The Greens are no more anti-Christian than they are anti-Buddhist. Sure, they have policies which run counter to Christian moral teaching... show me a party that doesn't (if you show me Family First, the Christian Democrats et. al., you lose). What's important come Saturday is that you vote with your heart - not with your Priest/Imam/Shaman/Vicar/Druid/Rabbi/Pastor's heart.

Hi Ravi, some might even vote with their heads! :-)

But yes, when preferences are taken into account, a vote for Family First is a vote for abortion. It's the same with Fred Nile etc. Because in the real world, what is the real difference between the Liberal Party and Labor Party on abortion?

Has abortion even been raised once this whole election?

I personally hate the concept of abortion. But what am I going to do... try and get it outlawed, and drive it underground so that both mother and baby die in backyard operations?

Here's a great article on abortion by Christians arguing that maybe outlawing it isn't the solution, and there might be other ways of reducing the demand for abortion in the first place.

http://blog.sojo.net/2008/11/03/outlawing-the-symptom-our-broken-abortion-strategy/

After reading the above I have some questions of Fred Nile. Is he *really* serious about abortion? Maybe if he was more serious about abortion than he was paranoid about 'commies under the bed', he might not make preference deals with the neocons. Maybe he'd consider increasing certain welfare funds to decrease the need for abortion in the first place!

But, with the way he rants about a quite small socialist wing in the Greens party, and tries to paint all greens as 'watermelons' (Green on the outside, RED on the inside! Beware the red terror!), I'm quite sure he's more concerned about the commie threat than lowering infant murder.

Elvis Christ, can't anybody around here get my name right?

.

Dear Ron in Bennelong,

.

Indeed, Australia is a "commonwealth" or, in other words, a "federation". It is a federation of States and Territories.

The commonwealth or federation has a constittution which sets out the fundamental laws of the country.

It defines the various governing bodies and the manner in which they are organised as well as the relationship between the political powers and the citizens, and, most importantly, guarantees our rights and freedoms.

The Commonwealth of Australia is, as I already indicated, a constitutional monarchy. It clearly indicates that the British Crown is our Constitutional Head of State.

As the British Crown is also the Supreme Governor of the Church of England, that means that Australia, like the United Kingdom, is not, strictly speaking, a secular State.

You also write: "I see nothing obvious for which we need a new constitution".

I couldn't agree more, if only I were certain the "happy go lucky" country we are today, living in peace and relative prosperity, could continue forever.

Realistically, however, there is no guarantee that it will.

We just need to look beyond our shores to see that things can go terribly wrong if we do not have the right legal and political safeguards in place, starting with our Constitution.

We do not have the equivalent of a "Bill of Rights" in our Constitution to protect each individual citizens rights and freedoms, for example.

As long as everybody is reasonable and easy-going, that's fine. But that could change. There are a number of holes and inadequacies in our Constitution that need to be fixed. We might end up with a Hitler, a Lenin a Pol Pot and have no legal or political means of enforcing our rights.

You write: "Let's save money and leave it like that".

No, Ron, I consider that attitude to be totally irresponsible. We should pull our heads out of the sand and take a more realistic look at the risks we are neglecting today which may impact negatively on our children and grand-children a few years down the line.

.

Dear Poirot... I can empathize with your report there. I can't speak for your neighbour's personal predicament, but re Beck? I've watched enough of his unfolding explanations..and checked/verified them myself from original sources to have a reasonable degree of confidence in the thrust of what he's saying.

ECLIPSE.... oooooh.. you tend to stir up my political passions ya know...

Here is why.

A) "I turned off when they compared the Greenies with Nazi's.

B) "Some people don't look at planning laws before buying"

aaaah THAT is where you got me going. You might not have tweaked to it but the *point* of the story was that people HAVE checked the planning or that EXISTING enterprises (Beef ranch) .. STILL become the victims of "GreeNazis" where the mere 'possibility' of something being 'habitat' is enough for them to deny planning permission.

Pozgais filled 'Wetland' ? (Below)

In the case of the Pozgais, have a look at this 'Government' side of the story but pay special attention to the paragraphs from about 25 onward.

http://cases.justia.com/us-court-of-appeals/F2/999/719/309100/

The Government seems to read 'earth' for the word 'water'...... But while this is not the case on which the argument of the Vid hinges (it is but one) there are others where existing ranches have been destroyed (The cattle ranch example) by the activities of EnviroTerrorists in "Government".

Do you deny the corruption and scheming going on by powerful financial and political interests using the Green movement and clout for base selfish greed and gain ?

Of the examples cited, the Rockerfella's one stands out!

Of course we could review the case of "Mr UN Environment" Maurice Strong and his shares in the Chicago Climate Exchange or his directorship ! ! !
Or Gore's company Generation Investments and them being the 6th largest shareholder in the European 'Climate Exchange' carbon trading group.

GREENS..POWER...MONEY... CONTROL..TYRANNY...GLOBAL GOVERNMENT they all go together

" this is an extremely important doctrine!" @ Eclipse Now

Rubbish - it's fiction.

"Separation of church and state is also a Christian idea, as found in Romans."

Rubbish - the story of Jesus' arrest, trial and punishment is about sedition. Furthermore, the later emerging church was shoved into the State by Constantine; a move many attribute the fall of the Roman empire to!