Thursday, February 15, 2007

The guilty party will step out of the ranks

And the entire brigade took one step forward. Already there has been a question: "What's it to you? You're Canadian."

Good question, and given that it wasn't proffered as anything but that, I was getting prepared to answer. Then I read two posts elsewhere that I thought put it better than I could have. The first is via Pretty Shaved Ape:
It is a travesty that political discourse and disagreement should devolve into such an ugly spectacle. The women have left their positions. It is now incumbent upon Edwards to come to the aid and assistance of good people whose lives have come under such bitter attack. Donahue's entire mission was to interfere in the Edwards campaign and take down individuals who advocated positions counter to his own. He used their words as weapons against them. Fine. There are no shortages of Donahue's public displays of racism, sexism, bigotry and bile. Someone in Edwards office should put a reel of choice cuts together and force Bill Donahue to own his ugly words and ideas before the public. Donahue needs to be hauled before the IRS and have his organization stripped of tax exempt status. The larger Catholic hierarchy needs to come forward and either disavow Donahue and his extreme positions and tactics or accept them. As of this moment, Donahue is the voice and public perception of Catholicism in North America. His brand of bigotry will not be disavowed by silence. What do the real priests and bishops have to say? Will the church muzzle a rabid dog or will they endure his villainy as they have so famously enabled past scandals and crimes?
And then this post from R. Mildred who wastes no time or words absolutely hacking right into the bone of the vile, rotting, abominations who occupy the stools of repellent fanaticism:
Now one thing that has to be remembered here is that A) it's not actually catholics who are really at fault here, donahue and his ilk are basically jack chick catholics, the sort who's "masses" generally involve them picking crusty bits of feet off and giving it to other members of their particular cult in lieu of actual sacraments, and are also people who haven't every really gotten over Galileo's disproving of the, shall we call them "mocklics"?, dogma that the sun shines out of their asses and the universe revolves around them, THEM YA HEAR! Because what no one else seems to be willing to point out is that Marcotte (let alone McEwan) didn't actually say anything that could be even remotely construed to be "anti-catholic", nor even "anti-christian" becuase what she's been called on is, of all the fucking things to call her on, mocking the pre-christian greco-roman concept that sperm carries a magical spriritual essence and is the only active ingredient in making babies. And while I'm aware that many christians believe that God's own universe is of course secondary in importance to the one inside their heads, I feel I should point out that that particular belief is the made up and factually incorrect one of all the odd little bits of pagan detritus that is held onto by christians like their lives depended on them, rather than their souls.
So what's it to me?

Apparently the question was posed because this is a problem which is supposedly contained by an artificial boundary.

In that, I can only reply that this is an issue which goes beyond any boundary. We, in this hemisphere, purport to live in an enlightened world. Given the events of the past week, one would never know it. A self-styled centurion of puritanism, under the guise of religion, conducts a blatant political maneuver and gets away with it. Using an argument that wouldn't stand in a kindergarten class, he hauls down the political campaign of one of his opponents and the established media organs of "truth" fearfully provided the armoured protection, lest they too become a target. They offered the dripping, putrefying ghoul a sacrifice - to save themselves.

It is happening in the US and it is happening in Canada. Unless there are still those who believe that the political and religious ultra-right are somehow separate entities, take note that the gathering around Canada's Conservative government hides their political activism under the mantle of religious protection. And, if we call them on it, they scream INTOLERANCE or, even more laughably, PERSECUTION. Then, free of interference from such inconveniences as legislative or media inquiry, they propel a political agenda centered on a belief system that bears no resemblance to Christianity.

During this whole episode the one question that has stood out in my mind has been how the written opinions of Amanda Marcotte and Melissa McEwan could be judged obscene by their choice of expletives.

How are the rantings of a goon who defends the pedophilia of the priests of his so-called faith not more obscene than anything Amanda Marcotte has ever written?

How is the hysteria of a racist who, after being advised that the information on her blog was inciting others to issue death threats upon her targets, refused to expunge the personal information of people who had never wronged her, not more completely obscene than any post ever written by Melissa McEwan?

How are the infantile diatribes of a blustering verbal bully, who believes it is his right to abuse his position and have his sexual fantasies satisfied by female staff members under his authority, not more obscene than anything ever written at Pandagon or Shakespeare's Sister?

What is galling is that The New York Times and The Washington Post, along with a list of other high-profile stenographic sheep, provided the truly obscene the shelter from which to operate while tossing those who speak the truth, bluntly, under the bus.

So, it is something to me. There are no boundaries and there are no limits. I will stand shoulder-to-shoulder with those who have earned my respect and my friendship when they are under assault from nothing less than a horde of thugs. Thugs whose use of religion to promote their own ends is reminiscent of another one of history's jackbooted horrors.

And, if some think that last link is an extreme example, they're wrong. It is cleanly accurate. Donohue, Malkin and O'Reilly would be a perfect fit.

I stand by Amanda and Melissa. I am utterly confident that, should it ever come to that, they would do the same for me.

No comments: