Please justify mixing religion and politics (for Christians)?
Here’s an example. I found it at the election booth a few weeks ago when the Australian Federal election was on and I was quite appalled by one leaflet in particular:
“VOTE [1]
Paul Green
Christian Democratic Party
Aussie Values
1) Suspension of Islamic Immigration
2) Christian voice in the Senate…”
Is there any way that this leaflet is justified in anyway (in reference to number 1 in particular)?
It all just seems discriminatory and I don’t think any good would come out of it.
What’s the point of trying to merge religion with politics anyway?
The reasons why this Paul Green might want to suspend islamic immigration:
-to prevent incidents like the riots in france
-While all religions have their extremists, the voice of the moderate muslim community has not been heard to any real extent concerning islamic terrorism, thereby raising questions about the existance of a substancial moderate muslim community.
-to prevent creating islamic communities that terrorist cells could hide in.
I’m not neccessarily agreeing with him, but I’m just giving his side for #1.
for #2, the reason why there’s any relevance, is that there’s a lot of Christians around, and they want a politician who relates to them and works to their reasoning, as well as he supposedly holds to their various moral standards.
Public Affairs with Jeff Berkowitz – Paul Green
|
|
Paul and Politics $43.94 A provocative analysis of interrelated issues in Paul’s letters, including his views on the Roman Empire, the politics of Israel, and politics and the church. |
Tags: sustainability, paul green politics
Recent Comments: