Increasingly religious politicans

[lionking]

Although this thread is based on my observations about the Australian political system, I am interested in knowing if there is a similar trend in other countries.

Like the US, Australia is officially a secular nation, with separation of church and state enshrined in the constitution. Unlike the US, this has also been the case in practice - until the past 10 years or so.

In the early 1970's the Labor Party came to power after a very long period of conservative rule. The Prime Minister, Gough Whitlam, was certainly a-religious, although there was clear evidence of self-adoration. Since then most leaders have been nominally religious (mostly Anglican, with Paul Keating calling himself a Catholic), with the striking exception of the atheist Bob Hawke.

This changed dramatically with the election of John Howard, ably supported by the "Mad Monk", the Jesuit educated Tony Abbott. Howard once urged Australians, seriously, to pray for rain:

http://www.theage.com.au/news/NATIONAL/Pray-for-rain-urges-Howard/2007/04/22/1177180463040.html


Prime Minister John Howard has urged Australians to pray for rain as hard-hit agricultural regions face zero water allocations due to drought.


And if anyone thinks this is just anecdotal:

http://www.psnews.com.au/BooksFeaturespsn1743.html


A study of the characteristics of 2,422 political speeches between 2000 and 2006 shows politicians doubled their use of Christian terms – Christ, church, faith, pray, Jesus, Bible, spiritual, God and/or religion – suggesting that religion played an increasingly prominent role in Australian political discourse in the early twenty-first century.



But this trend has now reached ridiculous levels. Our current PM Kevin Rudd (once catholic but now anglican) regularly has interviews on sundays outside his church. He is now overseas with one of his objectives being to lobby for the canonisation of the australian nun, Mary MacKillop:

http://news.theage.com.au/breaking-news-national/rudd-pushes-for-mackillops-canonisation-20090709-dejf.html


Mr Rudd is expected to discuss the possible canonisation of the Roman Catholic nun, who founded the Sisters of St Joseph of the Sacred Heart in the late 1860s in Australia and New Zealand, as well as setting up education for the poor.


It's bad enough that our PM, on an expensive overseas trip, is even visiting the head of a state of about 700, but to argue for sainthood???

Anyway, it's not my imagination that Australia's leaders are becoming more religious, even though there are little or no votes in it (Bob Hawke, the atheist, was one of our most popular PMs and won landslide elections).

Is this trend emerging anywhere else?

[Monketey Ghost]

The US, surely. We have yet to elect an avowed atheist to any office, AFAIK.

[lionking]

Sure, but has it got worse? I mean Carter and Reagan would have been high water marks and not even the Bushes would have attained those levels. So I would have thought that the US piousity trend line would be edging downwards, while our's is in the other direction.

[HansMustermann]

Umm, GWB had God personally telling him what to do. Plus other signs like having some dozens of appointees which were graduates of Pat Robertson's school.

Now I don't know if he was actually that religious himself, but it's hard to imagine anyone pandering to the bible-thumpers more than that. Without actually being an official theocracy, that is.

[lionking]

Fair point Hans.

I would have thought that at least Europe would have become more secular on average, but might be wrong here as well.

[amb]

Italy. The christian democrats are the largest party in the land. Berlusconi, the present PM is a member of this party. And what a hypocrite he is. Wild parties with hookers in attendance, skimpy barmaids, etc. This man is the pits.

[Monketey Ghost]

We in the US who are disgusted by religious displays have been disgusted for many a long year. In this past election, we finally got around to really examining whether there should be a "religious test" for higher office... and most analyses I read concerning the notion were careful to be respectful of religious beliefs and only tip-toed around the question of whether or not it's right or proper.

Obama made many pompous religious displays on his way to the WH, and immediately afterwards as well.

[Femke]

Holland, not so much. The churches seem to have a slightly better attendance since the beginning of the crisis, but not really in politics. We do have a Christian Democratic party in office, but they lost in the last European elections.
There was a billboard with the Dutch version of 'There is probably no God so don't worry' near a very busy highway, and I don't remember any newspaper, news show or politician ranting against it.

