How about we demand they disclose their medical history, and that of their family members because of the emotional bearing that might have on decisions based on stress. Stool samples, blood tests, aptitude testing, IQ testing, accept only those who've 'served' in the police or military for at least 3 years, psych evaluations, get them to do a 'spit handshake', have them swear on the Bible, Koran, Torah and whatever you read (everyone is valued in society, aren't they David?), do a 'cross my heart and hope to die', and finally, sacrifice a goat to include the satanists.

Whatya think, David?

Would you consider allowing evolution AND "intelligent design" as part of the curriculum?. I mean, you're hard pressed to have anything that remotely resembles Christmas at schools 'cause we can't insult our Muslim and Jewish brethren, let alone teaching the concept of Christianity in this Christian based society. Go to Saudi Arabia and demand what you are, David. Your head would be "Express Post" back to your missus inside a week.

Here's some trivia, David. When you spell check bible, torah and koran, only torah and koran come up as needing capital letters at the front, but not bible. Did you have something to do with that, Dave?. ;o

(you'll need to try it in "reply")

StG,

The secular portion of society is merely demanding that politicians use all available evidence and unhampered reasoning in developing legislation. If you consider that is inappropriate, well that is your poorly thought out opinion. The rest of your post did not contribute anything worthwhile to the topic.

StG, allow me to ask you a couple of questions;
• What is wrong with the above criteria?
• What would constitute a better criteria?

David

You used the word yourself. 'Secular'. Where would it stop?. As per my going on about politicians fitting every criteria that any "secular portion" might dream up. Why don't Satanists and Pagans have the same rights as you're demanding?.

Demanding politicians disclose their fundamental beliefs through legislation based on the whims of a "secular portion of society" for the purposed of demonising their proposals goes against the fundamentals of what this society is based on. Of course unless those beliefs have destructive, illegal and immoral aspects to them.

What would constitute a better criteria?. Freedom of belief without discrimination from "secular portions of society". Where would you stop?. Only agnostics and Buddhists can vote on certain legislation?.

I heartily agree with you David. There are so many flippant and irrelevant posts on this site, I wonder at their logic and comprehension of your statement. It seems perfectly logical to me to know the attitude one's representative in parliament may have to many questions to which they are voting on behalf of constituents. I would like to know how their opinions are prejudiced by their beliefs in eugenics or euthanasia for instance...........particularly the latter as I am sure there is a chance that more than 50% of the elderly population are in favour of it
Keep up the good work David. I don't need to tell you that all religion is conceived by man to rationalise the unknown. I have no objection to others having their "faith" but I object to them imposing it on me.

Foxy, I’m not trying to upset you for two reasons and I apologise if I did. You didn’t say anything upsetting and Foxy Love, your namesake, (Character in Drawn Together SBS) is one of my heroines. ;)

Thank you and I agree with you snake, but I will give StG one more chance at being rational. Here we go.

StG,

I’ll type very slowly so you can better read what I am saying. I do not intend to repeat myself ad infinitum. I said secularists require that; “…politicians use all available evidence and unhampered reasoning…”

This means, (Now are you following me?) that all the evidence about certain proposed legislation has to be considered. (Are you still with me?) That evidence must then not be biased by people’s personal beliefs, whether they are Satanists, Christian, Muslim or UFOlogists.

To make it clear to you, secular people do not have beliefs as do religious people or UFOlogists etc. Secular people work on the evidence and that is what we require politicians to do also.

If you wish to have a rational conversation and start again, then I will oblige. But you have to resist jumping all over the place. No hard feelings.

David

Spam man gets narky. You hurt MY feelings too dave.

Lets leave it at the point where people deserve their right to privacy. No matter what their role is in society.

The title of your spam is "The Rights of Politicians versus the Rights of Electors". Democracy means we ALL have rights, Davey boy. My point lays there. Everything else you're on about is null and void considering that issue from the top.

Good luck in your endeavors.

What's your definitive proof there is no God....Dave?.