Religious Diversity A Cover for Hate?

The archbishop of Toronto, Cardinal Thomas Collins, accused Ontario Premier Dalton McGuinty and his Liberal government of making religious freedom a second class right with its amendment to an anti-bullying bill. At issue is whether Catholic schools can stop students from calling anti-homophobia support groups "gay" clubs. Collins and his supporters - including Tory leader Tim Hudak, say schools should have the final say in the naming of these support clubs. Why? Well it apparently infringes on Catholics religious right to love the sinner and hate the sin. Collins says " we simply ask that diversity be respected in our society." Unless it's sexual diversity. I guess Collins is unfamiliar with irony. Or hypocrisy.

They argue that the focus is now on anti-gay bullying at the expense of other types of bullying. Of course Collins and his supporters haven't mentioned how. Has the bill been re-written to focus solely on gay bullying? Did I miss something?

There is also the argument that made by more right-leaning types that this is the thin edge of the gay-agenda wedge. See the comments of Jim Hughes, part of the anti-abortion group Campaign For Life. He accused Education Minister Laurel Broten of being an apologist for the "homosexual activists and their drive to insert their agenda into all schools." And what is that agenda? To not be bullied into suicide? The dastards!

The real concern here, that Collins and his supports won’t come out and state explicitly, is that any legislation protecting gays from bullying legitimizes homosexuality. Now the Catholic Church (and many other Christian denominations and other religions to be fair) actively preach against homosexuality. Enshrining in legislation that bullying someone because of their sexuality is illegal certainly hampers efforts to "help" gays out of their lifestyle. I'm not arguing that the church wants to see a mass suicide of gay students. But it's awfully hard to preach against the gay lifestyle knowing someone could take it as bullying. That's the root of Collins argument that the bill infringes on religious freedom. 

Now, we Liberals tie ourselves into knots sometimes, trying to reconcile cultural and religious diversity with liberal, western values. On the religious front we believe people can worship any way they see fit and believe all sorts of things.  Often those beliefs and our values conflict, causing us to wring our hands and hum and hah. We've been told that all regions demand our respect. That these age-old belief systems followed by millions around the world are automatically deserving of respect. Those versed in rhetoric would recognize this as the logical fallacy of authority from antiquity.

Just because you believe something passionately doesn't mean I need to respect that belief. I'll try. I will certainly give it the ole college try but some beliefs just aren't worthy of respect. Sure, the bible says homosexuality is a sin. (But it only mentions man on man action. On lesbians its silent. More proof, if you needed it, that the bible was written by men). But the bible says a whole whack of things that to our modern eyes are quite frankly crazy. It used to be OK to bury adulteresses up to their necks in the sand and stone them to death. Today we no longer find that necessary. The bible also condones the owning of slaves. Again, we've realized this really isn't a good idea. As Reverend Lovejoy says about the bible in the Simpsons: "Have you ever read this thing? Technically we aren't allowed to go to the bathroom."

Religious belief has had to adapt to the modern world are risk losing its relevance. We've come to terms with adultery and slavery and it's now time to do the same with human sexuality.