[Twiler]

Tony Blair talked about how YHVH had spoken to him during the time of the Iraq war, but he only mentioned this after leaving office, and it was probably intended to be a lead-in to his faith initiative thing.

I think that anyone saying this sort of thing while in office in the UK would suffer a distinct loss of credibility.

[Soapy Sam]

Tony had any credibility?

[maddog]

As a US conservative, I'm noticing what seems to be a lot more politicians pandering to the Christian Evangelicals with god talk. Is it really possible that I'm the only politically conservative atheist in this country? It seems that way, from the way politicians and the TV talking heads babble about the "religious right".

[Bikewer]

The Republicans (or at least a percentage of them) have long seen the "Evangelicals" as a strong part of the "base". On some issues, like abortion, they see Catholics as a strong ally as well, even if on other issues they might not come along.
So depending on how one's constituency is oriented, being (or portraying oneself as....) very religious may be a good strategy.

Tends to all tie together with the "family values" ticket. Amazing how few politicians are willing to actually enumerate those ill-defined "values".

[MG1962]

Lionking - I actually agree and disagree with you at the same time

Unoffically - Religion has always played a big part. Traditionally Protestants tended to gravitate and identfy with the Liberal Party, Catholics with the Labor Party. You may even be old enough to recall the devasting split in the Labor movement when the DLP was formed in Victoria. It was meant to be a foil for the increased communist...read athiest influence in the party.

Over the last 10 years we have seen the emergence of the Family First party in South Australia, and political asperations of Hillsong in NSW, which actually financed the election of a Federal member in my seat. In Sydney the Hills district has begun to be called the Bible belt, in political terms.

As a Catholic, I was very disturbed to find out that the school my girls went to won a special award, including cash for a program to take religious teachings into government schools. In my mind this seemed to be a state institution rewarding the Catholic Church for persuing its own agenda, and a gross violation of the concept of seperating state and church. I wrote to my local member.....never got a reply :(

[G-K-4]

Anyway, it's not my imagination that Australia's leaders are becoming more religious, even though there are little or no votes in it....
Are you sure? I don't know much about Australian politics and society, but there may be ways that you can find out why this is happening. I'd give the answers, but seeing as how you are from Melbourne you would probably know better where to find them than I would.

What are the trends in church attendance over the last 30 or 40 years? Or other measures of religious identification. If they have been increasing, the politicians' reaction shouldn't be too surprising.

Have minor parties been using religious identification to gain votes? Is this the sort of language the One Nation Party uses? If this has been successful for them, the major parties might be trying to capture those voters. It might also be worth looking at what has been happening on the state level.

Since we're talking about Australia, could this ultimately be an issue of "Australian identity"? I know that there has long been resistance to immigration from non-Anglospheric countries. If the talk is specifically Christian, is it a way of unofficially declaring a cultural norm, to give more weight to a kind of assimilation or perhaps to make a starker contrast with the unwanted Other? Meanwhile, does the Terror War have anything to do with the increase in this rhetoric at that particular time, the twenty-aughts?

[themusicteacher]

As a US conservative, I'm noticing what seems to be a lot more politicians pandering to the Christian Evangelicals with god talk. Is it really possible that I'm the only politically conservative atheist in this country? It seems that way, from the way politicians and the TV talking heads babble about the "religious right".

My father-in-law is an economic/political conservative who has no religious leanings (couldn't tell you if he's atheist or not). The religious right are single issue (or narrow scope) voters who are willing pawns of the politically conservative. I can't believe you're just now noticing the pandering to of the religious folks in this country. Ever since Johnson signed the Civil Rights Act (1964?), the south (up to that point was solidly Democrat) has been using it's religiously inspired bigotry to put Repubs in office for decades regardless of whether or not the political/economic agenda of said Repub was in their best interest. So long as the fags, blacks, feminists, the educated, the pro-science and pro-personal rights people are demonized (and white, straight Christian men are elevated to the highest of moral/social standings), the religious right couldn't care less what else the Repubs are up to.

