Sometimes people find themselves living in a world created by other people.
Karl Marx wrote in 1843 that “religion is the sigh of the oppressed creature… It is the opium of the people”. According to Marx, religion has been a tool utilised by the ruling classes to allow the ‘masses’ to escape their suffering without questioning the source of the suffering and make any real attempts to overcome the suffering (which Marx believed was the capitalist economic system). But in modern days, where workers are protected some-what from potentially exploitative bosses and the Vatican has come out in support of the ‘Occupy’ protests against corporate greed, this theory has little traction. Nevertheless, the vast influence of religion (and in particular Christianity in Australia) in our society and traditional institutions means that, to varying extents, all of our lives are guided by somewhat someone else’s religious beliefs. Despite large numbers religious viewpoints contrary to Christianity making up Australia’s social fabric, traditional ‘beliefs’ and ‘values’ guided by Christianity still feature prominently in laws, schools and families, affecting not people not only on an personal basis, but also affecting society as a whole.
Despite our supposed ‘secular’ society in Australia, politician’s religious beliefs are able to influence dramatically the way in which our lives are led. Exemplified by Opposition leader Tony Abbott’s flat-out rejection of the ‘abortion-pill’ RU 486 in 2006 as Health Minister, the personal beliefs of some in powerful positions are able to change the laws which govern our lives. Although the rejection was eventually over-turned in a ‘conscience’ vote in parliament, the very fact that a very personal issue to women is in the hands of a few elected ‘representatives’ shows that ultimately our lives are shaped somewhat by those who have power and our realities are created, to varying extents, by other people.
Although there are obvious intrusions into personal lives that religion makes every day, it is still possible to practice other religions within Australia or even abstain from religion and attempt to minimise the influence of Christianity in day-to-day lives. Nearly one quarter of the entire population of Australia identify with no religion and our multicultural immigration program means the vast amount of religions continue to grow in popularity. But whilst freedom of religion is guaranteed under the constitution, the rejection of marriage equality in Australia and even the Christian lobby’s influence in state politics in rejecting an R18 rating for video games exemplifies the daily intrusion that the dominant religion of Christianity makes in our personal lives. On the surface we are able to choose our beliefs and act in accordance with them, but these actions must not go against the law, which is driven by the traditional Christian beliefs of those who have power.
It is demonstrated by most families that as a child is growing up, their ‘reality’ will be guided and protected to an extent by their parents. Essentially, a child grows up in a world which is shaped by their parents and their beliefs, but external influences such as media and school play an important role in a child’s development. In most cases, the child will mature and eventually choose the way in which they wish to lead their lives; however in some extreme cases, parents are able to distort reality to the extent that their children lead the lives exactly how their parents want them to be led. The Westboro Baptist Church (WBC) in the United States shows an extremely rare situation in which parents guide their children from an early age to hate essentially everyone except members of the WBC. The world created by these parents for their children is a world of intimidation and ‘groupthink’, and any divergence away from the views of the WBC result in expulsion from the church and immediate estrangement from their family.
In most cases however, children are able to mature with influences from both their parents and external sources. Although children may be born into a religious household, the influences of peers, television and role models often mean a child will most likely moderate and compromise on the religious views of their parents, and potentially even rebel completely against them. In particular, the 1950s and 1960s were a time of rebellion against parents. The rise of rock’n’roll and underage drinking caused teens to create their own realities, somewhat freeing themselves of their parents influence. In Robert Drewe’s memoirs of his childhood “The Shark Net”, it shows exposure to parties, girls and ‘rock’n’roll’ led him to rebel against his strongly religious mother through an unwanted pregnancy and eventually moving out of home. On an individual level, Drewe shows it is very possible to break free of a reality created for you by someone else, and develop your own.
Ultimately our lives will be controlled by some extent by other, more powerful people. The laws and mores that have been created by the powerful mean we don’t have complete control over our lives, and instead we have to live by the laws and regulations that have been created for us. We do have a certain level of freedom in our lives – freedom of religion, speech and assembly (though those last two have been challenged recently by Andrew Bolt’s Racial Discrimination case and the disbanding of the Occupy protests) – ultimately, however, the philosophy that the individual should be “sovereign”, espoused by people such as John Stuart Mill, is not met.
Not so much concerned about a mark out of 10 (though that would be nice) but more concerned about links to the text? Too awkward? I tried to ease into the Shark Net by talking about the family dynamics of the Westboro Baptist church but I don't think i pull it off.
Thanks guys!
Home
Help
Search
Login
