Guy Crouchback: Christian values needed in politics

If it is correct (a big “if”) that there are proportionately more Christians in Parliament than in the general population, what does it mean?
There are too many Christians in parliament and they don’t reflect the make-up of modern Australia, according to Democrats leader Lyn Allison. People with very strong religious views were “heavily over-represented”.
If it is correct (a big “if”) that there are proportionately more Christians in Parliament than in the general population, what does it mean?
That many non-Christian voters trust Christians to represent them, perhaps? Many non-Christians entrust themselves and their families to Christian schools, hospitals, retirement villages etc.
The political record of non-Christian and anti-Christian ideologies as expressed in political action in the last couple of centuries, around the world from Austerlitz to Auschwitz, the Gulag and the World Trade Centre has not inspired optimism.
One of the last politicians to try to implement a militantly anti-Christian political agenda in Australia was the Whitlam Government’s late Senator Lionel Murphy, whose Family Law Act, aimed explicitly at destroying the Christian foundations of marriage and the family in this country led, for a time, to the enrichment of many lawyers but probably serious damaged society in many other ways.
He also wanted what he called “Genetic therapy,” advocating: The virtually complete international agreement on the means and pace by which human growth rates throughout the world will be brought to zero and in some cases made to become temporarily negative, … [and] increased analysis of the genetics of modern and Aboriginal human populations and [the] development of both population and individual genetic therapy.
Another active anti-Christian, or at least Gnostic, in politics at the same time was the late R. F. X. Connor, whose policies managed to wreck the mining industry, and who once expressed his philosophy in the following terms:
“No man is complete who lacks a cosmogony, or who does not possess the knowledge that he is intermediate in stature between the atom and the star. Man is, in fact, the microcosm of the macrocosm, and is in a process of spiritual evolution, of which the present world doubts and fears are the outward symbols.
“I have the firm belief that man is a moral being, and that he is, in fact, emerging slowly but certainly from an age of darkness where materialism and its mechanistic expressions are the symptoms of a deep, but definitely not fatal, spiritual crisis, Man, in fact, has yet to realise the significance of the inscription on the portals of Eleusis: ‘Man, Know Thyself’.”
Yet another Gnostic, the late Dr Jim Cairns (who certainly had no religious qualms about a little matter of perjury for profit), stated:
“It is difficult to resist the conclusion that the history of man as seen through the eyes of Labor’s philosophers shows a purpose, a groping, a drive towards a better life. How else could all the evolutionary stages have been overcome? How else could the primeval swamps and jungles, the fires, storms, wars, the cruelties of man to man, the poverty, isolation and neglect have been overcome?
“This evolution is certainly not without direction. It moves logically as though it has a destination. And that destination is not of man divided into nations, races, parties or groups; it is man in one, men in unity.
“This is not a theistic or atheistic philosophy. It is hardly agnostic because a positive or negative theistic view is not relevant at all. It is positively concerned with people and has a positive assumption of their eventual unity.”
With this kind of occultist wisdom around, a preference by voters for Christian politicians looks pretty reasonable.