Robert

Oh I see it is okay for the Greens to want Australia to sign up to every secular ungodly UN agreement but it is not okay to make a pledge before God. Does not seem to add up.

From what I've read, Jesus was a pretty good bloke - but I'm sure he'd be very disappointed in the lies that his supporters promote in his name. For the benefit of those who'd like to cut through the bulldust, the actual Greens policies can be found here:

http://greens.org.au/election/policy.php

Funny, I couldn't find anything about "legislating policies against (Jesus') standards which He has set out for people to follow", or "wanting Australia to sign up to every secular ungodly UN agreement".

However, I did find some eminently sensible and well thought out policies about Environment, Agriculture & Natural Resources, Climate Change and Energy, Caring for People, Human Rights & Democracy, Media, Arts & Science, and Sustainable Economy. In fact, I'm even more convinced that a good like Jesus would be a Greens supporter of he was around today :)

runner, "Just look at how many took an oath on the Word of God after being elected last time and you will get your answer on who to vote for." - no mention of foreign treaties in that post.

Rather if I've understood your point correctly you are suggesting that behavior which coincides with a clear instruction from the bible is a reason not to vote for the greens.

I'm assuming that the greens mostly don't take that oath on the bible and members of the coalition mostly do - please tell me if I have that back the front.

R0bert

"By the 'Kingdom of God,' Jesus meant a new state of affairs on earth, which God would bring about. In it all people would live as God's children. - Foxy

Divine or not divine, the entity Jesus' cenral mission was the Kingdom of God, as you state, on Earth. What the Church teaches comes after three centries of Chinese whispers and three of regions [Galalilee, N. Syria, S. Syria and Asia Minor]. Preacher or God at Church , Christians are taught Jesus' funamental thurst. The teachings between 325-800 CE, were to vote [bu the leaders] for standardisation and unification. The Church of the early nine century wished to establish its origins to Augustus not St. Peter. The sring of Popes thing came later. Besides teh first 15{?] Popes/Bishops were Jewish.

[away for a while]

Many of the values which underpin our political traditions have roots that are consistent with Christian values, but the ways we try to work those values out in political ideologies reflect all too clearly the pitfalls of human fallibility.

I suspect that Jesus would share the left’s core values of solidarity with, and compassion for, the poor and marginalised, but disapprove of their tendency to naïve idealism, materialism and resort to state power to impose their model of society on others.

He would share liberals’ core values of respect for the unique value and dignity of the individual, but not their tendency to egotism, consumerism and the under-valuing of society.

He would share greens’ concern with creation and misuse of the earth’s resources, but not their judgementalism and tendency (at the radical fringe) to misanthropy.

He would share conservatives’ respect for an inherited living tradition and suspicion of political ideologies, but not their reluctance to change and complacency with the status quo.

He would probably be very amused at anyone who tried to use His name to bolster their own political agendas, whether on the right or left

Rhian

That's a pretty shrewd and well-balanced assessment.

But you've left out one big group in the current Australian political landscape. What would Jesus have said about the economic rationalists who dominate the Coalition Government (and their back-room benefactors/beneficiaries)?

These are not liberal in the sense you mean nor are they socially conservative in the sense you mean. Yet they often use Christianity as either a cover for their real purpose or as a (spurious) justification for their position.