ONTD Political

Freedom of religion under threat, Canadian bishops warn

4:18 pm - 05/14/2012

EDMONTON - Canada’s Catholic bishops issued an open letter Monday calling on Canadians to stand up for their faith, even if they suffer for it.


The letter, from the Canadian Conference of Catholic Bishops, said they are concerned “radical secularism” is squeezing religion out of public policy debate in countries such as Canada, while internationally Christians are being persecuted in violent attacks.



Edmonton Archbishop Richard Smith said Monday morning that people who act out their faith are praised when they dedicate their efforts to social issues such as caring for the poor or housing the homeless.

“Where things do get a little nasty sometimes is when the freedom of religion and its free expression challenges the status quo,” Smith said.

“For example, if the church speaks out on the right to life, if the church speaks on particular definitions of marriage or family. That’s when you start to hear things like, ‘Just keep this in the private sphere. Keep those beliefs to yourself. That’s OK for the privacy of your home and the privacy of church, but it should have no bearing on the public sphere, on the formulation of public policy.’ ”

Smith, who is president of the Canadian Conference of Catholic Bishops, discussed the pastoral letter as part of his annual breakfast with local reporters. Smith said he was glad the issue of conscience rights was raised in Alberta during last month’s provincial election, but said he found the level of debate on the subject disappointing.

The 12-page letter on freedom of religion and conscience rights says that bishops’ concerns in Canada often relate to rules that limit the right to conscientious objection by people in the health care and education sectors, as well as the political realm.

“At times, believers are being legally compelled to exercise their profession without reference to their religious or moral convictions, and even in opposition to them,” the letter says.

“For example, some colleges of physicians require that members who refuse to perform abortions refer patients to another physician willing to do so,” it continues. “Elsewhere pharmacists are being threatened by being forced to have to fill prescriptions for contraceptives or the ‘morning after’ pills; and marriage commissioners in British Columbia, Manitoba, Newfoundland and Saskatchewan must now perform same-sex marriages or resign.”

The bishops urge all Canadians, especially Catholics, to actively get involved in every sector of public life and make their views known.




SOURCE is BS.

effervescent 15th-May-2012 02:21 am (UTC)
“For example, if the church speaks out on the right to life, if the church speaks on particular definitions of marriage or family. That’s when you start to hear things like, ‘Just keep this in the private sphere. Keep those beliefs to yourself. That’s OK for the privacy of your home and the privacy of church, but it should have no bearing on the public sphere, on the formulation of public policy.’ ”

I am so tired of people bawwwing about the ~loss of rights~ for those who are religious. Ffs, religion SHOULD NOT have any bearing on the public sphere or public policy, and changing things so that policy and government are not swayed by any one faith is the way that it should be!! I was raised Christian and I still think that it's ridiculous to force the view of any religion on the population. You have to allow for those who are agnostic, atheist, of other faiths, spiritual, etc. The world does not revolve around Catholicism or Christianity or any faith.

(My faction of the church - the United Church of Canada - is all right with same sex marriage and abortion... yet somehow I doubt that that sort of influence on public policy is what they're going for.)
thelilyqueen 15th-May-2012 04:25 am (UTC)
Precisely. If we want to make the conversation about religious liberty, they still fail. Isn't it denying the UUs their religious liberty to not recognize same-sex marriage? Doesn't piling on barriers to obtaining an abortion deny women who adhere to at least some Jewish movements their ability to fulfill their religious duty to abort under certain circumstances?
martyfan 15th-May-2012 09:28 am (UTC)
I wish I could get this across to my family. To them, and a hell of a lot of other Christians, religion always = Christianity only, and everything else is heathenism or something.
thelilyqueen 15th-May-2012 02:03 pm (UTC)
Suppose so. Maybe a more effective line of argument with such people would deal with the disagreements/differences in practice among Christians? I can't think many Baptists would be happy to be required to fast for Lent if Catholicism was the rule of the land, or that many Catholics would be happy to have to deny the Pope as an authority on religious matters if the Baptists were running things.
allisondawn 15th-May-2012 02:24 am (UTC)
lmao ~radical secularism~
erunamiryene 15th-May-2012 02:30 am (UTC)
calling on Canadians to stand up for their faith, even if they suffer for it

i was unaware that Canada had degraded to the level of the United States, where Christians have no voice in government, are persecuted at every turn for their faith, and have no say in how anything is run, and are scared to even voice the fact that they're Christian for fear of ridicule and possible death.

