Runner,

I appreciate the civilness of you reply. Please don't take it personally when I say that I am very bothered that are so many people like you in this country.

I can understand that you feel the nations abortion rate is a disgrace, but I diagree. There are thousands of born babies in the developing world suffereing, in part because of our govts. foreign policy choices. Closer to home, my suggestion is to go for a tour through some of the poorer suburbs in our cities. Have a look at the amount of pregant teenagers, parents on drugs and welfare who can barely look after themselves. Then come back and tell me abortion isn't a good option to have. Harsh I know, but true.

Your attitude to Homosexuals really distresses me, and I beleive its probably your faith that will prevent me from being able to reason with you, so I will just say that just because its not normal to you, dosn't mean it isn't to them.

Like I said, nothing personal, but in my view, you are what is wrong with this country.

In my first post today I gave a few examples of the mindless labels which are offered as a substitute for reasoned discussion on this forum. I suppose I should have anticipated these others: ‘the usual churchy-left hostility’, ‘moralising historians’, ‘illegals’, ‘Papuan deserters’, ‘left-lurching church types’ and the good old ‘communist/sympathiser’? What would contributors do if we banned cliches and labels for week and insited on clear, reasoned argument?

And I should have anticipated a much larger range of pet red herrings. So far today we've had abortion, homosexuality, the threat of Islam, the history debate, refugees, national security, religious vilification laws and the latest doozy – a secular web site is not the place for ‘spewing everything’ that Christians disagree upon. Apparently, Christians should keep their squabbles in-house. Naughty man, Alan Matheson; see what you've done!.

there is no place for religion in a truly equal playing field.

If we where all christian, or all muslim, it would be different.

We are 21st Century Australia, how do we expect to embrace the world if we are running on old values.

Forget religion, we need a non bias, greatest good for the greatest number mentality that protects the culture of Australia without disadvantaging any.

Religion is the mark of the first 2 milleniums of an emerging civilization, not the third.

Thanks for the article Alan Matheson.

As a high school student in an expensive private church school we grew to despise those pious hypocrites who gouged money out of their workers, customers and competitors from Monday to Saturday then thought that praying at church on Sunday and paying for a stained glass window would absolve them of their sins.

I feel so sad for Australia that the pious hypocrites of the religious right have ascended to the positions of leadership they planned to take back about 15 to 20 years ago.

So those who believe in allowing everyone 'a place in the sun' and 'a fair deal for everyone' need to mobilise to regain the centre ground from the religious right.

"Alan Matheson is a retired churches of Christ minister. who worked in a migration centre in Melbourne, then the human rights program of the World Council of Churches, before returning to take responsibility for the international program of the ACTU"

I for one, find it refreshing to find someone who has been on the inside of both religion and politics speaking out against the marriage of the two.

Nice posts by Carl and YngnLvnit - I too find it somewhat unusual that the religious right have departed so far from the actions of jesus - I for one think he would be disgusted by the church as a political institution, but that's just an agnostic's view.

There are no easy answers when it comes to religion - a lot of people have them, and those who are most vociferous in spreading their view tend to be deaf to the alternatives. The problem we have here, is that their moral code requires them to try and force their views on others, be it any issue, such as abortion or homosexuality.

What really scares me is the subversive nature of these groups - if they are truly a church organisation, should they not be open about their actions and funding? Why are those who are contributing to these organisations hiding their involvement?

The only reason I can come up with is that they are determined to persuade by stealth.

But come on - is that not a departure from the core values of Christianity? do you really think Jesus would have promoted conversion by subversion? or would he have taken the moderate, less aggressive stance?

What is this entity that is the religious right, and from whence has it spawned?

YngNL

You are right about the ‘racist’ bit, of course. I gave up long ago taking any notice of the intellectually challenged posters who regularly pop up calling those of us with whom they disagree names, particularly as they can’t even get their terms of abuse correct. Wrong name, right name. It’s all the same to me – not worth the bother. People who would rather attack someone else’s opinion and make assumptions about strangers rather than giving their own opinions are not worthy of any response.

I hope the Mullahs don’t get to hear that some of their flock are befriending an infidel. On the other hand, perhaps our new smarty pants poster only thinks they are his or her friends.

Sunilse sounds like a bit of loser to me. Bit of a busybody, too, having the need to rush to the defence of someone else when they have ample opportunity to defend themselves.

I just loved the one about the Islamist’s difficulty in matching Israel ‘horrors’.