(A Christian perspective on Australian politics)

I have thought long and hard on this and I have to say that I just don’t think most people make an informed decision about who to vote for, based on a careful consideration of the different parties policies. They don’t weigh or evaluate or appraise.

But if people don’t vote on that basis, then what actually is guiding their decision? I think a number of things are driving them. They include:

* Their environment they grew up in. Who did their parents vote for? (Apparently 80% of people vote the same way their parents or their most influential parent, voted).

* What was their socio-economic background? What is it still like? (People raised in a solid working class home with strong views on the need for trade union membership, will tend to vote Labor, whereas people raised in more middle class and upper middle class homes, with values based on individualism and personal wealth accumulation, will tend to vote coalition. It is not as simple as that, but you hopefully get the drift of what I am trying to summarize here.)

* There may just be one key policy – and maybe even two. There will be a key issue that they either strongly support or strongly hate, and that will draw them to a party or repel them from another party. If gay marriage is the issue I fully support then I will vote Democrats or Green. If gay marriage is abhorrent to me then I will vote Coalition or Labor or Family First. I met a man a few years ago who said he would vote for the party that allowed him to hunt ducks. He could never vote for certain groups – no matter what their policies were on any other issue – if they wanted to ban duck hunting.

* The party that has a key person in it whom they like the most. It seems that a number of people vote for John Howard or for Kym Beasley, rather than for the policies that will be implemented by the parties these people head up. I recall in the last election (between Howard and Latham) a friend saying to me “For me what it comes down to is that point that I would rather be led by a father than a mate.”

* Self-interest. If such and such a party are going to look after me better, I will vote for them. For some it might mean they will keep me in my job and make it more secure. For others the decision might come from a desire to keep their mortgage payments under control. For yet another it may mean they will allow them to send their children to private schools at cheaper rates. For another it may be that they will make dental care free and put it under Medicare. Self-interest will prevail, and the issues that hurt others (foreign policy, the East Timor off shore oil wells, the Iraq war, the sacking of workers, the neglect of disadvantaged groups, the taxing or others more than of me, etc) will be ignored or relegated to “lesser importance issues.”

* Fear. If I fear that my budget will be hurt by a different government; if I fear that Australia will become a target for terrorists by the current government; if I fear that refugees are taking over the country; if I fear that fundamentalist Christians want to make me live by their scruples and are sneaking into Government under appealing slogans and banners – I might vote to avoid that which I fear. Fear and self-interest are close brothers.

So here is my next question: if that is how the ordinary non-Christian voter makes up their mind, then what is it that motivates a Christian to vote the way he or she votes?

 · Is it prayer and a “word from the Spirit”?
 · Is it Bible reading and reflection on passages of scripture that seem to be really important, and then the pointed question: which party best encapsulates those principles? (But which passages are the most important? Love the Lord your God with al your heart and love your neighbor as yourself? Do justice and mercy? Taking care of widows and orphans and other disadvantaged people groups? Sharing our possessions? Or a list of moral sins that include avoiding homosexuality and adultery and fornication?)

 · Could it be discussion of the different parties and their policies, with other church members, using actual sources of material from the different parties? (This is not reading what the Liberals believe in from a Labor writer; it is not believing what the Greens will promote, from a Family First Writer; it is not believing what Labor would do, from a One Nation writer… No…. reading the material from the actual parties themselves.)

 · Or maybe, just maybe the typical Christian voter is influenced in much the same way as the non-Christian voter: by family, upbringing, and their perception of different parties summed down to one or two key policies. Could they be motivated by self interest and by fear as well? Or by which party leader comes across best in the media? It is a bit of a disturbing thought. I have heard it said that the last part of the person to be converted to God is the hip-pocket. But I wonder if another contender for that title is actually our political alliances. We vote the way we have been raised – the way our parents voted (whether or not they were strong Christians) – we vote in ways that look after our self-interest and which alleviate our fears. And we justify continuing in that same vein, after our conversion.

The way I would love it to happen would be for a Christian to decide who to vote for by using the best of all the above:
1) Acknowledging their background and biases and then evaluating them. This might mean rejecting, or refining, or staying with, those biases and attitudes and beliefs. But at least acknowledging them. Identifying self interest and fears, and seeking to respond in a Christ-like way to them.
2) Considering what issues are really important to them and which are not. Not just one key issue. Not even two. But a serious consideration of what is really important and what is less important. This moves away from a single issue voter, to being a broader reflective voter. Why is gay marriage on the top of my list? Why isn’t the need for more housing for the poor? Why is economic progress more important than Australia’s domination of East Timor’s off shore oil wells? Or vice versa. Why are interest rates more important that foreign policy? Or vice versa. Why is climate change more important than the new Industrial Relations legislation? Or vice versa. Would I vote for the Greens if stop the dredging of Port Phillip Bay, but then allow gays to be married? Would I vote for the Liberals if they keep my mortgage reasonably steady, but then steal from the East Timorese? Would I vote for Labor if they help reduce the gap between the rich and poor in this country, but they continue wood chipping of old growth forests? Is the single policy decision all that wise? Or why is duck hunting the ultimate key issue I will use to make my decision? Would I vote for the Nazis if they let me hunt ducks? Would I vote for Communists if they promised to ban homosexuality? No…. Probably not…. But that must mean that there comes a point somewhere, where other issues are coming into it after all. … There is clearly a level or final straw, when a one issue person must become more than that.
3) Prayer. Seeking God. Asking Him if our biases are His biases. Asking Him what is really important and what is of secondary priority. What cluster of issues should I support and what can I tolerate? Because at the end of the day, I have to choose.
4) Bible reading and seeking to determine what really are the key issues that are closest to the heart of God. Is care for the creation more important than blocking gay marriage? Is justice for the poor more important than economic progress at 3-4% a year? Or vice versa. What do I end up tolerating as the cost for supporting the really important issues (whatever they are)?
5) Discussion and study of actual policies from the actual parties. No more relying on such and such email ministry to inform me of Labor policies! No more relying on such and such newsletter or e-letter to tell me what the Liberals think. No more dependence on some conservative Christian organization to tell me what the Greens advocate. Maybe – just maybe – those groups I have been dependent on are themselves bias and they might consciously or subconsciously misrepresent the parties that they say they are “evaluating”. Maybe I should read material from all the parties for myself. There will be web sites…. Mailing lists…. I could get informed…. I don’t have to leave that to others doing it on my behalf.

And then …. then, the Christian is making and informed and prayerfully considered response.

But I don’t have time for all that! I need that email ministry to tell me who is good and who is bad. To simplify the issues. To tell me who is best to vote for. It saves me time. And I like some of the other things they do.

That may well be true. But it may still be misinformation that is driving your actions. And God’s people should not be satisfied with anything less than truth.

If the Christian voter does something similar to the way I have expressed above (numbers 1-5), then it actually becomes rather exciting to find different Christians still voting differently. Some will still vote Liberal and some will vote Labor and some will vote Green and some will vote Family First. It is just the way we end up responding after working with a degree of integrity. And then that diversity or opinion is wonderful. It is the fruit of informed and prayerful reflection. It allows for ongoing analysis and dialogue, and encourages tolerance and “live and let live” attitudes. It reminds us that we are all fallible, and we need to constantly examine ourselves and our beliefs. It challenges us to growth and maturity packaged with genuine grace towards those who are different to us.

Jim Reiher