... oh wait.
tilmon 15th-May-2012 02:46 am (UTC)
It's terrible how they can't force every public meeting to open with a prayer, or how the national pledge no longer includes reference to a supreme deity, or how sports teams and individuals are fined and banned from promoting religion in any shape or form. And the way religious property can't be used as tax shelters for religous leaders any more. A shame, just a shame.
erunamiryene 15th-May-2012 02:56 am (UTC)
And a deity certainly isn't on the money, or included the military service oath, and you're looked at funny and given shit if you're christian while atheists and non-christians are totally accepted. Poor, poor christians.
lee_rowan 15th-May-2012 02:58 am (UTC)
Not allowing a religion to persecute those who do not accept their dogma is NOT persecuting the religion. STFU, TYVM.
layweed 15th-May-2012 03:03 am (UTC)
Can't get over the first paragraph, lolz r u srs
nicosian 15th-May-2012 03:26 am (UTC)
this canadian atheist would like very much to see that religion can't force/influence public policy. I'm not religious. I don't WANT their meddling in public policy. As do many of us in the country. I don't argue their right to conduct their own little lives within their own faith but NOT in MY life. Sorry. My freedom from religion means something.

Ugh. more catholic wambulancing.
rinygrin 15th-May-2012 03:45 am (UTC)
There are bigger things at hand than "radical secularism".


crossfire 15th-May-2012 04:48 pm (UTC)
This song will always be awesome.
toraguru 15th-May-2012 03:57 am (UTC)
No. If you are a doctor, you WILL give me my birth control or refer me to another doctor. I have the freedom to do that. I'm a person, and certain aspects of your religion should not dictate what I do, no matter what it is.
Let's not start this shit, my country. Stop caring so fucking much what other people do if it doesn't hurt anyone.
I'm no Athiest, but even I know that NO religion (not just Christianity) has a place outside of home and church, especially in such a culturally-diverse country as ours.
bluelarkspur 15th-May-2012 04:56 am (UTC)
I don't know why so many Christians have a hard time wrapping their minds around the concept of "freedom of religion", that they can believe something without having to force it on others. What about Jews who follow a strict dietary code? They are perfectly able to eat accordingly, without petitioning Washington to take away their neighbors' bacon.

Or probably a more relevant example: Jesus had a lot more to say about divorce then he ever did about abortion or homosexuality. The Catholic Church has strict rules about it. Yet I don't know of anyone trying to get divorce banned. Because it is perfectly possible to disapprove of something, to promise not to do it yourself, to preach to the congregation that it is wrong, without attempting to write that moral judgment into law.
kaowolfie 15th-May-2012 05:24 am (UTC)
The only reasonable assumption I can think of is that many Christian sects heavily emphasize converting the unfaithful and insist that *everyone* should be Christian, even if it has to be forced on it.

By reasonable, I mean "according to the fan fiction". Not *reasonable* reasonable.
13chapters 15th-May-2012 06:38 am (UTC)
I know you're being rhetorical, but Christianity (Islam, too) has a much more universal message than Judaism. The rules of Judaism only apply to Jews. (Judaism has a very short list of rules non-Jews should follow, but they're pretty basic "be a decent person" type rules, so if you're not out thieving and murdering, you're probably not breaking any of them...except now that I think about it, I think one of them is that you have to be a monotheist.) OTOH, Christian theology generally holds that if something is a sin, it's a sin for everyone.
bluelarkspur 15th-May-2012 07:28 am (UTC)
Yeah, I know. That's why I discussed divorce as more relevant example of how Christians at least have some familiarity with the concept of believing something without having to prohibit it by law (adultery is another example.)
13chapters 15th-May-2012 07:33 am (UTC)
Yeah...IDG this obvious hypocrisy. It must hurt to have that much cognitive dissonance in one's brain.

