While I agree with Gavin's post in the main, I don't believe that the fundamentalist Christian vote is very significant in this country. I used to be part of one of these evangelical churches in my youth, and abandoned it when I was 17 when it started to turn into something of a cult, and many people I went to church with were instrumental in creating a number of churches in the Perth, Adelaide and Gold Coast regions, as well as helping the CDP and Family First movements. I recall when WA's gay law reform was before the parliament, Margaret Court managed to organise, like, 200 people or something to protest the laws. They looked like the fanatics they were. In retrospect, I can't believe I used to think like that myself.

As for the Australian electorate, I think some of you are right. It is increasingly polarised - both the left and right are stronger than ever before, and there doesn't seem to be much room left in the middle for the centre of politics. Howard is a cynical manipulator of this reality to try and score as much of the centre vote as possible, while trying to win over the far right. The Christian vote has not substantially increased in years, and they have always preferenced the Liberals since even the Keating days, so this is hardly a factor. The real cause of the 2004 election win was the collapse of One Nation and the Democrats.

OrderinChaos, I am surprised by your belief that the left is well-organised and influential in Australian politics. Can you expand on that idea. What do you mean by the 'left'

I don't think that the number of fundamentalist Christian voters is the problem. Rather, like in the United States, in Australia they are over-represented in the 10% or so of swinging voters (between centre-right and right) who increasingly determine election results.

This only becomes a problem when a government panders to the extreme beliefs of these people, as I believe we have been witnessing with respect to the manufactured abortion 'debate' in recent times, amongst other issues. Peter Costello's attendance at the Hillsong church during the last election campaign was a master stroke in propaganda, but I'm concerned at the undue influence these minority pentecostal types might try and exert over the greater majority of the population.

This of course is related to (contra "OrderInChaos") what I think is the more basic political problem: the fragmentation of the 'Left' (if such a term is still valid) following the apparent demise of its organising socialist ideology. From this perspective, all that's coherently on offer is the 'Tweedledum' and 'Tweedledee' neo-conservative politics that we call democracy. This creates a sufficient structural condition for a relatively small but strategic interest group to exert disproportional influence.

What scare me about this is that, instead of the balance of political power being held by political parties who share a secular humanist orientation, this is shifting towards a more 'theocratic' exercise of political power that is inconsistent with a cosmopolitan 21st century society like Australia. I shudder to think what will happen when the Coalition has complete control of the Senate from July 1.

I'm glad about one thing, some of you seem to be latching on the the fact that SMALL MINORITIES can determine LARGE POLITICAL OUTCOMES if they are strategically placed.

This has been one of my main arguments for a very controlled and even 'selective' immigration policy because of this very thing.
I would not want to see any one race or religion 'over represented' in our immig stats, for reasons of political stability in Australia.
I am all for 'non discriminatory' policy as long as its balanced and guided. Meaning, at times it may favor certain groups over others, if the population balance is creeping in an unhealthy direction.

It is quite conceivable that ONE seat in which a high concentration of former assylum seekers may be now residing, to swing a close election one way or the other. This is a lot of power to be wielding.

So, the Howard governments tough line is most welcome to me. The recurring theme has always been 'WE control our immigration NOT outsiders'.

Can anyone tell me what these evil and dangerous policies of the Christian right actually are? What agenda do they have that is so horrible that it cannot be debated in this country? What beliefs do they have that are so far outside the norm of society that they must be stopped at any cost?

I don't think I believe in God but I'm not particularly intimidated by Christians or their beliefs. I don't believe in the creation myth being taught as fact in schools but I'd rather have the matter debated openly than have my child come home from school telling me that Darwin was the devil himself.

I also wonder where all the concerned citizens were when the damaging doctrine of multiculturalism was forced upon us? Where were they all when our mentally ill citizens were tossed onto the streets to fend for themselves, all in the name of rights of the individual? Isn't anyone concerned at the paradox in this country of individual rights being of the absolute paramount importance, yet everyone else is responsible if I get drunk and walk in front of a car? We don't want Christians forcing their views onto us but it's OK to have judges do it every time they hand down a gutless sentence not in the best interests of the community.

My point is, what do these people propose to do to our society that’s any worse than some of things we tolerate now? I certainly wouldn’t deny that the progressive agenda has added to and benefited our society in a lot of ways. Maybe the religious right has something to offer as well?

Tony

David_BOAZ I would suggest small minorities connecting with other small minorities to form a majority determine “outcomes”. If the outcome is significant and the minority influence is not “too radical” or departed from mainstream values maybe the minority perspective can be accommodated without impedement.

Again bozzie – I would agree – when we see the evils and excesses of the religious right (of which, whilst I may be “right”, I would not suggest I am in any way “religious”) then is the time to jump up and down.

Presently I am more annoyed with the change to Victorian employment legislation thrown through by Bracks and co in an attempt to bolster up last the vestiges of defunct and decrepit socialist policies which impose shopping curfews on us all.