Thursday, February 03, 2005

Look at them weeds!

The first volleys of the Religious Reich (tm, pat. pend) against same-gender marriage come forth - in the form of "Wow! look at them weeds!".

In the Sun Newspaper chain, Ted Byfield has opened his ugly mouth in this article. In it, Mr. Byfield attempts to argue that Religious Freedoms are being suppressed by Bill C-38.

His argument begins with a fundamental assertion that all law is inherently based on moral principles:
The entire Criminal Code, for starters, is an anthology of morality. Thou shalt not steal, though shalt not lie, thou shalt not murder, all these rules are moral principles.
He then goes on to make the following assertion - after a certain amount of ranting:

The basis of the morality of just about everybody in the country is religious.

To wit, ergo, all law must spring forth from religion. Of course, in Mr. Byfield's thinking, not only does religion have a place in the creation of law, it is front and center in defining those laws.

If we seek to make education available to everyone, it's because we think it's "fair," and what we think "fair," whether we realize it or not, comes directly out of the Bible.

Therefore, when Pettigrew says that religion must not be allowed to influence public policy, he disqualifies from participation in government all those whose moral basis lies in religion.

Since our religion is ultimately the only reason we can give for favouring, or opposing, any law, he has in reality called for the disenfranchisement of just about every Canadian.

Mr. Byfield's assertions are flawed - period. First of all, my support or disagreement with any piece of legislation is based on the merits of that legislation. I do not cleave to alleged morality of any particular faith. To argue that morality as expressed in the legal constructs is inherently religious is to assert that all interested peoples are religious. I'm not, and frankly, I am insulted that Mr. Byfield would put such words in my mouth.

You will see this as the first volley in what I fully expect will become a campaign where the religious will focus their arguments on how liberalization in law impinges upon their religious freedoms. What I find exceptionally galling about this is that these same morons will assert that it is their right to marginalize people, even though their own scriptures speak to treating all equally.

Is it "Christian" to marginalize people? Was it Christian to marginalize women by denying them equal rights in our governments? I've seen some of the most godawful things advocated in the name of "Christianity" - in the "moral" certitude that these people know some absolute truth that are not shared by all - or any - Canadians.

The ugly underside of hard-line religion is bigotry and intolerance. I am disappointed to see that the mainstream religions have forgotten the horrors that they experienced at the hands of others in the past. It used to be that being Christian got you thrown to the lions in Rome; being Muslim brought down the wrath of Popes on the Middle East in the Medieval era; Questioning the Popes got you burned at the stake; Arguing against Rome's dogma got Galileo a life under house arrest.

I find it sad that the Religious Reich today has forgotten those lessons, and practices the very same bullying tactics as were once used against them. We live in a country where the Constitution protects the rights of all equally, and religious freedoms are protected as vigorously as any other rights.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

BTW - it is now four days since I wrote to Jason Kenney - the silence is deafening. Not even an e-mail acknowledgement has arrived...anyone for starting a betting pool on how long it takes before I see a response?

2 comments:

Anonymous said...

Re: Jason Kenney. Have you tried phoning the fucker?

Re: Ted Byfield. I don't think religion has an underbelly of bigotry and intolerance - I think it's front and center.

True Believers create the worst sorts of distopias because they're not in it for the power. They do it because it's for your own good, this makes them impervious to logic or mercy. Look at the Taliban - or Mississippi.

Quixote
http://www.livejournal.com/users/quixote317/

Anonymous said...

He is simply pulling another Ostrich... Sticking his head into the sand so that he doesn't have to acknowledge that his views are not shared by his constituents.

He is really not too bright, but then again, what does that say about those whom continue to vote for him? (These are the same folks - at least those who bother - who walk to the polls "Baaaaing" and voting in Klein and his band of Conservatives.

Perhaps it is simply a misunderstanding that not everything that TASTES bad is GOOD for you. Quite the opposite.

Yuck! Coffee tastes horrid, better drink some more!

Ewwwww! What do you mean Beer is an acquired taste? Tastes horrid so let's acquire a taste for a poisonous substance?

Yuck! Conservatives leave a bad taste in my mouth... better vote like a sheep!

Ok, two out of three isn't bad. As soon as I finish my coffee, I'm cracking a beer and then I will DEKLEIN with my vote.

The Cass Review and the WPATH SOC

The Cass Review draws some astonishing conclusions about the WPATH Standards of Care (SOC) . More or less, the basic upshot of the Cass Rev...