The Assemblies of God (AOG), under the guise of the Family First Party, are set to take the place of the depleted One Nation as the new right-wing of Australian politics. The AOG's love of tele-evangelism and the media spotlight, together with a fanatical desire for religious influence on government, combine to create a potential force of unmeasurable strength.
Unfortunately the Family First Party have the considerable advantage of presenting, at least on the surface, a "family orientated" Christian niceness that may attract the hearts and minds of many unwary swinging voters. But their blinkered view of putting family first may spark more debate than a red head in a fish and chip shop.
The reality is that Family First is not dissimilar to New Zealand's Destiny Party, famed for their recent black-shirt marches of intolerance and hate. The Destiny Party is born out of the Destiny Church and the links between Destiny and the Assemblies of God are clear cut.
Family First and the AOG are careful to provide some distance between themselves, unlike their New Zealand counterparts. Candidates continue to inform the media that they are not a church-based party, but the facts speak for themselves. Each of the Family First lead Senate candidates hold high ranking or influential positions in their respective churches, all within the AOG ministry.
While the current media focus is on the fight between the Greens and the Democrats for the balance of power little attention is being paid to the growing possibility of right wing conservative control by fanatical churches.
In Australia's secular society, it is paramount that no religion, not even Christianity, should have the opportunity to eat away at the separation of Church and State. This is a fundamental principle of democracy and the Westminster system of government.
By all means, any group has the right to establish a political presence and I will defend anyone's right to free speech and participation in the political process. What I object to, and what all democratically-minded Australians should be concerned about, is the disguise that many political parties, new and old, are adopting in order to attract our votes.
The days of the Democratic Labor Party (DLP) confusing the electorate may have passed, but we continue to be bombarded by names of parties that speak more about well-devised branding, rather than being descriptive of policy. If this election is to be fought and won on the concepts of truth and trust, the average punter will need degrees in psychology and marketing to adequately assess the myriad of options.
It is commonly accepted that the Liberals have not been 'liberal' for many decades. They should at least acknowledge, like their British counterparts, that they are in fact Conservatives. Of course Labor is not any different, having rid itself of the 'u' in labour when Adam was a boy and continuing to drive the working class out of its caucus.
It can be argued that even the Democrats have ignored their namesake for political expediency and short-term gain. This election will determine if they suffer the near fatal effects of member and voter disenchantment.
One Nation is as divided as the "one nation" it originally tried to divide! As for the Greens, the only critical argument seems to be the watermelon theory - green on the outside, red on the inside. And while there's no doubt that socialism always attracts parallels with communism, the Greens have done so little as a significant minor party, that we are left to wonder if the concepts of Greens and "political party" are a tautology.
On the surface the latest entry to the field, Family First, heralds a welcome return to the traditional family values of nurturing, unconditional love, strong morals and inclusion of extended family. Scratch beneath that pleasant exterior, however, and you will recognise a familiar tone of religious indoctrination, intolerance, disregard for some human rights, and specific exclusionary practices.
There is no room in a Family First Australia for anyone other than god-fearing, bible-toting, Christian-blessed families. Whilst the party does not make any direct policy references to controversial issues like individual human rights, read between the lines and some crucial issues of social justice are blatantly avoided.
For a start Family First are heterosexist. They are incapable of respecting an individual's right to love anyone they choose. Their narrow definition of family excludes the thousands of happy and functioning members of alternative families. In treating homosexuals, bisexuals and transfolk with such contempt they aim to set back human rights advances of the last two decades.
Imagine a set of policies that discriminated against children on the basis of how they were conceived. Natural conception would mean you were part of a family, artificial conception would relegate you to second class non-family status. Sounds ridiculous? Of course it is!
It doesn't matter how one becomes part of a family, be it natural or artificial, fostered or adopted, same sex or opposite sex relationships, married or unmarried. The fact that we exist as a family unit should be the only determination of our rights and our treatment as valuable members of society. It is basic human rights.
I'm sure not to win any friends by issuing a critique of a so-called Christian organisation, and I could go on about the myriad of smaller parties that are failing to meet standards of truth, trust and decency in a modern Australia, but time and space prevail.
By this stage, my good reader, you are probably wondering if the author has nothing but cynicism for the state of politics, and perhaps religion, in this country. Relax, there is a lighter side to all of this and a simple moral in my preaching.
This election, I urge caution. What you see, is not necessarily what you get. In a case of reality imitating art, this election you will find yourself voting for Miriam's affection or confronted by an inadequate gaydar on "Playing it Straight".
However, there's no cash jackpot waiting for you, just two simple guarantees regardless of how you vote and who forms government.
Firstly, at least half of you will be disappointed by the outcome of the election. Secondly, there will be no major change to economic, social or foreign policy. Labor and Liberal are almost indistinguishable on the "what". It is only the "how" that differentiates them.
In deciding your vote, I suggest treating the exercise like buying a used car from some dodgy guy in a tweed jacket and jeans. Kick the tyres, look under the bonnet and turn on the ignition. Take it for a test drive and see how it feels. Make certain that you don't get landed with a P76 that's been done up to look like a Rolls Royce!
Remember, this vehicle doesn't come with free auto club membership when it breaks down! Someday soon you could find yourself at the wrong end of a bigoted political party with the balance of power and your basic human rights severely diminished. If you think it won't happen in Australia, you are probably thinking the same as the Germans 70+ years ago and US citizens only 4 years ago.
