in Australian politics and Christianity is whether or not our responsibility to our fellow human beings is a matter of private, discretionary choice - or whether that is something which requires the collective intervention of society through the state.
There are many fine human beings in all our political parties who are great givers of their time and money to those who need help.
Labor has a view that if social justice were to rely entirely on individual acts of charity, there can be no guarantee whatsoever that all those in need are provided with humane levels of universal care.
Those of us who are Christians within the Labor tradition are not about to readily concede the ground to those who chant the mantra of family and moral values but who are disturbingly silent when it comes to taking action through government to relieve the burden of those who cannot properly fend for themselves.
First published in The Courier-Mail on December 13, 2004. |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Dracon II
|
|
Communist Party of Apolyton
Jan 1970
time: 15:34
|
|
quote:
Well we see, those of us who are from the community of the Christian faith but who are also active in the Labor movement, I think what we would say to the broader Christian audience is, look, when we read the Gospels what we see is a message which is as much about questions of personal responsibility, personal moral responsibility as they about collective social responsibility. That the Gospel is both personal and social. And if it’s social it therefore has a political dimension as well. What does it mean concretely? That the same Jesus who talks about personal salvation is the same Jesus who said, did you feed the hungry, did you clothe the naked. And these are the great criteria of the judgment. So I think our job is to say, this is the fully rounded Christian Gospel and we as Christians within a political party are seeking to give effect to that social dimension as well |
quote:
Narrator:
In 1998 Kevin Rudd moved from the back rooms to front of house, as the Federal member for Griffith, a suburban seat of Brisbane. He’s a member of the Parliamentary Christian Fellowship and calls himself a Christian Socialist, a movement with deep roots in the Labor party. He believes in faith based social action, where the Christian values of justice, equality and compassion inform and shape policy.
Kevin Rudd:
I come from a long history of people who have spoken about the relevance of their faith to their political beliefs, on our side of politics going back. I mean here in Queensland Andrew Fisher was the Labor Prime Minister from this State. Andrew Fisher was a Christian Socialist. He taught Presbyterian Sunday School. He in turn came out of the stable of Keir Hardie who was himself a Presbyterian Sunday School teacher who founded the British Labour Party in the 1890’s and was the first British Labour member of parliament. There’s a long tradition associated with this; currently called the Christian Socialist Movement. And it’s a worldwide network of people. The fact that you don’t often hear from us in this country, well it’s open for others to answer. I’m a relatively recent arrival. But I think, I think given what’s happening on the political right in this country, what’s happening on the political right in America, it’s important that people on the centre-left of politics begin to argue a different perspective from within the Christian tradition. |
What do you guys think? Is it helpful to the ALP to bring religion into their politics?
|
|
| |
|
|
|
trev
|
|
Adelaide, Australia
Feb 2003
time: 15:04
|
|
I think it is great if members of the Labour Party who are christians do push their expression of the Christian faith, however they should do this without ignoring the basic beliefs of the christian faith, ie the value of life of the unborn child for example. Unfortunately they seem to fail in areas like this and therefore the evangelical christian will fail to pay attention to them. Yes, expand christian faith into social action, but do not neglect the moral issues if you are really a christian believer. You are welcome to pass this message on to Kevin Rudd as I am uneasy with some social aspects of John Howards policies, but even more concerned with the moral policies of the Labour party, which their christian MP's fail to differentiate themselves from. I would like to think that when Peter Costello takes over from John Howard in about 12 months time, he will reexamine some of the social impacts of the gov't policies because I respect his christian beliefs more than I do John Howards
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Dracon II
|
|
Communist Party of Apolyton
Jan 1970
time: 15:34
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Spiffor
What does the abortion debate look like in Oz? Is it as insane as the one in the US? |
Not nearly as big. In fact, the first time I can remember anyone bringing it up in politics was after last year's election. the health minister Tony Abbott wanted to introduce restrictions on abortion when the Government gained control of the senate. But the Prime Minister throttled the issue and nothing has been said of it since.
It's only been very recently that I have noticed religion creeping into politics. Peter Costello at the Hillsong meeting, John Howard's speech, Family First, etc...
Religion has always been in politics.... the Catholics were a major component of the labor party... and even split to form the Democratic Labor Party in 1955 out of fear that Labor was too communist. Managed to keep labor out of Government for almost 20 years. It's just never really been overtly displayed our discussed.
Last edited by Dracon II on 18-05-2005 at 03:45
|
|
| |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:34.
Apolyton Time is 00:34. |
top of page
|
|
|
Forum Rules:
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is ON
vB code is ON
Smilies are ON
[IMG] code is ON
|
|
|
|
|
|
17-05-2005 11:43
read my sig for more information...
|