inspiring vision.
Isn't the bloody obvious threat of going under the thumb of middle ages logic & fanaticism inspiration enough ?

Peter and others:

I tend to agree with your view that this election is dispiriting and that it reflects a malaise in Australian politics. I think I also, like you, reject the modern triumphalist view of human being.

I too see Gillard’s atheism as no cause for concern. But I disagree with what you then write about her:

<What does concern me is that her atheism signals that she is closed to the alternative society that the church represents. This is one reason that she does not have an inspiring vision for the country. She, in fact, represents the final stages of modern politics that has nothing interesting to say.>

While I am a practising Christian I have friends and family-members who are avowed atheists and abhor “the Church”, and yet they can describe very simply and passionately what should be radically changed in our society to make it more just, more peaceful, more beautiful.

We may repeat endlessly that we are one body because we all share in the one bread, but “The Church” is obviously not one. The various churches do not share the same vision for the world of tomorrow. Being “churched” does not in itself make a politician inspiring, wise and moral.

In fact some churches offer a deplorable vision for society based on such evils as condemnation of homosexuals, refusing to allow women to be priests or bishops, and making the Bible an idol.

Coincidentally today we read in The Australian (page 9) that Anglican Archbishop Roger Herft in WA has stated: “Any statement which portrays the Christian faith as having some type of exclusivity to be the sole arbiter on matters of moral integrity and just policy-making are unhelpful and untrue…Christians need to remind themselves that those who do not profess the Christian faith are still capable of adopting an ethical and moral framework which assists in public policy decision-making for the common good.” He also reportedly says that “believers and non-believers alike should be embraced by the church.”

To me this is much more in accord with the attitude of Jesus.

John J. and King Hazza

There is simply no comparison between Islam, which has not changed since the 14th Century, and modern Christianity. Christianity changed during the Enlightenment. Islam has not changed at all, and Muslims are forbidden to veer one iota from the Koran even today.

I've said many times that I am not a religionist of any kind. I am not a Christian. But I cannot name another religion that is the same threat - to freedom, to democracy and to a decent and prosperous life - as Islam clealy is. I don't think you can either, no matter how much you are opposed to all religions, as you are perfectly entitled to be.

I have read fairly widely on the excesses and hideously cruel practices of Christianity in past centuries. There is no denying that they existed in the past. But with Islam, the horrors are still occurring, and Islam has no place in modern society. You believe that Western religions have no place in modern society, either, and I respect and understand that. But, there are no terrorists, suicide bombers and mad muftis intent on wiping out everybody not like themselves as there are with Islam.

The crazy relativism of white liberals who say that all cultures and religions are equal and must be respected is playing right into the hands of the Muslims. All religions and cultures are not equal when some are carrying on the way they did 600 years ago.

Islam could mean the death of the West if we don't stop apologising for our own ways, and have the guts to criticise Islam for what it is: out of date religion, with strong does of facist politics.

One of the worst 'relativists' when it comes to Islam is the Archbishop of Canterbury, who is either naive or mad.

Leigh, you're missing the point.

The point is that there are simply too few Shariah-endeared fruitcakes in any Western Country- and zero in government (except the UK) to ever enable their medieval viewpoint to become policy. I repeat, they have bugger all chance to do anything on that scale. Extreme Christian viewpoints, however, are held by many senior members of government and the judiciary, not to mention lobby groups- and as a result many areas of policy are skewed by their interests (not to mention World Youth Day being shoved down Sydney's throat).
Hence, based on THIS difference, people are more concerned about Christianity in Politics than Islam.
It doesn't matter that they're worse, they can't actually DO anything about it, as far as politics is concerned.

Peter,
Thanks for some welcome words of common sense amid so much bilateral spin.
I don't think you go far enough in your search for a way out. We need a social proposal that starts with the human person, its dignity, its needs, its desires, its unquenchable thirst for engagement with reality, its capacity for sacrifice, its need to take responsibility for its destiny. Is there a politician who will speak to me not as a taxpayer not as a voter but as a person with thoughts, ideals, desires?
Keep writing
JJK