Or so Damien Murphy informs us in the Sydney Morning Herald
… Borrowing a leaf from Rudd’s magazine, the North Sydney MP Joe Hockey plans a series of speeches setting out his beliefs and seeking to establish a philosophical basis for his leadership. …
Hockey’s first address, titled In Defence of God, is slated for delivery to the Sydney Institute on November 9.
I can’t decide if this is an honest calling from Joe or some cynical ploy to set himself up as a potential leader for the Liberal Party come the next election.
If it is an honest calling, this defence of God, then I would prefer the minister, stayed out of the pulpit and left the Apologetics to the professionals, or alternatively left politics to join the priesthood.
If recent Prime Ministers are anything to go by its seems that there is a trend developing toward having a strong religious affiliation as a de facto prerequisite for Australian political leadership.
Murphy remarks in his article that while the Australian populace is trending towards secularism (or perhaps apathy) our politicians seem to think it necessary to court religious power brokers. Do we really want to go down the road paved by the united states where a politician wears his cross on his sleeve, where atheist is used as pejorative label to alienate opponents?
In my view a politicians beliefs should be a private matter and for most of them it appears to be.
Do we need real separation of Church and State in Australia? Are Catholic MP’s such as Joe and Tony Abbott the reason why we can’t seem to get a Royal Commission into child abuse by the Catholic Church off the ground? Does the church hold that much sway?
What are your thoughts?
Related posts:
- Joe Hockey speaks sense on liberty… and I almost fall off my chair. I...
- With religion on our sights For a brief second I thought that our defence forces...
- Inaction by Catholic Education responsible for child rape. Pretend for a moment that you are a Catholic School...
Loading ...
I don't doubt Hockey's commitment to his faith, but I can't see this as anything other than a ploy for leadership of the Liberals and a move match Rudd for the next election.
It'll be interesting to see how this plays out, and whether the religious stuff is a miscalculation by both Rudd and Hockey. How much of Rudd's success in leading Labor to victory was his religion and how much was voter's tired of Howard and the Liberals? I'd say it was more of the latter than the former.
But given our virtual two party political machine, when the leaders of both parties get religion and take it to the polling booth it's a disturbing trend.
Did you know his family comes from Bethlehem? Maybe his just rooting for the hometow boy:D
I hope that Rudd's victory was an indication of the dissatisfaction felt for howard. I fear as you do that it has become a thing one must do (court the religious) if you want to get somewhere in either party.
First of all, God does not need Hockey to defend him. From the context and discussions going round, I think he is a liability to God. If he is to succeed as a leader, probably he need to have a willing God to allow that.
I could never understand why anyone who truly believes in an interventionist god would bother going into politics. Surely their god can take care of things without their Earthly stewardship. He burnt down Victoria, flooded Queensland and flattened a good chunk of America, after all. Why does Hockey think he'll hold any sway with god's decisions?
Yes why does an omnipotent god need defending?
I hope you guys can stop the apparent trend toward becoming more like the US politically. Treating candidates' religiosity like its something good is ridiculous.
We have had an openly agnostic Prime Minister – bit it did cause a stir:)
I've been wondering this myself, whether this recent turn of events by Joe Hockey is just a political play or if it is how he actually thinks. If it is the former then it bodes horribly for the liberal party and any chance of me voting for them. The two candidates next in line after Turnbull are Abbott who as health minister when the libs were last in power held back numerous drugs and procedures due to nothing more than his religious beliefs only to be overruled by his own staff and cabinet, and Hockey who to my recollection hasn't shown any religious sway until now. I would much prefer someone who uses investigations, reports, science and reason to make their decisions over someone who lets religious bigotry control them. At least with Kevin Rudd, despite his open religiosity, listens to reason and has on numerous occasions actually stated his religious biases make him not agree with a policy but still signs off on it giving it approval.
Another thing I often wonder is whether this religious infestation of our politicians is actually happening, or whether it is just a consequence of me paying more and more attention to politics over the last 10-15 years.
Watching the news I think he is preparing to challenge
The master slave mentality of the Christian religion suits the ideology of politicians from both sides of politics. Remember Blair is a Christian and Brown the son of a Presbyterian minister. It doesn't matter that under this banner the worst atrocities in human history have occurred and continue to dominate the world politic. It is a mercantile religion which encourages wealth as a greater good and then has the audicity to compensate those it has exploited with charity. If people had to question the underlying principles excuse the oxymoron as I am hard pressed to know what they are the shock may bring them to their knees. Not in prayer. It is the greatest confidence trick played on humankind.
