Arrowman

(Does anyone know of a quality Australian-based message board where I can pontificate on Australian current affairs etc?)

Permission to hijack a small portion of the Infidels board for an Aussie discussion:

How do you see the history, current status and future of C-S separation in Australia? Especially in light of recent events in the US? Will we see the same issues coming up here?

I'm going to "post and run" on this one - sorry - I don't have time to compose a detailed essay right now but I'd like toss out some thoughts and see what others have to say.

Some bullet points/assertions from me to tee it off:

- Australia has a different demographic and history from the US - convict vs free settlement, remained under English influence much longer etc.

- But Australia does have a history of immigrants escaping religious intolerance (eg Germans into South Australia, mid 1800s - including my maternal ancestors).

- Australian Christianity is dominated by churches which have a liberal attitude to C-S separation, whereas the US has a much larger and more influential fundamentalist minority.

- For some reason, religion and patriotism are much more closely related in people's minds in the US.

- Australia has exactly the same consitutional provisions for C-S separation, as does the US. Presumably our FFs borrowed the words. What we do not have, is the extensive Supreme Court caselaw to back it up. And neither, I suspect, do we have reams of writings from our FFs on the subject, from which we may glean their intent.

C-S separation is not the same hot public issue as it is in the US. I suspect that if you asked 100 Americans, and 100 Australians, to define "Church state separation" you'd get more clear (if in some cases incorrect) answers from the Americans than from the Australians, who would probably largely answer "what?".

By and large we in Australia seem to enjoy a high degree of C-S separation, although we see the wall breached in small ways all the time.

Even when our High Anglican Prime Minister mooted the idea of "Almighty God" being mentioned (retained) in a revised preamble to the constitution, he did so in a rather lukewarm way, acknowledged the problems and didn't push it hard. In fact, in that, compared to GW Bush Little Johnny Howard looks like a raving communist athiest.

Should we be pleased that we "don't have the same level of problem that have in the US"? Or is that complacency?

Oh, and one for the legal experts - if a C-S case were brought to court in Australia, and given that we have the same words in our consitution, to what extent would you expect our High Court to rely on the previous judgements of the US Supreme Court? I know of course that we do not formally rely on the SOCUS for precedent, but it seems to be inescapable that the two constitutions were intended to say the same thing, and therefore common sense (yes, I know, common sense in a law court...) dictates that we take some interest. Just a side thought.

Skepticwithachainsaw

Well as a Pommy, I have to say that I think we have far less of a problem Arrow, now I can't speak for Australia but I get the impression that the situation is similar to it is over here.

In theory the Church of England is an important, influential factor in British life, in practice it only really acts as window dressing on state occasions, many of the Bishops have been booted out of the house of Lords (as a general shake up of it, not as a specific target) and although the Queen (similarly a archaic and powerless institution) is technically the head of the Church of England she seems to make an effort to be very multi-cultrual. Charles (the prince) has implied that he will become “defender of the Faiths” instead of “Defender of the Faith” and he’ll be crowned with assistance rather than just by the Archbishop of Canterbury (is it just me or do those priests really need to work out more&#8230 .

Now to get a bit more personal, I went to Church of England run Infant and Junior Schools (4-11) and we had morning prayer, Christmas Carols, local Vicar came to present assembly every Tuesday et all. Now my Parents aren’t Christian (like most people in this country it simply doesn’t influence their lives) they were the closest schools (and only ones in the village). In fact CoE schools make up 25% of all state-run primary (state as in government, not your type of state) primary schools in England are Church of England schools, they receive their funding from the local education authorities (I.e the government) but the land and buildings are from the CoE (who also contribute 15% for building costs).

Now this is where it is interesting, as I know that of the 100 or so people who went to the same schools as me only about 8 I know are active Christians (and even these don’t go to the COE, probably because it's too soft for them...). It may just be where I live that breeds cynical, hardened secularists but I have a distinct feeling that this is a general trend.

Combine this with a Church attendance of less than 10% an a population of non-believers being around 40=50%)
As I see it England hasn't really got a demand for a greater Church-State separation because in practice the Church's influence in minimal , indeed the Church often appears to want to separate itself, fully aware of the situation it is in. In general religion is a lot less important than in the states

Would it be sort of safe to assume that the situation is pretty much the same in Oz?

Arrowman

You are right, Skeptic - the general situation is similar in Oz, although the influence of the Anglican church is diluted through distance and general Aussie disrespect . However church leaders, particularly Anglican And Catholic, still have a disproportionate influence in public debates (eg stem cell research).

(Noting however that the stem cell debate in Australia was resolved fairly rapidly and with what I would say was fairly minimal heat, despite the protests of branches of the Catholic curch thinly disguised as "bio-ethics institutes".)

The Queen is of course our Head of State but the fact that she is also "Defender of the Faith" causes only mild annoyance and I think it is widely regarded as just a historical anachronism more than having any real significance. And of course over 50% of Australians want a Republic anyway, for reasons unrelated to C-S separation.

On schools - the situation here is slightly different; the government provides subsidies to private schools (rather than a direct partnership, as you describe) but the reasons for that (and the public debate over how much, and to which schools) centres more on educational and economic issues than on C-S separation. Most Anglican schools (which dominate the "elite private school" market) are criticised for receiving government funding not because they are religious schools, but because they are "elite".

As for church attendance etc - I don't know the attendance stats for Australia but I'd be surprised if it was much above the 10% you give for the UK.

I am surprised at your "proportion of non-believers around 40-50%". The official number in Australia, according to the latest census, is 68% Christian, about 16% no religion (atheist etc) and the rest is either minor religions or overseas visitors ect who are not counted in that question. Are you really down to 50% in UK?

PS I believe (and I think a lot of church leaders would reluctantly agree) that even 68% is an overstatement of the population of "True Christians" because so many people are apatheists, and just tick "Christian" or "CofE" when asked their religion, even though they don't really practice it.