|
Last
Friday. May 26 Dr. Charles McVety, President of Canada
Family Action Coalition and Canada Christian College,
was asked to participate in a televised debate with
MP Garth Turner on the twin topics of muzzling MPs and
the Conservatives opening the nomination process.
Dr.
McVety, a key player in the debate over marriage in
this country, is encouraging pro-family Canadians of
all backgrounds to join the political party of their
choice and work within the system to ensure that the
policies of those parties are not destructive to families.
Legislation redefining marriage is one such policy,
and nominating candidates who oppose that sort of myopic
social engineering is one way to influence the process.
During
the debate Mr. Turner worried about this, complaining
about “ethnics” coming on busses and hijacking
political nomination meetings to ensure that their preferred
candidate gets selected. At the time, rightly in my
view, he was criticized by other panellists for suggesting
that so-called ethnic Canadians don’t have the
right to organize and participate in the democratic
process.
Subsequent
to that interview Mr. Turner posted a commentary on
his personal blog entitled “Agenda of Hate”
in which he ridicules Dr. McVety and his religious beliefs.
His remarks include: “I started to worry about
lightening bolts in the studio”, and calling McVety
a “sanctimonious blowhard”. He accuses people
of faith of trying to “force their morals, or their
culture, on the rest of us” and expresses concern
that “the same crew might target” him. He
concludes by equating Christians with the fanatics our
troops are fighting in Afghanistan. “Call it Defend
Marriage. Call it the Taliban” he writes.
In
the interest of full disclosure let me say that Charles
McVety is my friend. Over the years he and I have worked
closely together on a number of projects, including
rallies against anti-semitism, pro-immigration initiatives
and a number of issues relating to religious freedom.
We also worked together on the subject of marriage.
If there is a more caring and tolerant man than McVety,
I have yet to meet him.
But
this is not about Charles McVety. It’s about Garth
Turner and his apparent and irresponsible school-boy
delight in playing to his audience by offending those
with whom he and they disagree. The louder the cheering,
the bolder the attacks.
It’s
also about honesty and intellectual integrity.
In
the interest of full disclosure I should also point
out that I have been active in Conservative politics
for the last 30 years – longer, I suspect, than
almost all of those who voted for Mr. Turner in his
last nomination meeting. As it happens, I worked on
Mr. Turner's campaign to lead the Tories in 1993. He
and his team were thrilled to have the support of what
he now calls "insta-Tories" that I and my
colleagues signed up at that time on his behalf, just
as, I am quite certain, he was thrilled to have their
support this time around. Indeed, he no doubt encouraged
his friends and supporters to go out and sign up as
many "insta-Tories" as possible to "stack"
the nomination meeting in his favour. In short, Mr.
Turner is being dishonest. His hand-wringing over this
issue is entirely contrived.
Then
there are the "ethnic" comments he made on
CHTV.
For
the record, I am not an Evangelical Christian. In fact,
I am not Christian at all. I am Jewish – Orthodox
to be exact. I am, moreover, the former Director of
Government Relations for the Jewish human rights group
B'nai Brith Canada. I have had a long experience, both
personal and professional, with bigotry.
The
term "ethnic", in the context Mr. Turner used
it on television, is always a pejorative. Why?
Properly
used, the word "ethnic" is an adjective. There
are such things as ethnic groups (one or more of which
we all, including Mr. Turner, belong to), but no such
thing as an ethnic. When used like this – as a
noun – the term is meant to refer to... well –
them, that is to say, those who aren’t part of
the my ethnic group. Nobody took Mr. Turner's words
out of context. Garth Turner is a smart man. He used
the word deliberately and in the context he did because
it accurately conveyed what he meant to say.
Protestations
to the contrary may fool others, but not me. I'm reminded
of how Jews used to be barred from certain clubs in
the past, not because they were Jews, but because the
club could not accept those who required "special
diets". "We aren’t against Jews,"
the argument would go. "We just can’t accommodate
anybody with a special diet."
Right
– except vegetarians, diabetics and anyone with
a food allergy, of course.
Mr.
Turner writes that, in his view, "(f)aith-based
politics is fine", but then characterizes people
of faith – read Christians – as Taliban if
they solicit the support of others who believe in the
same things they believe in, such as marriage and family.
Dr. McVety may be a bit of a blowhard sometimes, a description
he good-naturedly acknowledges, but at least he doesn't
try to suck and blow at the same time.
In
fairness, perhaps this was just an example of the sort
of "colourful language" Mr. Turner sheepishly
admits to using from time to time. But would he get
away with it if he were calling African Canadians "niggers"
or Jews "kikes"? Why is it OK to use derogatory
words when it comes to Christians? The silence of the
mainstream media on this is deafening – and chilling.
Finally,
there's Mr. Turner's implicit accusation that certain
"groups" in our society are trying to force
their "culture" on the rest of us. I couldn’t
agree more. That's why so many of us, the majority of
Canadians in fact, from all walks of life, opposed,
and still oppose the re-definition of marriage.
While
Canadians tolerate many relationship and life-style
choices, they rightly regard the institution of marriage
as something special and worth protecting. Forcibly
changing that age-old institution, and the corresponding
changes to the structure of families, is precisely the
sort of imposed and radical cultural change that we
are against, particularly given the potential social
costs involved. This is the sort of important policy
issue that serious MPs are supposed to grapple with.
Instead of being serious about it, however, Mr. Turner
turns it into a joke and invites his blog-readers to
join with him in the laughter. This isn't reasoned argument
– it's political sadism.
German
theologian Martin Niemöller wrote a poem dealing
with the incremental growth of intolerance in pre-war
Nazi Germany in which he observed that "When they
came for the Jews I did not speak out for I was not
a Jew. When they came for me, there was no one left
to speak out."
To
be sure, Garth Turner and his ready-made audience are
not Nazis – not even close. But the ease with which
they ridicule their fellow Canadians who happen to be
Christian is disquieting to say the least, as is the
obvious and perverse pleasure they all seem to derive
from the offence they are causing.
As
a Jew, I will not be silent, because if I’m silent
when Christians are the target, who will be there when
the focus shifts to me?
Garth
Turner??
Joseph
C. Ben-Ami is Executive Director of the Institute
for Canadian Values.
©
2006 Joseph C. Ben-Ami
Joseph C. Ben-Ami
Executive Director
Institute for Canadian Values
Phone: 613.482.2253
Fax: 613.482.2278
email: jbenami@canadianvalues.ca
|