Sadly it is precisely this kind of commentary that has delivered so many of our (nominally) Catholic politicians into the hands of the Right. What seems to be embarrassingly at stake here is that Hockey, Abbott and Pyne, even Rudd from the other side, have spent their most formative years in a Catholic school (with the exception of Turnbull, who I take to be a convert by marriage) without any semblance of an understanding or feel for Catholic social teaching (though, paradoxically – despite his attribution for it to the magnificent Bonhoeffer – Rudd may have some) which, most historians would agree, is at least as important an explanation for the economically ameliorative attitudes and values in the ALP and the Union movement as any secular humanistic socialist ideology…..
Sadly its precisely this kind of commentary that has delivered so many of our (nominally) Catholic politicians into the hands of the Right. What seems to be embarrassingly at stake here is that Hockey, Abbott and Pyne, even Rudd from the other side, have spent their most formative years in a Catholic school (with the exception of Turnbull, who I take to be a convert by marriage) without any semblance of an understanding or feel for Catholic social teaching (though, paradoxically – despite his attribution for it to the magnificent Bonhoeffer – some of this may have rubbed off on Rudd) which, most historians would agree, is at least as important an explanation for the economically ameliorative attitudes and values in the ALP and the Union movement as any secular humanistic socialist ideology…..
…..My deepest misgivings about this therefore relate to my unhappy but unavoidable conclusion that it is the location of Catholic schools (by design of the secular humanists as much as Catholic fascists of an earlier era) in the private sector that accounts for a man who calls his children after the justice-oriented Jesuits, Xavier and Ignatius, to trespass upon the discourse of Godliness and morality in Australian politics while seeking, as might the most morally repugnant and just plain low among us, to decribe asylum seekers as queue-jumpers and free-loaders taking advantage of our three-star floating hospitality in Indonesian waters instead of doing the decent thing, going away and shutting the gates behind them. What a crying waste and shame!
Joe looks a little like that sinister talk show host from V for Vendetta.
Michael, I can see your point to a certain extent, but I'm sorry there's not a sinister secular humanist cabal waiting to deliver Australia into the hands of the right. Religious groups like Mercy Ministries and Hillsong are doing this all by themselves.
After having heard the general make up of his speech it seems he is calling out to the churches to abandon any literalist approach to the bible. He seems to think its the bibles incompatibility with modern knowledge of the world that is causing the faithful to leave in such numbers.
I don't care what irrational views are held by our pollies. They can believe in faries in the garden who need to be fed Tim Tams for all I care just so long as they don't think the Tim Tams should be paid for by the public purse or that it is the will of the faries that we drive on the left in the forenoon andhe right in the afternoon. I just wish they would shut up about the faries whether literal or figurative.
That's all well and good, but therein lies another problem. The polli may well believe all that and remain mute on the subject in the public sphere, but their belief in such will still be influencing their decisions on matters of public policy.
I'd rather know where their bias lay and how it influences their decsion making than not.
I thought Joe Hockey's speech this week was good, calling on all Christians to remember that their religions are, or should be about compassion, justice, equality, dignity, forgiveness, charity and respect for other people (rather than a literal interpretation of their holy book). These tenets are worthy traits for anyone, regardless of their spiritual beliefs. So I have no problem with Hockey, being a practising Catholic, using these as his guidelines for living an honourable and honest life. I'd like to see more politicians (and people generally) live their lives with these tenets.
Having observed Hockey's careeer for over a decade now, I believe he is basically honest but he is nowadays a very shrewd political player. I believe he does approach most questions & issues in politics with the open minded approach of "what would be best for the Australian community"? I think he is a rarity in Australian politics and I have a lot of time for him although I am not a Liberal Party supporter. I think his speech also put down the growing number of evangelical/hardline literalist churches in this country (a good thing IMO).
Do I believe Hockey would allow himself to be swayed by Catholic lobby groups? To a point but not at the expense of the Australian community or economy. Would Tony Abbott be swayed? Most definitely (not a good thing).
Do I think if churches dropped their literal approach numbers would increase? Possibly, but not by a lot. I think Australians are becoming a bit more demanding in their requests for scientific proof … well, until the next "terrorist" attack with a high Aussie body count. People tend to flock off to the churches for comforting then.
I was quite surprised by the content of the speech. I am hoping to do a post on it in the near future. I will say at this point that it wasn't what I expected. I still have bones to pick with him of course and when one dispenses with the literal interpretation then its a short road to deism and then to atheism. I think Tom Frame was picking up on this trend in his latest book.
Too many Roman Catholics in Federal Parliament. We don't want one in charge of the Liberal Party. What a choice: Hockey or the "Mad Monk" Abbott. Spare us Oh Mighty Horus.
Yes we will have a choice between a rock and a hard place if Abbot gets in