Read on Twitter
THREAD:
As an atheist, I welcome the mainstream and social media's interest in the warped influence of religion on Australian politics in general and on government decision-making more specifically.
But really, where have you been for the past 10, 20, 60 years?
As an atheist, I welcome the mainstream and social media's interest in the warped influence of religion on Australian politics in general and on government decision-making more specifically.
But really, where have you been for the past 10, 20, 60 years?
Sure it's entertaining to make fun of the new kid on the block, with their singing and handwaving and speaking in tongues.
But where were your breathless exposes (that's the plural of expose) of previous religious PMs and their coteries?
But where were your breathless exposes (that's the plural of expose) of previous religious PMs and their coteries?
Or does it not count when the dead hand of religion guiding political decisions is Catholic or High Anglican?
There WAS this really interesting piece by @annabelcrabb on Rudd and Abbott bringing their religion into politics https://www.abc.net.au/news/2013-09-04/crabb-religion-and-politics/4933224?nw=0
There WAS this really interesting piece by @annabelcrabb on Rudd and Abbott bringing their religion into politics https://www.abc.net.au/news/2013-09-04/crabb-religion-and-politics/4933224?nw=0
But nothing like the carry on we are seeing today.
It's great that we are now analysing (I use that term loosely, but live in hope) the twisted influence that religion might have today on policies that pertain to women and welfare, for example.
It's great that we are now analysing (I use that term loosely, but live in hope) the twisted influence that religion might have today on policies that pertain to women and welfare, for example.
But why haven't we done that before? Why not be outraged about all those Catholic/Anglican men (and some women) making bad policy decisions that affect women, the disadvantaged, the poor, and those that don't fit the Churches' preferred stereotypes?
If we're going to call out the religious-types in parliament and their undue influence given the non church-going nature of the general public, then let's call them all out - including the unions like the SDA, and the various lobby groups like Catholic Schools.
Sure, I'm interested in how the Pentecostals' focus on wealth influences policy. And it should be exposed. But I'm also interested in the Catholics' continuing influence on policies for women, the LGBTI community and education.
And where do the High Anglicans sit in all this. The Nats' John Anderson, who I think is still aiming to come back as a NSW Senator, is a High Anglican with some very traditional views. What's that going to mean for government policy?
Religion in politics is bigger than your personal distaste for the current PM. Let's not lose sight of the bigger picture.
