The State and the Church? (1 Viewer)

[Generator]

http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2004/04/11/1081621842301.html

http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2004/04/11/1081621834807.html


'Abbott denies that he is using his position to extend his religious philosophy into government action. But then he says: "A minister of the crown is scarcely supposed to abandon his principles simply because he is a minister of the crown. You don't become an ethical-free zone just because you are a minister."'

Why do we have idiots such as Abbott leading this country? Secular realms are not free of moral principles.


Now to the actual topic...
Do you think that the linked practices threaten the separation of the state and church?
I say Yes.

 

[santaslayer]

thats just coz of british tradition?......about the prayer thing.....?
done more out of ritual?

 

[AsyLum]

the real question is :

Is morality symbiotic with religion? if so can humanity exist in this day and age devoid of religion and morality?

 

[George W. Bush]

Originally posted by Asquithian
its quite obvious that the churh does reach into the legislature...when it really should not...

Why not?

 

[Alexander]

Yeah, Christian ethics are still what a lot of our laws are based on. I mean, we dont need to call ourselves christian, but there's certainly no harm in going with the vague teachings of Christ, which is essentially good for society, despite personal beliefs.
The only exclusively christian party i can think of is the fred nile group, and they're an absolute joke who shouldn't (and wont) ever call the shots....but how can you argue with the subconsious moral/cultural fabric of loose christian ideology in laws?

The other side of the coin is government donations to big religious charities in Australia, and how the gov. wants more impact and control over what these groups say.

 

[Alexander]

Yeah, he is bordering on the more extreme side of catholicism, but at least it's theoretically a releftion of his electorate and people and [insert usual democracy crap]

 

[CM_Tutor]

Originally posted by Alexander
... but at least it's theoretically a releftion of his electorate and people ...

I know many people who live in Tony Abbott's electorate. Many would vote Liberal no matter who was standing. The notion that electorates in Australia elect candidates rather than parties is a fiction - with the exception of electorates with independent's, that is.

Also, how many people would change their vote over an issue like religion?

BTW - if you want a good indication of why church and state should be as far apart as possible, imagine the effect if there were more people like Brian Harradine.

 

[George W. Bush]

Originally posted by Asquithian
the church should not be invovled with the state
?!?!?!?

dont they teach that anymore?

WTF? I'm asking for an explanation. Just because you learnt something when you were at school/uni as an axiom doesn't mean it's correct. I'm asking for your personal justification for the statement that the church should not have any effect on legislation.

 

[santaslayer]

Originally posted by Asquithian
yeah a prayer is religion !?!?!!

why is it in a legislative chamber?

there is meant to be a serparation between state and church...its quite obvious that the churh does reach into the legislature...when it really should not...

i kinda know what your trying to say, and i respect your stance. i just dont feel as strongly about it as you do, which is fine i guess, but yea...
i dont agree or disagree with it.


EDIT: i meant about the prayer conducted in the chamber...nothing else!

 

[santaslayer]

Originally posted by George W. Bush
WTF? I'm asking for an explanation. Just because you learnt something when you were at school/uni as an axiom doesn't mean it's correct. I'm asking for your personal justification for the statement that the church should not have any effect on legislation.

IMO, the church should NOT have any authoratative effect on legislation directly. But i do support the fact that they are ALLOWED to put forward a statement before a court expressing their views. BUT the courts should only allow this to happen without destroying the imprtiality of the judiciary. am i making sense?

 

[Comrade nathan]

GWB - Churches shoulnt be involved at all with government since there is no proof of it chirst and god being true

 

[George W. Bush]

Originally posted by Asquithian
can u give me reasons why it should ?

Maybe that the church suggests a certain moral code that at least a majority of Australians support?

Maybe that the church, as a group, represents far more Australians than other groups that attempt to influence government policy?

Maybe that religion influences legislation at the current time, and things seem to be going along just fine?

Maybe that it's inevitable that religion will have an effect on policy, as many in the government are religious, so we should ensure that the religious influence is an accepted one?

There is some for you to get started with. BTW, can you provide some reasons why it should not?

 

[George W. Bush]

Originally posted by Comrade nathan
GWB - Churches shoulnt be involved at all with government since there is no proof of it chirst and god being true

Many would disagree that there is no proof of religion being true. Nevertheless, assuming that you are correct, true or not, a majority of Australians are Christian. As Australia is a democracy, shouldn't legislation reflect the beliefs of a majority of the citizens?

 

[Comrade nathan]

Originally posted by CM_Tutor

Also, how many people would change their vote over an issue like religion?

Millions of people do around the world.

Anyway who would want a superstitial fool running a country for the sake of a "all mighty creator"

 

[CM_Tutor]

Originally posted by CM_Tutor
Also, how many people would change their vote over an issue like religion?

Originally posted by Comrade nathan
Millions of people do around the world.

True, but you're quoting me out of context. I was clearly talking about Australia in general and Tony Abbott in particular. Are you suggesting that the election result in a seat like Warringah would be influenced by religion? I didn't think so.

 

[CM_Tutor]

GWB - Separation of Church and State does not mean churches can't lobby government, just like any other interest group. Maybe you should check up on what it does mean.

Also, as for your 'moral code' comment, remember that morality is not dependent on religion. There is no problem with an atheist being moral (to take the extreme case).

 

[Comrade nathan]

Originally posted by CM_Tutor
True, but you're quoting me out of context. I was clearly talking about Australia in general and Tony Abbott in particular. Are you suggesting that the election result in a seat like Warringah would be influenced by religion? I didn't think so.

Yep i get you now, in that case i doubt it.

 

[AsyLum]

Originally posted by Asquithian
morality can exist without christianity!

Morality is in some ways tied with religion, however not exclusively.

are u suggesting that without religion society would not be moral ?

heeh oh no im not suggesting that at all

im merely asking that question because ultimately thats where you must begin your logic and questioning

writing this bloody essay on it atm actually hehe

 

[stamos]

Originally posted by Asquithian
there is meant to be a serparation between state and church...its quite obvious that the churh does reach into the legislature...when it really should not...

Originally posted by George W. Bush
Why not?

because religious ethical systems are full of anachronisms, and they are also too rigid

deontological systems of ethics aren't adaptable, and therefore shouldn't be directly involved in the operation of the state

 

[George W. Bush]

Originally posted by CM_Tutor
Also, as for your 'moral code' comment, remember that morality is not dependent on religion. There is no problem with an atheist being moral (to take the extreme case).

Many philosophers would disagree with you. Assuming you are correct, it doesn't matter that the morality is not dependant on the religion, but that the church recommends a code of behaviour, which many people follow, which is commonly accepted as something to aspire to.