The Devil and the LDP

Picture Fred Nile attempts to prevent deal between Family First and the LDP.

If you are not free to choose wrongly and irresponsibly, you are not free at all. – Jacob Hornberger (1995)

Politics gets just plain silly at times especially when religion gets involved, and worse when one party feels that another owes it because of belief. The proverbial has hit the fan over here because of a preference deal between the Family First Party (a Christian backed party) and the Liberty and Democracy Party.

Fred Nile, who heads the Christian Democratic Party, appears to be mad as a cut snake about it as the following extract from today’s press indicates: -

The Senate bombshell has shocked religious crusader Fred Nile, who accused Family First of giving preferences to "the enemy" - the Liberty and Democracy Party.

LDP, which stands little chance of winning a Senate spot, advocates a radical suite of policies and a minimal role for government.

"Say no to the nanny state," its election banner says.

Its preference deal with Family First has shocked long-term political observers, who believe the pro-Christian party could suffer a voter backlash.

Family First Senator Steve Fielding, who was elected in 2004 with the backing of church groups, now stands accused of supping with the devil.

Family First has decided to preference LDP ahead of the major parties and the Christian Democratic Party in both NSW and Western Australia.

Last night, Senator Fielding defended the preference swap with LDP, who he said had some policies in common with Family First.

But Reverend Nile, who is CDP's national president and a long-time advocate of conservative social values, said he was "shocked and disappointed" by Family First's decision.

"They didn't keep their word. They gave their preferences to the enemy, the anti-Christian party," said Reverend Nile, a member of the NSW Parliament.

I tend to disagree with the concept of religious parties whether they are Christian, Jewish, Islamic, Hindu, or anything else, on the principle that while people should be free to advocate their religious views to any willing listener and should be free to take part in the political process, they are not justified in legislating religious values into law.

A religious party has by definition, the intention of doing just that.

The Views on religion of the LDP is best summed up by our New South Wales Senate candidate Terje Petersen in his press release on the above issue: -

The LDP today moved to defend its preference deal with Family First in response to claims by the Christian Democrats that it is an "anti-Christian" party.

"The LDP is neither an anti-Christian nor an anti-family party," LDP NSW Senate candidate Terje Petersen said.

"Many members of our party are committed Christians. Our Victorian Senate candidate, Steve Clancy, is a practising Christian and obvious proof that we are not anti-Christian.

"However, the LDP is opposed to the nanny state that some people promote under the guise of Christianity. It is not opposed to personal responsibility and does not endorse risky behaviour, but it also does not support using the law to impose the moral values of a section of the community on everyone.

Small groups of zealots can achieve their goals in a tight Senate by using the mutual grooming political process, in which they will agree to pass something they can live with (say compulsory Identity cards) in exchange for something they want passed (say banning Sunday shopping or bikinis). This process is often referred to as “You scratch my back, and I’ll scratch yours".

Thus they can tend to double up on anti-freedom nanny state acts of legislation, which is of course something any government will approve of.

Still it’s a great thing to see press articles of this type, you can’t buy publicity like this.