As you may or may not really care, Australia had it’s election recently and voted in a new Prime Minister, Kevin Rudd.

The night of the election, I was out with a friend who’s a regular church goer. She told me that the previous sunday in church, the congregation was told not to vote for Kevin Rudd because “he was evil as he had attended a strip club in New York.” (When this story came out, Rudd said that he couldn’t really remember the night in question because he was drunk - very Australian!)

Now, I’m not entirely sure which domination of church my friend attends, or whether all churches of this domination were telling their congregations this.

I think it is wrong to force someone to vote a certain way, especially to threaten someone with eternal damnation for voting a certain way.  Isn’t that why secret balloting was invented?

Does anyone know if the church committed an illegal act by doing this?

Was the church forcing it’s members to not vote for him
or was it just a suggestion?

If they’re forcing then it’s probably time to find another church

if a suggestion, it’s not as bad, but the church should still keep their noses out of politics.

A voting advice is given by organisations of all kinds, from Unions to Churches to pressure groups to celebrities (e.g., like in the US Oprah is pushing Obama currently), so in that sense it is nothing unusual what this church did. As long as it is not pressed as “compulsory” there need not be anything wrong with it.

When you ally yourself with any specific group, you can easily be unsettled when that group presses an idea upon you that doesn’t ‘jive’ with your own heart.  What is counted upon is that by using the group’s ideals as a kind of right-justification, there is almost a dread to the individual if they do not follow the ‘advice’. 

While it isn’t illegal,  or even ‘brainwashing’ by definition, it is savvy manipulation.  When religious groups use this kind of machinery, it can have the affect that Hell-Fire-Brimstone lectures have on those most vulnerable.  This is absolutely why Church and State MUST be held separate always.

Anyone with a lick of sense is going to vote based on criteria other than “he is evil”.  People who are that easily influenced are a lobbyists dream but exactly the wrong type of people to be choosing a government.  I’m thinking that most of the congregation took the pastors words with a grain of salt.  If they are like most people I know the stuff that they hear in church is purged the moment they walk out the door.  It’s the real believers that will take it all as gospel.

Yeah, I don’t think it’s illegal unless they’re actually being coerced into voting a certain way.  After all, that’s what campaigning is:  saying, “Vote for this person!” or “Don’t vote for this person!”.  Even the politicians themselves aren’t immune from it, having considerable pressure to vote according to their party’s line.  It’s all part of having an elected form of government.

Our church doesnot get involved in politics. One reason is that it’s to devisive.  Another reason is because Jesus did not get involved in politics while he was on earth.  We believe the Bible promises a better world later basicly.

See, I didn’t have a problem with it, other than i don’t think it’s the church’s place.

My friend, however, is obsessive compulsive, and becomes paranoid very easily.  She took those words to heart.  And I’m sure that there are other devoutly religious people who would have done the same. 

I’m not religious, and this issue is one of the reasons why.

I hate the fact that priests sometimes abuse their power over their congregation when complaining about their personal opinions.

Why did we ever stop feeding Christians to the lions?

Because at least some of us are pretty nice people?

Why did we stop feeding pretty nice people to the lions?

It’s all downhill…

Well, how about that it’s not really nice to feed people - whether they are nice or not - to the lions? The idea gives me, at least, a few ethical qualms…