Rudd's SENSELESS POLICIES

1. Rudd's policy on Iraq Comment
  "We believe our combat forces should come home and we should not be sending more troops to Iraq."

- Kevin Rudd, News.com.au, February 21, 2007.

 So Kevin thinks we should just abandon Iraq and let it slip further into civil war.

In other words, he really couldn't care less about the Iraqi people, the damage that will be done their country, and the deaths of innocent people.

Is this Kevin Rudd's idea of being a "Christian socialist" and advocating "social justice"?

2. Rudd on morality of human cloning Comment
  "I find it very difficult to support a legal regime that supports the creation of a human life for the single and explicit purpose of experimentation on that human life."

- Kevin Rudd, Sydney Morning Herald, December 6, 2006.

"This is a debate where no side should be arguing any absolute moral position as if they have a monopoly on moral conscience."

- Kevin Rudd, Sydney Morning Herald, December 6, 2006.

 So Kevin expresses personal unease regarding human cloning for experimentation.

However, he also indicates that there is in fact NO absolute moral position on this issue. In other words, neither position is right or wrong.

Therefore, Kevin Rudd admits to being a MORAL RELATIVIST!

How can a professing Christian like Kevin Rudd possibly be a moral relativist and yet remain faithful to Christianity?
3. Rudd advocates neo-Marxism Comment
  "...the other-regarding values of equity, solidarity and sustainability. For social democrats, these additional values are seen as mutually reinforcing because the allocation of resources in pursuit of equity (particularly through education), solidarity and sustainability assist in creating the human, social and environmental capital necessary to make a market economy function effectively."

- Kevin Rudd, The Australian, October 28, 2006.

"I am an old-fashioned Christian socialist."

- Kevin Rudd, Australian Financial Review, February 2003.

"Equity through education" means that schools and universities will be dumbed down even more, to the detriment of society in general, and the students (especially the most intellectually gifted ones) in particular.

"Solidarity" is part of the rhetoric of totalitarian collectivism, so Rudd really exposes his Marxist-socialist tendencies here.

"Sustainability" means an authoritarian state run by an elite group of thugs who take money and property from individuals by force and use it in order to reshape society to match their eutopian fantasies and implement their ideological wet-dreams.
4. Rudd supports Bill of Rights Comment
  Kevin Rudd supports the idea of an Australian bill of rights: "We need to begin to look at ways in which we can bedrock basic protections of civil liberties."

- Kevin Rudd, The Age, December 14, 2006.

 A Bill of Rights is a list of basic motherhood statements and values that virtually everyone would, in principle, agree with. Eg. "freedom of speech", "freedom of religion"

However, because these statements are so ambiguous it is left up to the courts to decide how they apply. In other words, unelected judges rule the land and end up becoming tyrants.

You see, people do not go to court and argue about whether we should have free speech. People go to court and argue whether you can point out the fact that most terrorists are Muslims without being convicted of a 'hate crime' and sent to prison.
5.  Rudd advocates equality of opportunity Comment
  "We believe radically in equality of opportunity, that is that every kid from every working family has a decent start in life."

- Kevin Rudd, The Age, December 14, 2006.

 Kevin Rudd believes opportunities are not fairly distributed, and those with more wealth and power have many more and better opportunities. Therefore, they want government authorities to take control and ensure that there is a level playing field and that everyone receives the same opportunities. Although this may seem a reasonable step to take, it is ultimately a fundamental denial of reality. Power and wealth are not the only factors that result in more and better opportunities. A person’s basic intelligence (usually a derivative of their parents’ intelligence), their family life and upbringing, their place of residence (country, state or region), their native language, their religion and/or system of values, their emotional and psychological makeup, their physical appearance (stature, beauty, and physical strength), all contribute significantly to the number and kinds of opportunities available to each person. No amount of interference can change these realities. A smart beautiful person will always have more and better opportunities than a simple unattractive person. The only other options are to tear down those with natural advantages by somehow destroying those advantages, or by launching a program of eugenics where every person born has the same genetic characteristics. Such options, however, are clearly horrific, not to mention fundamentally unjust.
  And there's plenty more to come...