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.At the same time, appearing in the National Post was this column by Father Raymond J. De Souza:
There have been in the last five years a number of clear-cut religious liberty cases that have ended up in the various provincial human rights tribunals. The proximate issue has usually been homosexuality, and the human rights tribunals have been inclined to limit religious liberty in favour of an emphasis on putative equality claims instead. Eventually, these cases will emerge from the shadowy legal world of the human rights tribunals and be litigated as Charter cases in the courts themselves.He went on with this:
As the vast apparatus of the Canadian state moves in certain respects toward enforcing a secular orthodoxy, infringements on religious liberty are sure to become more, not less, frequent. This has already happened in education, as students and parents often find themselves confronted in the classroom with moral teachings contrary to their religious beliefs. To date, accommodations have generally been worked out, but as secularist bureaucrats become more zealous, these cases too will soon head to court on religious liberty grounds.Canadian Cynic takes De Souza to task with a clear breakdown of what is not happening.
Is De Souza or anyone else from the Catholic Church required to perform SSMs within the religious context of the Church? No.So you have to ask yourself, how long before De Souza and his Canadian contingent start converting that argument to something a little more focussed? Because the "religious liberty" these guys are talking about is the ability to condemn anyone or any group they don't approve of from the pulpit without fear of running afoul of existing hate-crime statutes. How long before we start seeing this?
Is De Souza required to publicly condone SSMs? No.
Is De Souza or anyone else from his annoying religion required to ever attend a same-sex marriage? No.
Is De Souza required, in any way, shape or form, forced to ever associate with gays within the context of his Church? No.
Does SSM in Canada force De Souza (or any other Catholic) to, in any way, restructure their religious freedom or, in any way, curtail their "liberty" to worship their vengeful, misogynistic, baby-killing God? No.
William Donohue, president of the Catholic League for Religious and Civil Rights, asserted that "[t]he gay community has yet to apologize to straight people for all the damage that they have done" and denounced gays for "asking for more rights" while allegedly "acting so morally delinquent." All of which will be done while completely ignoring this and this.
Not to mention that these moralistic crusaders use this as a means to defend the real moral delinquents of their own church as long as they're wearing some sort of frock.
William A. Donohue suggesting that 15-year-old boys who are the victims of sexual abuse are to blame for the abuse they suffer. Responding to the recent statement by the attorney of former Rep. Mark Foley (R-FL) that Foley "was molested between the ages of 13 and 15 by a clergyman," Donohue, addressing Foley in the press release, asked: "[W]hy didn't you just smack the clergyman in the face? After all, most 15-year-old teenage boys wouldn't allow themselves to be molested. So why did you?"I get it. Those catholic priests weren't trying to engage in homosexual sex with under-age altar-boys. They were just testing them.
Keep a weather eye for these guys. As I said yesterday, they're already here.