Well the Fred Nile party, known as the Christian Democrat Party, or CDP, has decided to run what at a glance looks like a spoiler campaign for the Liberal Party by running candidates in 25 lower house electorates, preferencing the Liberal Party.

The fact that we once more see some "religious" people within our community seeking to use their religious beliefs as a tool to influence the voting choices of others within our secular society should come as no surprise, but just how big a payoff in funding for "Christian" projects would eventuate from a coalition win, would not seem too unfair a question to put, if indeed they do preference the coalition first on every ticket in both the senate and the lower house.

They even seek to undermine the Family First Party as being a choice that any Christian should make, after they allege that Family First initiated a preference deal with the SEX Party, which was rejected by the Sex Party due to irreconcilable differences.

It really is a shame that these religious folk should seek to politicise their faith in such a way, and one must certainly ask, in light of where this party seeks it support from, what would Jesus think about a church using his name for political gain?

So christians shouldn't be allowed a vote or a voice?

Mozz, if you were allowed to restrict how people let their religion influence their politics, how far would you go?

Vanessa wrote on Aug 17^th, 2010 at 2:18pm:



religion is not something that can be turned on and off at will.  It is an entire way of life, so the only way in which religious people could seperate their beliefs from their poltics, would be for them to have NO representation at all.  A big step backwards, wouldn't you say?

Vanessa wrote on Aug 17^th, 2010 at 2:18pm:

I agree, Australia is a secular country, KEEP IT THAT WAY.

I would obviously ban all religions, and make people swear to renouncing their faith on a copy of "The Origin Of Species", of course.

I would then make them sign up to the church of Atheism, and tithe 20% of their income to ME.

BUT, if that doesn't work, then I would just satisfy myself with being able to point out how we need to change our electoral system, where people like Fred Nile, can hold a position in our governmental system with such a very small support base.

When Fielding wallowed in the limelight with his posturing about "learning" about climate change, and meeting with top scientists, it showed how absurd the system had become, when such a man could hold the balance of power to make or break a decision that would effect our whole country for generations to come, I really wondered how far we had sunk.
Now Fielding may be the nicest guy in the world, a real life regular Ned Flanders, but the fact that he gets to be in such a position of power, which is so totally disproportionate to the actual support he has in the community, shows me that we really need to fix our voting system up.

Do YOU, have any suggestions of how we could do that, FD?

mozzaok wrote on Aug 17^th, 2010 at 1:45pm:


In the seat of Riverina there is a lady standing for the CDP. She lives in Sydney and she told the CDP that she wouldn't campaign or visit the area at all.

All the CDP wants is people to stand in as many seats as possible so people would vote for CDP in the Senate.

Vanessa wrote on Aug 17^th, 2010 at 2:22pm:


Pollies make decisions for us based upon their beliefs be it religious or non religious, thats what the system does.

Rudd wants an ETS because its his belief, Judas doesnt and either does Abbott because its theirs.

Pollies push their own beliefs since the dawn of the system.  To suggest it should is laughable.  Its a pollies position, or beliefs, on certain matter that people vote for them.

You can classify the Greens as being in the same class as the religous parties.

They are moralists and extremists as well

gizmo_2655 wrote on Aug 17^th, 2010 at 4:37pm:




LOL.  You don't think any tenets of Christanity, or any religion, are logical?  Funny how atheists morality is almost identical to that which is spruiked by christianity.

Quote:



And yet, atheists morals are identical to those of Christianity, and probably most religions. 
Logical when someone says there an atheist, but illogical otherwise?