[amb]

Holland, not so much. The churches seem to have a slightly better attendance since the beginning of the crisis, but not really in politics. We do have a Christian Democratic party in office, but they lost in the last European elections.
There was a billboard with the Dutch version of 'There is probably no God so don't worry' near a very busy highway, and I don't remember any newspaper, news show or politician ranting against it.
Try a sign saying; ''The prophet Muhammad was a pedophile'' and see the response.
:D

[amb]

Tony Blair talked about how YHVH had spoken to him during the time of the Iraq war, but he only mentioned this after leaving office, and it was probably intended to be a lead-in to his faith initiative thing.

I think that anyone saying this sort of thing while in office in the UK would suffer a distinct loss of credibility.

Remember, every word that comes out of a politician's mouth is placed there by his/hers minders. It's when they open their greedy mouths when alone with no minders that they get into all sorts of trouble. :p

[Ducky]

The US, surely. We have yet to elect an avowed atheist to any office, AFAIK.

There's at least one. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pete_Stark)

[amb]

Whatever happened to the good Rev.Fred Niles who got himself elected to Parliament?
Has he been a little quite lately, or is he history? Don't hear much about Eastern States politics here in the West. I do know that Labor will get wiped out come the next elections in N S W.

[oldhat]

The US, surely. We have yet to elect an avowed atheist to any office, AFAIK.

Avowed? No.

Washington, Adams, Jefferson and Lincoln at least were almost certainly atheists, judging by their writings. I don't see how you could make an argument that Jefferson was anything but an atheist, in fact.

FDR likely was an atheist as well.

I have suspicions that Obama is an atheist as well, although he could never say so in public. His membership at that church seemed like a calculated political move.

[oldhat]

I don't think Reagan ever believed in a god, either, his speechwriter's speeches notwithstanding. He didn't care about church or anything. I don't know if that makes him an affirmative atheist.

[Ducky]

Avowed? No.

Washington, Adams, Jefferson and Lincoln at least were almost certainly atheists, judging by their writings. I don't see how you could make an argument that Jefferson was anything but an atheist, in fact.

FDR likely was an atheist as well.

I have suspicions that Obama is an atheist as well, although he could never say so in public. His membership at that church seemed like a calculated political move.

What, are my posts invisible? Go look up Pete Stark on Wiki.

[Femke]

Try a sign saying; ''The prophet Muhammad was a pedophile'' and see the response.
:D

Whoa, I remember the Danish. :boxedin: There might be a riot or two, you're right.
However, I don't think many politicians would rant about that either, because as far as I know we have not many fundy muslims in Parliament. Some might want to assuage the muslim voters by saying it is inappropriate or something, however.
:rolleyes:Geert Wilders (the xenofobic anti-islam party) might start cheering, even.

[Freethinker]

Is it really possible that I'm the only politically conservative atheist in this country? It seems that way, from the way politicians and the TV talking heads babble about the "religious right".

There are at least two of us, although I wouldn't be described as conservative in all aspects of my politics.

[Freethinker]

Umm, GWB had God personally telling him what to do. Plus other signs like having some dozens of appointees which were graduates of Pat Robertson's school.

Now I don't know if he was actually that religious himself, but it's hard to imagine anyone pandering to the bible-thumpers more than that. Without actually being an official theocracy, that is.

I am acquainted with someone who had daily contact with GW Bush for some time before he entered politics. He told me that Bush had no use for religion whatsoever. Neither Bush was very popular with mainstream conservatives. GW had to court the religious vote to get elected. They are low-hanging fruit, since they have a few hot-button issues like abortion where there really isn't much that can be done either way in the US. Lip service is enough to sell your faith, since the public accepts that faith is a personal thing.

All politicians are whores who will say almost anything to sell themselves to special interest groups. Pretending to be religious is/has been a pretty safe bet in the US, since it doesn't alienate any large voting blocks, but does placate the sheep.

[maddog]

I can't believe you're just now noticing the pandering to of the religious folks in this country. Ever since Johnson signed the Civil Rights Act (1964?), the south (up to that point was solidly Democrat) has been using it's religiously inspired bigotry to put Repubs in office for decades regardless of whether or not the political/economic agenda of said Repub was in their best interest.

