Interesting development in Saturday's election: up to 250,000 Australians voting for the Family First party. Their senator may even hold the balance of power!
My fist reaction was: what a strange name for an overtly Christian group (primarily AOG) in the light of some of the less than complimentary things Jesus said about families (Luke talks about the demands of discipleship entailing hating your father, mother etc!) And are we not called to seek first, not family, but the kingdom of God!? That may mean not necessarily signing up to the values of society (economic growth, national security, the nuclear family etc as ulimate goods), but being committed to the outcasts and forgotten ones, as Jesus was. My understanding of the reign of God and baptismal living have always pushed me to voting for the left end of the political spectrum.
I then wondered if this was another "family values" push that would give single mums, gays, those incapable of having children etc a hard time? And what would an overtly Christian group say about families of other faiths?
So I checked out their website: http://familyfirst.org.au/policy.php. Indigenous Australians, refugees and asylum seekers, the war Iraq and the environment were some of the bits I checked out. While many of their policies are vague and obviously need lots of development, they do actually talk about social justice etc. A surprise for me was the acknowledgement of a diversity of beliefs, traditions and values in Australian society.
I suspect that dialogue rather than caricature may be more productive.
Does anyone have any more first hand experience of the party and its leaders? Did any Insights list members vote for them? Should some of us join, encourage further theological reflection and help them to sharpen their policies? Are there aspects we should warn people about?
Rob Bos
With the exception of extremists who were quickly toted in the press, and disavowed by Party leaders, Family First's stated policy is to support and promote family life. We might be critical of its conservative fundamentalist approach to "family values" (eg. they are dead set against changing the law to recognise gay marrieages), but from what I've read on the web site there is a broad-based set of policies that incorporate aboriginal reconciliation, environmental and justice issues.
My disappointment with Family First Party (FFP) was that they made a "political deal" with the Coalition, who placed them #2 on their how to vote cards. With the exception of the Greens (Family First's "arch enemies"), all the other parties placed FFP pretty high in their preferences and as a result, it looks like they have secured a seat in the Senate with only 45,000 votes.
If Family First is indeed "putting families first", then I would have expected their support of Labour's election promises and policies over that of the Liberal Party. (Labour, I was told, did try to get 2nd place preferences from them, but that was abandoned by FFP when the Greens put their backing behind Labour).
I seriously think it is a party to watch. Some of the questions I would ask would be in terms of its constitution, process of choosing candidates and determining policies. What are the requirements of its membership? - Are there any anamolies as what took place with One Nation?
One of the agreements family first made with the Liberals was a request that every piece of legislation be subject a "family impact statement" (cf. environmental impact). If the Libs take them seriously this could be of great value.
Mind you, this is a conservative protestant wing. It claims a "secular agenda" that may appeal to a broad range of people (eg. families, agnostics, nominal Christians, catholics, orthodox and protestant). I'm sure they'd be quite conservative on matters of gambling, alcohol, drugs, tobacco, etc. And would probably favour limiting poker machine and casino venues. It is calling for an apology from the federal government re. the "lost generations", and is promoting reconciliation. It is also calling for humane treatment of refugees and asylum seekers, which is similar in policy to those of "The Justice Project", Greens and Democrats.
Whether they would recognise "family rights" for de facto couples securing access to Centrelink and other services, would be another question.
I think it is new movement to reckon and dialogue with, rather than dismissing them outright as just another "right-wing lunatic fringe".
Cheers from Cowes,
John M.
<where the Apostolic Faith pastor passed out FFP how to vote cards, and the UCA minister passed out "Justice Project" how to vote cards (re. Refugees) side by side.
------------------------------------------------------------------- John Maynard ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) PO Box 600, Cowes VIC 3922 Australia -------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------------------------------ - You are subscribed to the mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] - To unsubscribe, email [EMAIL PROTECTED] and put in the message body 'unsubscribe insights-l' (ell, not one (1)) See: http://nsw.uca.org.au/insights-l-information.htm ------------------------------------------------------
