Would you like salt with that?

My WebSalt article about the Greens is now up. You should go over there, read it, and argue it out with me in the comments… It’s much more balanced than my regular blogging fodder because it’s not polemic – it’s balanced… I hope.

“But there is much in their policy platform to celebrate – an Australian Christian Lobby media release issued prior to the 2008 election praised the Greens for their strong stance on climate change, refugees, overseas aid, work life balance and poverty. These are important issues – and should be serious concerns for biblical Christians.” “The criteria that determine an individual’s political preference will come down to personal convictions – that’s the fundamental freedom offered by a liberal democracy. So voters need to decide for themselves whether caring for the poor should be the government’s concern or the church’s? Or whether we should impose a Christian ethical framework on non-believers? Can we vote for a party that purposefully pursues an easing of restrictions in the circumstances surrounding the termination of the lives of unborn children? Just how much of a concern is the environment?”


Izaac says:

You’re right. It was too balanced.

Nathan says:

“You’re right. It was too balanced.”

Yeah. But that’s journalism. If people want to know what I really think they can check out my “anti-green” rants.

I can respect where Jenny Stirling is coming from as a “liberal” Christian who is prepared to understand the Bible through culture – rather than the other way around. If I was a “liberal” Christian, and a hippy, I’d probably vote for her.

queenstuss says:

I agree, nothing to argue with, really. Though I’m more impressed with Jenny Stirling than I’ve ever been before, was that your intention?