The National Forum   Donate   Your Account   On Line Opinion   Forum   Blogs   Polling   About   
The Forum - On Line Opinion's article discussion area



Syndicate
RSS/XML


RSS 2.0

Main Articles General

Sign In      Register

The Forum > Article Comments > An uneasy marriage of necessity > Comments

An uneasy marriage of necessity : Comments

By Tony Coady, published 20/4/2007

Faith and politics can be unhappy bedfellows, but it is possible for them to coexist.

  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. ...
  6. 7
  7. 8
  8. 9
  9. Page 10
  10. 11
  11. All
The strongest poison ever known
came from Caesars laurel crown.

William Blake
Posted by aqvarivs, Tuesday, 1 May 2007 3:32:10 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
I do not see why trustworthiness cannot coexist with predictability. If a politician's world view, including stands on politically relevant moral issues, is well known - and the world view background of not only "religious politicians" can be known beforehand - and agrees with mine, then he/she is both predictable, and trustworthy for me provided he/she sticks to his/her proclaimed preferences. For instance, a Pro Life candidate who does not change his/her stand to suit the perceived majority is predictable and trustworthy for those who voted for him/her, the same as a principled Pro Choice candidate is both predictable and trustworthy for those who voted for him/her. I admit, this is not as obvious in case of more complicated moral (or e.g. economic) issues.
Posted by George, Tuesday, 1 May 2007 7:02:57 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Has any one mentioned the massive pro-secularism march in Turkey recently?

'Huge rally for Turkish secularism

Hundreds of thousands of people have rallied in Istanbul in support of secularism in Turkey, amid a row over a vote for the country's next president.....

"Turkey is secular and will remain secular," shouted demonstrators from all over the country as they waved flags and pictures of Mustafa Kemal Ataturk, the founder of the Turkish Republic.

"We want neither Sharia, nor a coup, but a fully democratic Turkey," they added.....'

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/6604643.stm

Have we become too complacent in Australia because monotheism has been effectively controlled thus far? Indeed, we can give thanks to a long line of Australian politicians who have been intelligent enough to keep religion out of parlimentary debate for the most part.

Because secular Turks live in a country dominated by Sheiks and Imams they understand how quickly their freedoms can evaporate under an Islamic regime. They only need to look over their shoulder to the east to see how Islamic goverments easily slide into totalitarism.

The French philosopher Michel Onfray encapsulates the Islamic problem neatly;

'Muslim theocracy - like any other - presupposes an end to the separation between private belief and public practice....

At which point religion becomes the business of the state. Not of a restricted community, a limited group, but the whole of society. The extension of politics to the totality of the human sphere is the very definition of totalitarism. The state serves an idea - racial, fascist, Islamic, Christian etc - and family, work, privacy, school, barracks, hospital, newspaper or publishing, office, friendship, leisure, reading, sexuality, courts, sports, are all controlled by the dominant ideology. And thus Islamic family, Islamic work, Islamic privacy, Islamic school, and so on.'

'The Atheist Manifesto. The Case Against Christianity, Judaism and Islam' (p 208)
Posted by TR, Tuesday, 1 May 2007 9:04:55 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
TR has raised the pro-secularism demonstrations in Turkey. One thing that they show is the difference between Western (traditionally Christian) nations and Muslim countries, which highlights some of the differences between Christianity and Islam. Though they do have some similarities (belief in one God) there are obvious differences. Despite some wanting to paint them all with the same brush, religions are not all the same.

Christians, including Christ himself, suffered under Roman persecution. They were not welcome in Rome. Later, after Rome adopted Christianity as its faith, it was sacked by invading Goths and eventually crumbled. So early Christians did not identify themselves with the State but rather down played the concept of this present ‘world’ and recognised the city to come, with its foundations in heaven, as their true inheritance (as Coady alludes to in his article – ‘render to Caesar the things that are Caesar's and to God the things that are God's’.)

On the other hand, Mohammed arrived as a conquering general. His rule required full submission from conquered territories. The political system which accompanies the Islamic faith sees no distinction in societal laws which apply to the whole state and those which only apply to the faithful. Islam by nature is more communal or societal.

In Christianity, the ‘kingdom of God is within you’; it is not a political kingdom. This focus is on your heart or your conscience. It highlights your personal accountability to God, which also elevates the value of your opinion, or your vote. This is why secularism and democracy sit so comfortably with, in fact why they developed within, the traditionally Christian countries.

What is happening in Turkey could not happen in Australia because of the wisdom in our Constitution.

Again the word theocracy is brought up. No one in this whole thread has supported the idea of theocracy, so I doubt we need worry that what is happening in Turkey may present itself here.
Posted by Mick V, Wednesday, 2 May 2007 7:14:23 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
I think one important difference between Christianity and Islam is also in how they view martyrdom. A person becomes a Christian martyr, "immediately rewarded in heaven", if he/she is killed for being a Christian or for not wanting to renounce his/her faith. Those who died fighting as crusaders, "defending the faith", in "just wars", etc. might have been regarded as heroes but never as martyrs. And, of course a terrorist killer - suicide or not - is almost the opposite of what a Christian would call a martyr.
Posted by George, Wednesday, 2 May 2007 8:35:42 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Christ is a character from a work of fiction, just like Dr Who and Darth Vader. Christians had been banned in Rome because various early Christian sects practiced quite horrific crimes.More Christians were persecuted once Christians gained power in Rome than ever before. The early Christian era was the golden age of lion feeding. Christianity is the only cult which has persecuted peoples of every continent. It is to be expected, Jesus and god in the old and New Testament was exclusionary thus persecutory, it follows that those who worship such idols such immorality will brush off on them.

Only Christians themselves say Christian(ity)s are good because again religion is ego based, it is self worship. The natural blindness of the cult of Christianity will not allow those who belong to the cult to admit this.

Christians are not interested in truth, knowledge, and the realities of the world. Religious beliefs are pure superstition; faith and spirituality are raw emotion, fact is irrelevant to them.

At this moment Australian women are being persecuted by the oxymoronic termed right to life movement. Christianity in Australia has not distanced itself from and rejected from the as it causes harm to women thus an evil movement of a profound degree,threatening our mothers, sisters , daughters, wives, partners, friends thus reinforcing the obvious, that Christianity has no real moral claims.

The oxymoronic termed right to life movement is a good example of this where truth and knowledge are viperously fought against by right to lifers who engage in social terrorism in order to gain control , gain power over women. The only reasoning offered is hysterical emotion with a total rejection of facts and truth. To date the movement has supported itself nefariously with a currency of lies. A politician pushing such a cause is in effect fighting against Australians and thus Australia, certainly not representing Australia.

There is no trust by citizens there is only trust by the minority of operatives that support the politician who will serve their interests, their agenda and their quest for power
Posted by West, Wednesday, 2 May 2007 10:17:22 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. ...
  6. 7
  7. 8
  8. 9
  9. Page 10
  10. 11
  11. All

About Us :: Search :: Discuss :: Feedback :: Legals :: Privacy