I agree with those who see the term as practically meaningless, and used politically. The sooner we stop using it the better. The seven commandments of the Christian ten that deal with our relations with one another are simply commonsense guidelines for people living in a community, and were about in human societies long before Moses. A good deal of our legal system has a basis in Roman law. And Abraham is, after all, accorded status by Jews, Christians and Muslims as a central figure in their religions. Let's drop it (Mr Costello, please copy).

It seems to me Irfan is addressing several different questions here, that maybe deserve separate attention.

Firstly, the question of sifting values by hierarchy and one-answer-only citizenship test. On this I agree wholeheartedly with AnthonyMarinac. Not only does this utterly fail to capture the richness and complexity of our values and their origins, it is also more sinister – in effect an attempt to impose a particular interpretation of Australian values, rather than to identify whether the applicant can correctly identify the objectively accurate ones.

Secondly, is there a contemporary consensus on common values between Judaism and Christianity? I’d say not in detail (nor is there within these faiths), but there are some points of commonality of origin and perspective which are material (many of these are held in common with other faiths, especially Islam). The history of anti-Semitism is shameful, and David JS makes a telling point about how Jews might feel about dragged under an umbrella term conflating them with a religion that has persecuted them, and describing values they might not share at all.

Third, however, while Jews have every right to disavow commonality with Christians, the reverse is not true. It is in this sense – of acknowledging Christianity’s evolution from (and debt to) Judaism, its shared scripture, common stories and Jewish Messiah – that the term Judeo-Christian is a valid descriptor of Christian thought and culture.

Fourthly, when used more broadly, the term Judeo-Christian acknowledges that – despite centuries of persecution, discrimination and marginalisation – Jewish people have contributed disproportionately to Western culture, in science, politics, philosophy, the arts etc (Popper, Arendt, Marx, Freud, Einstein, Spinoza, Ricardo, Mahler, Kafka…).

Not in a billion lifetimes is it acceptable to expect intelligent people to respect your religious beliefs.
You can expect that you won't be tormented for them, that people will not stop you having them, but respect is reserved for the deserved. The real.
I'm not sure whether people's need to worship something or someone else is simply laughable, or something a little more sinister, like pathetic.
But what I do know is, that when my little brother used to ask about Santa,or the Easter Bunny, I'd humour him. Until he was about 8 years old, when he was old enough to stop believing in gift carrying animals, seasonal goblins, snakes that talk and protect apples, skinny dead men pushing aside boulders to ascend into heaven, and global warming.

God was simply a symbol created to control the people of that time by appealing to their morales. Times have changed, but the bible hasn't caught up a 10th of the way, but won't stop interfering in other people's lives. What scientific document would ever have this luxury? It wouldn't because science is real, and nobodies soft little feelings get hurt when someone disproves a scientific theory.

Keep your imaginary friends believers, but keep them to yourselves. The rest of us aren't that weak and dependant.

Irfan,

A good article and a point well made. Secularism is inherently inclusive or indifferent to religious and non-religious beliefs.
The secular democratic movement was born as a result of the French Revolution which was, amongst other things, anti religious.

For a group to claim that secularism is an extension of their faith reflects total ignorance of modern history or at best an attempt to take non-deserved credit. Thats politics.

Let me see um it is the Christians who are blamed for the abuse of the indigneous and woman while the human secularist are the saviours of our culture. Dream on!

"Judeo-Christian tradition" is a political term invented and used by the right in the US to try to portray Jews and Christians as natural allies against the Muslims. To create an us versus them mentality that justifies the degree of power and influence the Jewish Lobby has in US national politics. So its not surprising that the same people use it here.

I am an atheist, but I have no reluctance to admit that this country has a Christian tradition. We are a country that was set up as a colony of Britain. It has a Christian tradition. Unfortunately we are becoming more and more a colony of the US. Which may have been founded with a Christian tradition, but is increasingly becoming a Judeo-Christan country. Jews interests first. That is after all the real reason why Iraq was invaded, and why Iran will be if Dick Cheney and his neocon buddies can come up with a pretext before the end of 2008. Christians' second. Jews principles of smiting thine enemy first. Jesus' principles of loving thine enemy very much second.