The Christian Alliance's Muslim candidate
Guest blogger Neil Glover has more from the Scottish election.
George Hargreave鈥檚 Scottish Christian Party might have grabbed the headlines ahead of Thursday鈥檚 election but we have another Christian party who probably deserve a bit more attention.
The (don鈥檛 tell about the missing apostrophe) have focussed their campaign on four issues: Poverty, the war in Iraq, the renewal of Trident and the family.
This may be a Christian party but in Glasgow they have a Muslim candidate. Abdul Dean says says he would prefer living in a country which is 鈥渟erious about its Christianity, rather than a country given over to secular fundamentalism.鈥. We will find out how this mix of economic socialism and moral conservatism has appealed to Scottish voters on Thursday.
Comments
Abdul makes a good point!
PB
I agree with Abdul
Politicians will say anything....to get elected.
Promise her anyting...but give her Arpege.
I'll take secularism any day over islamic or christian fundamentalists wanting to legislate the 10 commandments. No Thanks.
Why the dislike of secularism? Can anyone here give some examples of how secularism was ever the direct cause of suffering or other evils? Not suffering that just happens to take place in a secular society, or misdeeds from a governement that just happens to be secular. I mean cases where those promoting secularism caused harm in their promotion of secularism. Counter-examples how some religions have lead to great misery are easy to come up with. But why the beef with secularism?
Peter
From my experience fundamentalists equate "secularism" with Stalin's Russia, Nazi Germany, Mao's China even though these regimes are the opposite of secularism.
Dylan:
Take Stalinist Russia or any countries of the communist bloc. Religious people were persecuted by atheists simply because of their religious belief. True, secularism wasn't responsible (secularism being a different concept from atheism) but atheism was abused in much the same way as religious belief has been.
Stephen G
PS...I believe in secular government.
Stephen,
I believe that fundamentalism is the problem. Stalin's Russia was a politically fundamentalist society and the people were forced to worship Stalin with an evangelical fervour. It's the same mindset and I don't believe that atrocities happened because Stalin was an atheist, it happened because Stalin was a megalomaniac psychopath. It does not automatically follow that if you are an atheist you will prosecute thesists in this manner. Atheism is simply a statement, carries no baggage however political systems do.
DD
I agree with SG; I would not vote for a theocracy.
The UK has steered a good common ground I think.
Having said that, Christians are obliged to respect and support whatever political system they find themselves in, in so far as it does not conflict with their faith.
There is actually no political system promoted by the New Testament.
PB
Dylan:
I agree. The problem is not with religion, atheism or secularism. The problem is with the mindsets of fanatical human beings.
SG
Stephen,
Unfortunately that is all too true.
DD
I suppose secular fundamentalists would be the sort of people who would try to ban things that conflict with their secular view. Like, say, preventing prayer in schools (an interesting interpretation of 'separation of church and state'), suing to have religious texts removed from monuments (in the US there was a court case about the ten commandments on some kind of display), or even ridiculing anyone with any sort of religious faith as some kind of backward moron.
Not that anyone here would show that kind of intolerance?
PB says: "I agree with SG; I would not vote for a theocracy."
I hate to be a stickler here, PB, but you've consistently said you would deny the ability of gay couples to marry with the same rights as heterosexual couples. If you do this for theological reasons (ie. morality based upon the bible), you are voting theocratically.
---------------------
Paul- I'm afraid you may have mixed up ideas on the concept of freedom.
"Like, say, preventing prayer in schools..." - prayer is not prevented in Christian schools and you're entirely within your rights to send your kids to a Christian school. But public schools, while they exist, should be entirely free of religious practice; consistent with the fact that atheists, Muslims and others are paying for it from their tax dollars.
"...suing to have religious texts removed from monuments..." - put your religious texts on your church buildings, which are owned privately. If something is being paid for by taxation then it is paid for by aheists as much as it is Christians. I'm sure you would object to a humanist credo being on a public building or monument, would you not?
"...or even ridiculing anyone with any sort of religious faith as some kind of backward moron..." - that's entirely within their rights and nothing whatever to do with the role of government.
Damn it John! You're using reason again! Have I not told you about this before!!
Grrr!!!!
SG
Stephen-
Oops..... my bad. :-)
Hello Paul,
When you mention 'monument', are you referring to that case where religious people wanted to instate a big white marble version of the 10 commandments in a court room (something I would find objectionable)? What you posted sounded like destroying a piece of history (something I would also find objectionable). But the case I read about, that sounds a little like what you mentioned, is rather different in the details of it. Do you have further detail pelase?
I know John-using reason will never do!
With that kind of attitude you will not get far!
DD
John
Surely you know there is a huge difference between using your vote in line with your convictions and voting to overthrow the entire political system?
You cant vote in a theocracy, as far as I understand them. I wouldnt vote for one.
PB
PB- You misunderstand. I'm referring to theocratic elements under our democracies (democracy = 'rule by the people', and the people have many different ways in which they'd like to rule). When people vote, they're voting as socialists, fascists, centrists, conservatives, authoritarians, libertarians, and more. When you vote for things you believe the bible teaches, and willfully wish to coerce your fellow citizens along such lines, you are voting theocratically.