What guides your MPs conscience?
When most people vote for a candidate they are not voting for the candidate personally but for the political party that endorsed them. Obviously this is because they want that person to vote in accordance with that party’s policies. If a candidate is consistently going to vote in accordance with a particular religious teaching when released from party discipline, then that is not within their brief if it has not been part of their election platform…This is not to argue against religious views being permitted to influence parliamentary debates. In a democracy all voices should be heard. It is simply to argue that democracy should also require that candidates for parliament be up front and honest about when and how their religious views will influence them so that their constituents can be properly informed when casting their vote.
Articles
When a candidate is elected on a party plank, it is reasonable for constituents to expect that he/she will vote along party lines in most cases. However, in all cases, the best interests of the Nation must be the supreme criterion. One’s religious convictions are purely personal and should never override that criterion. There is no doubt that, for many, religious teachings give some comfort in dealing with life’s problems but they should never colour decisions to be made for the whole of society. Steven Tudor’s suggested requirement that a candidate should declare any religious impediments to impartial decision making prior to elections has my support and should be made mandatory. Democracy today needs all the help it can get in the face of the constant attacks on it.
It is my contention that no devout person of any religious faith can possibly vote in an impartial manner on matters which may conflict with religious teaching. Religious dogma is interested only in rules and not in how those rules may cause people to suffer.
We see the church in Africa forbidding the use of condoms, thus encouraging the deaths of millions of people from AIDS.
How can anyone who is influenced by that sort of teaching possibly vote against it and for humanity? Archbishop Pell’s threats only serve to point this up.
When you consider that most religions are based on premises that in any other context would clearly be seen as deranged and psychotic, I am amazed that such beliefs are not considered just cause for disqualification from election to parliament.