GrahamY

My mistake, I did mix up Pell and Hollingworth. Although the essence of my argumant remains the same.

I am astounded at your take on the manner in which Abbot tried to deny women a safe treatment for abortion - there is nothing illogical in women wanting to control their fertility. Abbot claimed that the treatment was unsafe - it was not an argument about when it is appropriate to abort as you have tried to claim. Besides, general agreement among medics is up to 12 weeks; ideally. Abbot was using his position of office for his personal desires.

I suspect, I now know where you stand regarding abortion. Interesting.

The church has a lot to say about human foeti and very little about the environment surrounding and supporting them. Again I point out that the world is interconnected - everything we do has consequences.

There is much in the bible about stewardship over the earth - Michael4 has detailed much of this in his posts.

You state that the church has no interest in becoming a lobby group - in the face of its involvement over contraception? Are you being ironic?

The welfare of our environment is not about lobby groups - it is beyond the political; it is where you and I live. Surely 'domininion over the earth' carries responsibility along with it. Otherwise, dominion is just exploitation - to our very great loss.

Apart from my glaring error over identity - the reasoning behind my post remains sound. I think you are now simply trying to avoid the issue. Which remains, why do church leaders turn their backs on Animal Cruelty? Thus far, we have had some weak excuses such as 'lack of interest' and evasive tactics. Very poor indeed.

Therefore, I will conclude by asking you to consider your next purchase of animal product - was it free range, was it humanely slaughtered? I am not asking you to agree with me, all I am asking is that you care about the wider world.

After all: "You have it within yourself to work it out."

http://www.google.com.au/search?hl=en&q=church+leaders+against+abortion+&btnG=Google+Search&meta=cr%3DcountryAU
http://www.google.com.au/search?hl=en&q=church+leaders+politics&btnG=Google+Search&meta=cr%3DcountryAU
http://www.google.com.au/search?hl=en&q=church+enters+politics+&btnG=Google+Search&meta=cr%3DcountryAU
http://www.google.com.au/search?hl=en&cr=countryAU&sa=X&oi=spell&resnum=0&ct=result&cd=1&q=politics+and+steve+fielding+church+christians+&spell=1

Gee Robert I dont know the last time I looked The Churches were pretty political to me.The few above came up in two seconds There are thousands more.

The churches get funding off the Government. The school teachers are told not to get involved on the very public debate about live exports.
The kids are not allowed to talk about it or write about it.

It Says To Teach. To Preach in the bible and even Graham said that.

They preach about abortion but not animal abuse.?

Are you not ashamed that not one of your lot care.

Sit there reading your bibles if you like.

However the lord knows who is truely doing his work and who is not. Churches HAVE entered politics but even if they had not.> WHAT TYPE
of people make up excuses! while animals are so mistreated.

TEACH AND PREACH ABOUT THIS CRUELTY NOT JUST ABORTION.

Look at yourselves in the mirror.

SHAM and I do mean Sham! and Shame too!

Ok just to really upset everyone I'll add my 5c worth here:)

The problem here is a philosophical one, the point which
I think Graham raised in one of his posts.

In a secular democracy, the role of the churches should
be to preach to their flocks. Those citizens are then
free to express their opinions in a polical sense.

If you want churches to get politically involved in the
animal welfare debate, you should have no problem with
them getting politically involved in the abortion debate
and telling you what to do with your uterus.

Anything else is philosophically inconsistant and smacks
of opportunism.

Well Yabby

You are right - the church has already involved itself with 'my uterus' as you put it. Therefore, Christians trying to slink out under the 'we're not a political lobby' is very cowardly indeed.

Ideally we would have a separation of church and state and then the church could just preach to its flock - but we don't have that vital separation now do we?

Or, Yabby, are you going to recant all your posts regarding the catholic church on the abortion related threads?

I guess, because you disagree with the phasing out of live export - you thought you'd drop over and be disagreeable here as well. Muddying the waters yet again.

Scout, what should I recant anything? My point is, that I am
philosophically above the church or now even above you, for
my opinions and beliefs are consistant, wheras you are
showing your opportunistic side. Should you ever complain again
about the churches politically wanting to tell you what to do
about your uterus, I will point out this philosophical
inconsistancy to you....

Yabby

What?

I think we are failing to communicate.

You've lost me.

I have always been true to my beliefs - I have no idea what you are getting at here.

Email me will you?

Really beginning to think you are just trying to take the p*ss.