I can't speak to the late '60s, as I was only born in '65, but it's not "just now noticing the pandering"; it's that I am noticing a significant (it seems to me) increase in the pandering.

So long as the fags, blacks, feminists, the educated, the pro-science and pro-personal rights people are demonized (and white, straight Christian men are elevated to the highest of moral/social standings), the religious right couldn't care less what else the Repubs are up to.

You're welcome to your opinion, but this is not even remotely accurate in terms of what I see in the Republican party.

[Harpyja]

There's at least one. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pete_Stark)

Unfortunately, he seems to be the only one.

Stark is the first, and so far only, openly atheist member of the United States Congress.

EDIT: Upon reading the article, I think that it's a shame that the first atheist member of Congress has made so many potentially grating statements.

[UnrepentantSinner]

Lionking, if Australia is so irreligious, where did Ken Ham come from?

Avowed? No.

Washington, Adams, Jefferson and Lincoln at least were almost certainly atheists, judging by their writings. I don't see how you could make an argument that Jefferson was anything but an atheist, in fact.

Not to get off topic, but no. All of them held unorthodox views, but they weren't almost certainly atheists.

[lionking]

Lionking, if Australia is so irreligious, where did Ken Ham come from?


We've always had our religious kooks, some world class, but the politicisation of religion is something recent and worrying (and to MG1962, I am aware of the catholic-led Labor Party split and the DLP, but was more concerned with recent history).

[Emperornick]

Obama was the first president to include the term "non-believers" in his inaugural address. At least he'll admit we exist. It's a step!

[amb]

You must admit. The Obama family attending church on Sunday warms the bible belt's cockles and it's a feel good feeling for all xtians. Me? It makes me feel sick.:o

[maddog]

It makes me feel sick.:o

Just about anything done or said by any politician does that to me. :mad:

[amb]

Especially when it comes to a pay raise, or better perks.

[Akhenaten]

Hi lionking!

Do you think it would be fair of me to observe that our pollies aren't so much becoming more religious (which is a spiritual thing and takes time and commitment), but more Christian (which is more about PR and can be done with a press release).

If it's not fair, then I've become a cynic. Ah well.


Cheers,

Dave

[pchams]

Canada elected evangelist Stephen Harper (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stephen_Harper) as PM, who then appointed a creationist chiropractor (http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2009/03/17/is-canadas-science-minister-a-creationist/) as science minister. :rolleyes:

[lionking]

Hi lionking!

Do you think it would be fair of me to observe that our pollies aren't so much becoming more religious (which is a spiritual thing and takes time and commitment), but more Christian (which is more about PR and can be done with a press release).

If it's not fair, then I've become a cynic. Ah well.


Cheers,

Dave

Good point Dave. I don't see any manifestation of Buddhism or Hinduism.

[amb]

Canada elected evangelist Stephen Harper (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stephen_Harper) as PM, who then appointed a creationist chiropractor (http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2009/03/17/is-canadas-science-minister-a-creationist/) as science minister. :rolleyes:

It figures!! What else did the good naive people of Canada expect voting in a fundie. Next on the agenda is the banning of science in the classrooms. Biology will be replaced by creationism. Oh brother!!!! :rolleyes:

[Coolhat]

Over here politicians (outside the relatively small Christian democrat party) rarely bring out their religious views and there are plenty of non-religious politicians, especially on the left side of the spectrum.

However, the result of the last European parliament elections was slightly disturbing. Out of the 13 Finnish MEPs one is an orthodox christian priest and two others can be pretty safely described as fundies: one laestadian (a fundamentalist christian sect that holds a lot of power in Northern Finland) and one pentecostal. Also, Timo Soini, the leader of the right-wing populist party "True Finns" and the winner of highest personal vote count in all of Finland, has been vocal about his Roman catholic faith.

[amb]

In my humble opinion, these people are not fit to govern, in any form. If they are stupid enough to believe the mumbo-jumbo of scripture, how on Earth are they capable of making decisions regarding a nation's best interest?