Monday, October 1, 2007

Values vacuum: State replaces church

By John McNeil of Challenge Weekly, New Zealand
Special to ASSIST News Service

CHRISTCHURCH NZ (ANS) -- New Zealand society is looking less to the church for its values and more to Parliament, says a researcher investigating how Parliament handles moral issues

David Lindsey.

David Lindsey, who is compiling the research for a PhD thesis, said as the church had retreated from the public sphere, or become more of a minority group in society, Parliament had filled the gap, making more decisions that impinge on the values of society.

  “I don’t think there was a conspiracy to get Parliament involved in the family and other institutions – I think it just happened because the church abdicated its responsibility in that area, and tended to become inwardly focused, more spiritual than seeing Christianity as having a role in public affairs,” he said.

  It appeared Parliament’s role was being transformed in an unprecedented manner.

  “Most notable has been the increasing involvement of Parliament in issues that have conventionally been considered off-limits because of their ‘private’ or ‘moral’ component,” he said.

  These issues have included abortion, euthanasia, homosexuality, same-sex marriage, smacking, gambling, smoking, genetic modification, the minimum drinking age and prostitution.

  Recent legislation exceeds previous legislation in both depth and breadth on these issues. Further consideration of genetic modification, parental authority and issues related to bioethics - stem cell research, genetic screening and manipulation of unborn children – may extend Parliament’s moral role even further.

  “Society’s comparatively mute reaction to the flurry of recent moral legislation is remarkable, which in itself seems worth investigating,” he said.

  Mr Lindsey said the shift had a range of spin-offs. Whereas once values were the domain of the church, now MPs are making value decisions that get codified in law. Values are determined by vote.

  “On what basis are they doing it?” he asked. “Is it in reference to their own conscience, their own religion, to what will get them re-elected, what their constituents want, or to what will be saleable in the marketplace of ideas.”

  Mr Lindsay questioned the basis for a Christian to obey such laws. Christians knew if God said it, it must be obeyed, but if Parliament said homosexuality of smacking is right or wrong, that was a different story.

  “This is a movement from transcendent authority to sociological authority,” he said.

  He believes that the involvement of parliament in people’s lives quickened from the 1970s.

  “It is not just the big moral issues; there has been an undercurrent of involvement in values setting. The government is saying, ‘it is our role to decide what is best for you, and what will be the standards for society.’”

  The Christian consensus has been passed over in favour of individual human rights. Some of the moral legislation has altered attitudes towards these values, by design or otherwise.

  New ideas and concepts are emerging that are altering Parliament’s attitude towards its own role and, even, the basis of society, including the nature and source of truth, and nature of democracy, and the role of the state in establishing values.

  Mr Lindsey’s passion is to see the church re-engage with society and politics, but to do that in a more comprehensive way. He would like it explore what the church’s message means in the public realm.

  “What is a Christian position on politics?” he asked. “What does a Christian say about what it means to have redemption in society [as opposed to personal redemption]?”

  He said the Church tended to preach to itself and convert people one by one, leaving the running of society to secularists.

  “Then it complains those secularists have passed legislation on prostitution or homosexuality when it has not offered any cogent framework for an alternative.”

Conscience denied

• Since 1999 there have been 14 bills on which a conscience vote (voting according to conscience and not along party lines) has been permitted.
   
• Seven of the bills involved moral or family issues.
   
• Key issues were decriminalisation of prostitution, the passing of civil unions, the debate over euthanasia, care of children legislation, and the so-called anti-smacking bill.
   
• Other issues put to conscience vote include lowering the drinking age, moves to expand Sunday trading, the abolition of smoking in public places, and casino control.
   
• Questions have arisen during debate on the smacking bill, civil unions and prostitution bills, about the amount of pressure being put on Labour MPs and others to vote along Labour party lines.
   
• A glaring example of an MP bowing to pressure was the abstention by Labour list MP Ashraf Choudhary in the final vote on the Prostitution Bill, despite his previous opposition, allowing the bill to pass into law. The Muslim community had expected him to strongly oppose the legislation.

---

John McNeil, a veteran of 40 years of newspaper and radio journalism, is South Island editor for Challenge Weekly, New Zealand’s non-denominational, independent national Christian newspaper.

---

** You may republish this story with proper attribution.
Send this story to a friend.