@ AlgoreisRICH
Aren’t all parties in it for their own beliefs? With an ‘Avatar’ like ALGOREisRICH, I’m guessing you’re a global warming sceptic? Well, sorry, but I respect the science and the scientists. Also, the previous head of the IPCC was a Christian, and this next bloke I'm linking to is a scientist blogger and a Christian. Check out his site, as you’ve probably had your head filled with the very anti-climate myths he debunks.

http://www.skepticalscience.com/The-Good-The-Bad-and-The-Ugly-Effects-of-Climate-Change.html

I note Fred Nile has been doing the rounds about how evil Julia Gillard might become if influenced by a Greens balance of power in the Senate. In his “Salt and Light” email circular, number 7, August 2010 he writes:

“God's Word, the Holy Bible, states that the government is the "Minister of God" (Romans 13:4,6). If that is true, how can Christians elect atheists to rule our Australian nation? Politicians who reject God's authority, guidance and direction?”

Mr Nile, chill. Paul was writing to the Romans to respect and obey their *very Pagan* Caesar.

“4 For the one in authority is God's servant for your good. But if you do wrong, be afraid, for rulers do not bear the sword for no reason. They are God's servants, agents of wrath to bring punishment on the wrongdoer. 5 Therefore, it is necessary to submit to the authorities, not only because of possible punishment but also as a matter of conscience. 6 This is also why you pay taxes, for the authorities are God's servants, who give their full time to governing.”

If Paul can describe *Caesar* this way, then I think today’s church will survive anything our government throws our way.

So relax. The greens won’t be IN GOVERNMENT, they’ll be in the balance of power, part of the conversation. It’s not a perfect solution. I don’t agree with all their ideology. But some of their policies and *practical concerns* will balance the *apathy* of the L’s.

Eclipse Now

Excellent that you are taking time to engage Boazy in some thought - he doesn't like to listen to atheists like me, prefers to proselytise which just results in people ignoring him completely - all of which is a bit sad for the old fellow.

Would like to point how, that the Greens has a number of Christian members - they are not all lezzo-tree-hugging-femonazis, to point out the bleeding obvious. I take issue with you saying "I don’t agree with all their ideology" - do you agree 100% with any political party's ideology? I don't.

That said, there are many people reading these pages who are not Christians - major shock for you maybe. But when Christians write these articles they write as if their entire audience is Christian - well it is not - far from it and from the 60% of Australians who put "Christian" on their census forms - how many are seriously devout? How many believe in virgin births, walking on water, even understand what the Trinity is about? I'll wager that many atheists understand more about religion than self-claimed religious themselves.

OK, the point I am trying to make is that we all have a conscience which we use to make important decisions and is why I am voting for the Greens because they are closer to a HUMANE approach of governance than any of the other parties. They are far more inclusive, than say, Family First - whose ideas of a family wouldn't fill a post-it note let alone encompass that range of families in our country.

"Why a conscientious human being would vote for the Greens?" is a better question.

I expect the Green vote to be around 12% in the Senate, giving us the balance of power. Hopefully get rid of Fielding and a few Liberals along the way. The Greens may be the only "winners" in this whole election.

Dear JR and Paul1405,
I too will be voting for the Greens, and am immensely gratified that their policies and success will get up the noses of the Pellamites :-)

Just to do a quick rundown- what do posters (especially Christians) here think of Frank Brennan's stances in general?
A quick summary:
-refugee advocate
-indigenous rights advocate
-somewhat neutral on bill of rights but chaired commission
-anti-abortion
-anti-euthanasia.

I'm interested because most people don't tend to hold all these views together, and am interested to see what others (who most likely value some but abhor the others) have to say.

Paul1405... "So if you vote on Saturday do you get stoned on Sunday?"

Err, probably better to get stoned on Friday night, in readiness to vote Saturday, then get stonkered on Saturday night with Antony Green, and get Berrocca-ed on Sunday, whoever wins the green-seats-of-power.

Squeers, as you vote Green don't forget that Bob Brown is not going to halt the school chaplains you don't support.

In fact, he is happy to allow them to keep going, and increase their annual pay cheque too.

Only the Secular Party and Sex Party are clear about ridding us of this damn spot, the NSCP.

As for this line from 'Ronnelong'... "I think most people want a President - that everyone gets to vote for"... count me out cobber.

I have no issue with ridding us of the GG, and all the state Gs, but no thanks to any more of this lowgrade election stuff for another layer of crass stupidity, polls, and media speculation thanks.

Are we not mature enough to run our democracy without a president?

Are you all so weak that you need a figure head to fawn over?

Can you not see the link between country, queen and gods?

Grow up, for God's sake if not your own, and craft a democratic system out of two houses of parliament and a spark of rare intelligence.

Can you imagine what drongo we might end up with as an elected president, driven to power by Murdoch and those drones MelnKochie, not to mention Alan Jones et al.?

No wonder Jesus wept, when he looked out and surveyed all those assembled below him!

'What a waste of effort' I am sure he must have thought.

Well, this election fiasco is but a taste of what we'd have to suffer if 'the average Australian' was let loose with a ballot paper to elect a president.

Surely, we could just as easily manage with the Pharlap carcass in charge of everything as having some political, business or sports boof elevated to god-ike status?