Monday, July 04, 2005


How much longer before the Bible is declared hate literature?

Why is it that whatever is "progressive" (i.e. whatever makes the Canadian government more powerful) always triumphs, regardless of how unpopular it is, and why always at the expense of traditional authorities, especially the family and the faiths? As when the Liberals legalized abortion in 1969, staunchly refusing to admit that they had opened the way to abortion on demand (and Paul Martin's father resigned from cabinet in protest), they have now legalized same-sex marriage without admitting it will suppress religion from public life. But as anyone knows who isn't comatose, by making homosexual marriage an "equality right" under the Charter, governments have put churches on notice that they are henceforth outside the Charter.

Human rights law is quite clear. You may believe and say anything you like in private, but not in public. Legally, churches are being treated as "private," at least for now. But this is completely arbitrary, illogical and changeable. In the "public" realm --which means in schools (including religious ones), community halls (including religious ones), commercial and professional businesses (including religious ones) and government programs --"Charter values" are already being relentlessly enforced, and dissent (i.e. "hate") is not tolerated.

Stickers are already being plastered on news boxes in Toronto to "Tax the churches!" A Saskatchewan judge has already ruled that publishing the mere citation of anti-sodomy passages from the Bible is "discriminatory." Pro-gay MPs such as Keith Martin have already de-nounced as "venom" and "hatred" parliamentary statements against homosexual marriage. It is already a serious criminal offence to publish undefined "hatred" of homosexuals. For a little longer, the fiction will be preserved that gay equality does not conflict with freedom of belief. But then, six years ago, Parliament was insisting gay marriage would never happen. Political fictions outlive their usefulness pretty fast these days.

So how much longer will it be before the Bible is formally condemned as hate literature, because it describes sodomy as worth hating? The great crusade will start with a demand to remove the Bible from commercial hotel rooms, and then from public libraries and schools, and then from courtrooms and finally from tax-deductible churches. How much longer before it is counted as abuse to tell your own children that anal sex is sinful? Can such rampant hate be tolerated in an inclusive society which promotes Charter values?

Pro-marriage conservatives now face the same unhappy dilemma pro-lifers did three decades ago. Do they fight on, striving to hold an increasingly reluctant Conservative party to its pro-marriage position? Or do they just shrug and let it go? The gay marriage bill shows that there is something fundamentally flawed in Canada's system of government. Here was a serious change to a fundamental social institution which most people did not want, do not support, and probably never will. Yet it passed because the federal executive -- the cabinets and senior bureaucrats of Jean Chretien and Paul Martin -- wanted it passed. They wanted it passed because they are power-crazed and have taken upon themselves the duty of reshaping Canadian society to their own image and values.

To this end, they manipulate the courts, by funding court challenges to Canadian laws and then deliberately losing, and by appointing judges who will do what they want. The single biggest problem facing this country is not gay marriage, nor the attack on traditional values. It is the unchecked power of the prime minister. If that didn't exist, neither would same-sex marriage.


RCMP puts political correctness before law enforcement

Apparently, stirring up racial hatred is OK in Canada if you are a "minority"

About three weeks ago, a 17-year-old Sikh high school student in Richmond, B.C. reported that he was attacked by five young white males. According to the student, they tore off his turban and cut his hair that, in accordance with his religion, had never been cut before. Initially the RCMP believed his report. He had wounds on his head that were consistent with his struggling against attackers. After two weeks, the youth confessed that he had made the whole thing up, cut his own hair and the wounds on his head were self-inflicted. The reason he did this was that he wanted to have shorter hair without incurring the wrath of his strictly religious parents.

The RCMP, that has to be the slowest police force in the west (not to mention the east, north and south) immediately announced that they had decided not to lay criminal charges against the teen. He could have been charged with the offence of public mischief for causing the police to enter into an investigation of an offence that did not happen. Although public mischief is not tantamount to murder or bank robbery, it is usually considered a serious offence against the administration of justice. The RCMP decided quickly to divert the youth into a restorative justice program that brings offenders together with the victims. As stated in the Richmond Review, it is hard to see exactly who the victims in this case are. Not to worry; the RCMP chose the Sikh community to be the victims of this particular offence.

The RCMP issued a statement that said, "The RCMP and our partners do not believe it is in the best interests of this young person or society in general to have this incident carry forth through criminal charges. This is a time that calls for calm understanding and not a time to be thinking about criminal charges… There are definitely some cultural identity issues and this young person is under an incredible amount of pressure."

What utter and complete nonsense! Assuming he did cut his own hair, he committed a criminal offence but yet apparently this is not the time to talk about criminal offences. The RCMP could not have made it any clearer — the youth got special treatment because he’s a member of a favoured ethnic group. The actions of the RCMP are really not surprising since this is not the first time that they have bent over backwards to please their political masters in Ottawa. It was just recently that the police force provided a uniformed honour guard at the wedding of the son of a former "Liberal" prime minister. Enforcing the law comes second to advancing the Liberal Party agenda.

The only people that seemed to be upset about the way this matter was handled were some members of the Sikh community. They saw the obvious problem that incidents such as this can only inflame racial intolerance. And when real incidents of racial attacks happen in the future, they will not be taken seriously. They wanted the youth to be punished by the criminal justice system.

The RCMP has shown that the force has one law for certain ethnic groups and one for the rest of Canadians. Along with Paul Martin, the RCMP is doing their part in Canada’s march towards banana republic status. RCMP Corporal Peter Theissen stated that the youth was under an "incredible amount of pressure". In other words, like Runaway Bride, Jennifer Wilbanks, he "had issues". The youth’s defense counsel, if he had ever needed to have one, couldn’t have put it any better.

The RCMP, as police forces are wont to do, complain that they simply do not have sufficient resources to do their work. They are not upset in the least that the precious resources they do have are wasted in hunting down a group of young thugs who don’t actually exist.

It is difficult to imagine a better illustration of how political correctness trumps policing; how offenders get off the hook because the police characterize them of victims because they happen to belong to certain ethnic groups. Like Jennifer Wilbanks, there was no necessity to lock him up. But he should have faced charges that would have acted not only as a deterrent to this type of conduct but would have expressed society’s condemnation at people who cause the police to enter into false investigations. So much for justice.


No comments: