Not So Nervous about the Presidential Election Tomorrow
Tomorrow is the presidential election. World, breathe a sigh of relief; our years-long election cycle will again grind to a close. Of course, it will start up again soon enough
( Read more... )
It's also about the separation between church and state, and that's really what gets on my nerves. Unfortunately politicians, particularly the Prime Minister and the Opposition Leader, are pandering to those views because they don't want to alienate the religious side of politics. And that is not fair because gay people shouldn't not have the option to marry - it's a decision that affects them, and them alone, and they should have the final say, not conservatives who won't be harmed, anyway.
My contention is against the church/other religious organisations deciding what is good for the state. The state sanctions funding to religion-based private schools, for example (those schools are exempt from the Anti-Discrimination Act, for heaven's sake!). I realise that it's clearly not that simple in practice, and of course the politicians who run our country/state/district can't help but flavour their decisions with personal views. But I think that government needs to get its finger out of that particular pie, at least.
ETA: Oh, wait, they can't ban political parties. A pity, really. Just this once I wish they could tell Fred Nile and his ilk to get the hell out of our Parliament, but... yeah, that sort of undermines the fundamental principle of democracy.
Then again, Australia voted in an atheist PM, so there's still hope :) As I said, complicated in practice. And I absolutely agree with you that this is a much bigger issue than it needs to be.
tl;dr I don't like religious schools
Reply
Over here, some conservatives will argue that the Founding Fathers never actually intended that, being as the language itself "separation of church and state" doesn't appear in our Constitution proper but in The Federalist Papers, so clearly the framers--some of whom weren't even Christians--intended this to be a "Christian nation." (There is the gnat in the ointment of the Establishment Clause in the Constitution--"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion"--but that tends to get conveniently overlooked, as though if "separation of church and state" itself doesn't appear, then anything with regards to government sanction of religion is void.)
But these are the kinds of boneheaded arguments that distract from real progress on real issues over here.
they don't want to alienate the religious side of politics.
Sounds familiar. By some estimates, evangelicals constitute 33% of the U.S., which is itself a really scary number, imo.
Legality aside, it just blows my mind that anyone would want government based on religion. Even different denominations of Christians can't agree on the correct interpretation of the Bible, so it seems pretty cocksure to assume that one's own religion will be the engine of the law.
Reply
Yes, this. Religion is a shifting kraken of a thing, with so much cultural baggage (to mix my metaphors) attached to it that it can't be impartial in governing, or act in the best interests of the people. Religious government in itself prioritises one religion over another.
Reply
Leave a comment