This is one of those times I'm relieved I'm an atheist. Just so much easier and less time-consuming.
martyfan 15th-May-2012 09:31 am (UTC)
I actually tried using kosher as a hypothetical to my mom once for this very concept. I asked her how she would feel if we lived in a primarily Jewish country where keeping kosher was mandatory by law, and she gave me a funny look and said she didn't see how it was relevant. Or related to the idea of ~Christian oppression~.

ETA: I also asked her whether it would be fair or reasonable to let Jehovah's Witnesses outlaw blood transfusions if they were the majority because it's against their religious beliefs. She didn't get it then either.

Edited at 2012-05-15 09:35 am (UTC)
tabaqui 15th-May-2012 05:33 am (UTC)
I am really just sick of organized religion at this point. Just...go away, god-botherers, and leave me and mine alone.
hinoema 15th-May-2012 09:11 am (UTC)
... they are concerned “radical secularism” is squeezing religion out of public policy debate in countries such as Canada, while internationally Christians are being persecuted in violent attacks.

What is this, a form letter? Didn't they say the same thing here?

Edited at 2012-05-15 09:12 am (UTC)
ladypolitik 15th-May-2012 10:29 am (UTC)
There is not enough "get the fuck over yourself" in the world for this.
sparkindarkness 15th-May-2012 10:59 am (UTC)
"“Where things do get a little nasty sometimes is when the freedom of religion and its free expression challenges the status quo,”"

You mean when you act like bigoted fuckwads people treat you like bigoted fuckwads. You are not a special snowflake. You don't get to attack people, their lives and expect them to lay back and take it as your whipping boy. The fact you do expect it shows how grossly entitled and privileged your church has been for so long that its shit has gone unchallenged. It ends - it needs to end, it needed to end a long time ago. Perhaps if people hadn't spent so many decades - centuries - tip-toeing around you there wouldn't have been so many victims in the absue scandal

You are not special. When you abuse people, attack people or act like bigots you will be treated accordingly. That is not a violaltion of your rights - that's the consequences of your actions. That is you being treated as you deserve to be treated


Honestly, it's global arseholery from the Catholic church. I've started tuning out the minute the word "catholic" is mentioned because nothing good can follow
katrinar 15th-May-2012 01:00 pm (UTC)
THAT'S BECAUSE CANADA IS A SECULAR STATE YOU SHIT WADS.


blerg, my country.
kalijean 15th-May-2012 01:11 pm (UTC)
Jon always says it best.

Photobucket
the_gabih 15th-May-2012 03:10 pm (UTC)
while internationally Christians are being persecuted in violent attacks.

See, this is the thing that makes me angry. Yes, Christians around the world are being violently persecuted. They are being threatened, harassed, tortured, raped and murdered for believing in Jesus.

You? You are being told that you can have your religion, but also not to force your particular reading of the Bible on everyone else. STOP FUCKING CRYING PERSECUTION WHEN YOU'RE NOT ACTUALLY BEING PERSECUTED, jfc.

Edited at 2012-05-15 03:11 pm (UTC)
mirhanda 15th-May-2012 05:09 pm (UTC)

You? You are being told that you can have your religion, but also not to force your particular reading of the Bible on everyone else.


THIS!
crossfire 15th-May-2012 04:45 pm (UTC)
What the actual fuck is radical secularism?
ohnotaylor lol STFU15th-May-2012 06:20 pm (UTC)

Soc
This page was loaded May 26th 2013, 7:44 am GMT.