I chuckled out loud when I read the email from reader Janet. On Sunday I reminded the children that we had boxed up our Hallelujahs for Lent, although I mumbled "Hmm,hmm, hum, ahs" to avoid using the word. Janet asked if we could also box up the word "coalition" until May 2nd. Clever.
It is a privilege to elect those who represent us at every level of government, but I am amongst those who could have waited on this federal election. The expense and the fuss will probably bring us a similar result, and this seems to fit into a certain definition of insanity attributed to Albert Einstein; doing the same thing over and over, anticipating a different result.
How do we decide who to vote for in our various ridings, and as our prime minister? What are the issues which are essential? The CBC has created an online tool called the Vote Compass which allows folk to answer a series of questions to create a personal voting profile. Presumably it will help us decide which party suits us best, although the critics of the questions and methodology are already out there.
The United Church has created an election kit to help us consider the key areas for Christians to ponder and discuss http://www.united-church.ca/getinvolved/takeaction/election I'm glad our church was so quick off the mark with this.
How do you feel about the impending election? Anyone else concerned that we will be up to our earlobes in mud-slinging? Will you take the time to acquaint yourself with the issues and how you might vote as a person of faith?
8 comments:
I am a political junkie, so bring on the election! When a government is found in contempt, I think people should take notice. Around the world people are standing up and fighting for democracy. If only Canadians would realize how easy it is to lose basic freedoms that we take for granted. I hope Canadians will stand up and vote!
I'm with Laurie: grab your goggles and bring on the mud! BOO YAH!
I must confess, though, that I try not to let my faith influence my vote.
Perhaps I'm a staid separation of church and state kinda guy, but divorcing the two always feels like the right tack when it comes to politics. Maybe I read too much about Maurice Duplessis in the '50s in my Canadian history classes ... I dunno.
The idea of anyone's faith - including my own - being a driving force behind civic issues that affect us all doesn't sit well with me.
Well said Ian, leave faith out of it.
As far as I am concerned there is not even a vague resemblance between the separation of church and state -- a misunderstood priniple anyway --and choosing to act, including voting, according to one's Christian conscience.
I am a Christian who is a Canadian, not someone who compartmentalizes the two.
Let me clarify and expand upon my position, David.
Separation of church and state IS misunderstood. It ensures that the government does not express preferential treatment for one faith over another. Many often interpret it, however, as meaning "faith cannot be expressed in the public sphere." This is untrue, and is not what I take exception to.
Increasingly, people are co-opting the phrase "separation of church and state" to identify a growing wariness with respect to faith groups organizing to influence public policy in ways that adhere to their sect's beliefs. It's this interpretation of "separation of church and state" that I alluded to in my previous posting.
As evidence of this problem, I'd point to the enormous power that the evangelical movement holds over American politicians. Fundamentalist faith groups can literally force the outcomes of elections down south, such is the strength of their organization and financing. If an incumbent chooses to vote in a way that conflicts with these groups' positions, it could spell the end of their congressional/senatorial career due to mobilization of that group against the individual.
It simply amazes me that a country founded on freedom from religious oppression can tolerate this kind of extrinsic influence on government.
In Canada, it's been recently well documented how similar movements are steadily growing in B.C., Alberta and Ontario. I'd recommend you read Marci Mcdonald's "The Armageddon Factor: The Rise of Christian Nationalism in Canada" for a more in depth study of the origins, motives and growing power of this movement. Its implications on public policy could prove profound, indeed.
Back to the ballot box, and what I had to say previously: it's my opinion that faith (for those who hold it)has its place in each individual's life and work and I would never, ever try to refute or challenge that with any person of any faith.
Nor am I saying that everyone who votes with their relgious conscience is going to mobilize the like-minded to march on Parliament Hill. Intermingling faith and politics, however, is something I am strongly against.
I choose to compartmentalize and vote according to my study of the issues and my moral conscience as developed through my upbringing and experience. My religious views I leave out of the equation because voting with them in mind constitutes an(however slight) imposition of the freedoms of my fellow citizens.
I wish I had your way with words Ian. That was so well said.
I'm jumping in late I know, but I have to say this election is a big waste of time, and resources. I cannot see how it will change the look of our government. Those who voted PC last time will again because of the strength of our economy. Those who vote for one of the other 3 will split their vote.
I don't understand how the liberals think they can win with Ignatief as the leader. They don't even have candidates in all the Ontario ridings yet. The NDP has a pretty good leader, but they are very week in local candidates. Remember the McKeever debacle last election.
The Bloc splits the conservative vote in Quebec. If there was to be a coalition government the Conservatives, and the Bloc have the most in common when you remove the separatist agenda.
Then we have Lizzy-May and the Green party with 7% popular vote last time out, but yet to win a seat in parliament; let alone a debate table. Here is a party with all good intentions, but little experience, and difficulty drawing credible candidates in more than a handful of ridings.
May 3rd we will be back to where we are today.
Anything less than a majority is a waste of our freedom, because anyone who breaks party doctrine to actually work for the people is back benched, and pushed out.
I also believe that 4 years is too short of a term. Change cannot be made quickly. Their needs to be time to make tough decisions, and time to see them through. If we keep changing direction every time an unpopular decision is made we end up nowhere.
We do have it good in this country, and because of this we allow our elected officials to pad their pockets, make back door deals for their friends, waste money on bureaucratic BS that does nothing but employ more useless paper pushers that provide more obstacles for those who are actually working for a living.
Look at the HST. The government makes more money on a product than the company selling it. No matter how good at negotiating the price of your next car the government makes 13%. At full price the dealer does not get 13% except on the top of the line stuff sometimes. Then they tax the business on what it makes, on the property it is on, on some imports, on the workers wages, on building permits, licences, etc.
I love the simplicity of that old series "Little House on the Prairie" when they are lined up to pay property tax for the 1st time. Charles says to Edwards sarcastically "some day they might even think of a way to tax a man's wages". They sure got that figured out. I wouldn't mind if it went to curing cancer rather than bureaucratic non-sense.
Political junkie I am not. Fed up with lies and waste I am!
As a person of faith I don't see how God doesn't smite all the lying, deceitful, two timing, floor flushing, money grubbing, greedy, politicians, and bless the good one. (who ever that is)
I wasn't going to comment, but here goes.
As a person of faith, my beliefs strongly influence how I perceive the way our nation is run. I think it's a wonderful thing when a group of like-minded individuals, whether they be Christians or not, rally together to voice their opinion to the government, whether it be with letters, petitions, walks, etc. It shows that we are passionate about justice and willing to try and make a change in our world.
In the states, the problem is that a lot of these strong Christian groups also have money. These Christians use they money they have to gain power over people in politics.
In Saskatchewan Conference, we sometimes pass motions at our annual meeting that are in regards to issues that we want to bring before the provincial government. Every year, we bring before the government a brief. Within this brief are arguments for or against certain policies and we always state why we believe this way (our theological rationale). In no way are we saying our beliefs are more important than other; we are only stating where we are coming from. I can share my faith without stepping on others who may believe another way. In fact, Marti Tindal, our United Church moderator, has recently been working with other faiths to speak to our government about environmental concerns. As a people of faith, many can come as one together to speak about this concern.
I believe religion exists to bring like-minded people together to talk about those beliefs, to challenge each other, to worship and care for each other, and, in the case of Christianity, to follow the ministry of Jesus and not be silent in the face of corruption and greed. Jesus not only spoke against his own religion's authorities, but against the Roman Empire.
In saying all of this, I still cannot vote because I am not a citizen. It's something I need to work on but, wow!, there is a lot of paperwork and so little time.
Post a Comment