Recently news reports have come out claiming a Religious group made contributions to the Australian Federal Government Election Campaign during the last election...This is something which most Aussies find difficult to except. The seperation of Church and State has always been something taken for granted here. However these days the divide between the two is closing. Christian groups are becoming more and more of a tool to be used within the election campaign. The growing numbers of people involved in such groups is immense.
While eager to show the country what good Christian citizens, they are Australia is fast beginning to alienate a large selection of the community. Our politicians while having beliefs in what ever faith they choose should keep it at home and religion should not have a place in Government.....
With in Parliament we have Christians, Muslims, Buddist and people from many forms of religion the difference this time around is we are being told what their faiths are....
The group which made contributions to previous election campaign has the reputation of being somewhat of Cult.... A closed door Christian Group.... who puts fences around their churches, blackened windows on their car etc. It is very secretive.
Does a Politicans Personal religious faith sway your voting, does it matter?
So is this form of Secret Worship what defines a cult or is their more to it?
I ask you What are the differences between a Cult and a Religion?
2 comments:
A cult is any religious sect which claims to be "Christian" and denies one or more of the following:
1. The fact that God is eternally existent in 3 persons.
2. That Christ is the only way to heaven.
3. That salvations comes by grace through faith in Christ alone.
Okay, there seems to be two issues here. What's a cult and what place religious belief has in government.
I'll try to define the first:
http://www.answers.com/cult&r=67 : 1a A religion or religious sect generally considered to be extremist or false, with its followers often living in an unconventional manner under the guidance of an authoritarian, charismatic leader.
5a Obsessive, especially faddish, devotion to or veneration for a person, principle, or thing.
Those two seem to be the most useful.
As for the second point, I think a religious group has as much right to support a candidate as any other group. And that goes for every religious group, Christian or not.
Also, if a candidate is, say, Buddhist, then I'd expect his or her decisions in office to be based on the moral foundations of his or her beliefs. That would probably include voting against subsidization of cattle ranches or other things that violate Buddhist beliefs.
That goes for Christian candidates, too. You can't simply abandon your moral foundation because of "separation of church and state." That phrase simply means that the government can't fund any one religion or make an official state religion. At least, that's what it says in the United States constitution, though it usually gets interpreted as forbidding people from showing any sign of religious belief in a public place. (Including occasional suspension of students for bringing a Bible to school.) This violates the free expression of religion, which is protected by the constitution, but few legislators seem to care about that. Oh well.
In any case, I would never vote for anyone who tosses off his morals the moment he enters office. It doesn't matter what religion he belongs too, to do such a thing is wrong.
Post a Comment