Church and State not Separated in Cobourg
I cannot understand why we have a religious ceremony to start our Council meetings. I am not offended, I think the Lord’s prayer is as close to independent of religion as you are going to get. But it is a religious thing! OK, it’s also a tradition. But that’s not a reason to do something if it’s inappropriate. If we had a priest come in and bless the councillors or everyone had to use the “sign of the cross” every time they said anything, there would be objections. But it will continue because “there is a consensus” according to Peter Delanty. Consensus amongst whom? Certainly I was not asked - nor was a survey done in the town - there was not enough time. As Miriam says, it’s a personal thing and I say that personal things and religious things do not belong in council meetings.
“Render unto Caesar..”
February 17th, 2008 at 1:38 pm
There’s no history in Canadian politics or society of separation of church and state. That’s an American fixation firmly rooted in the U.S. Constitution. Religion and politics at every level of Canadian society have always been inextricably entwined, like the bindweed and columbine when growing close together. What harm results from public expressions of piety and prayer or when priests bless gatherings? Nothing happens, least of all does peaceful, reasoned and logical debate follow. Slings and arrows and barbed darts will always follow. Hence, non-believers, who would appear to be in the majority anyway, should exercise tolerance and forbearance. In short, reciting a prayer is a completely harmless practice.
February 17th, 2008 at 1:46 pm
Yes, reciting a prayer is “a completely harmless practice”. So is mastubating. Or standing on your head. Or flagpole sitting.
But are these practices (save for the first one anyway…) encouraged at Cobourg Council meetings? I certainly hope not.
February 17th, 2008 at 1:48 pm
Geez. Look at that. I can’t even spell ‘masturbating’ properly.
(Note to self: Both hands on the keyboard at all times.)
February 17th, 2008 at 1:59 pm
This is the Image National Prayer of the Peoples Republic of Poetry, recited at the beginning of all Poetic Events by the Poetariet. First published in Mcleans Magazine in 1972, it is to be recited in the same cadence at the Lord’s Prayer, version 3.1.
IBM
which is everywhere
hallowed by thy data
Thy info come
Thy program be done
here as it is everywhere
and give us this day
our datacards
and forgive us
our human errrs
as we forgive
thy breakdowns
and lead us into automation
but deliver us from work
for thine is the memory banks
the input/output terminals
forever and ever
ohm
The times change rapidly. There was a need in 1995 to upgrade the prayer (Version 4.3) thusly:
Microsoft
which is everywhere
hallowed be thy Windows
Thy software come
Thy program be done
here as it is everywhere
And give us this day
our plug and play
and forgive us
our human errrors
as we forgive
thy loadtime
And lead us into downsizing
and deliver us from work
For thine is the promises
the promises and promises
forever ad nauseum
Push!
But the world moves on, and things rapidly change. This the latest Beta version:
Internet
which is everywhere
hallowed be thy browsers
Thy google come
Thy media be done
here as it is everywhere
And give us this day
our url and play
and Facebook us
our humanity
as we forgive
thy pop-ups
And lead us into I-Pod
but deliver us from spam
For thine is the freedom
the liberty and power
forever ever after
File!
Of course. it would a blessing to rid town council of having to recite the Lord’s Prayer. Let’s face it, over all of the decades that Town Council has been praying to a fairy tale, not even a hint of a miracle has been offered in return. The failure rate is 100%. So god, who is jealous and vengeful, has a multitude of better things to do that to listen to insincere entreaties from municipal politicians or their ain’t no god. But there is a town council. Feel like praying?
February 20th, 2008 at 1:31 pm
Why should those of non Christian faiths have to tolerate the Lord’s Prayer in public settings? It’s disrespectful to them. If we’re to have a prayer in place for one faith, then justice demands we have prayers from all of them.
How much simpler it would be to just not have prayers in public places. Leave them in church where it can be assumed everyone there is an adherent and wants to hear or participate in the prayer.
Prayers of any type have no place in secular settings, and it’s simply the smug arrogance of our dominant culture that can’t, or won’t, see that.
Live and let live - a concept that we would all be advised to adopt.
February 20th, 2008 at 2:07 pm
Than God I’m an atheist.
February 20th, 2008 at 10:21 pm
Saying a prayer at the beginning of a council meeting appears to encourage most participants to believe that they are receiving absolution in advance, and therefore they do not have to observe any type of ethical behaviour in their future conduct.
February 20th, 2008 at 10:42 pm
True enough. But won’t that problem solve itself in another generation when the first crop of indoctrinated ‘character’ students graduates from the Kawartha Pine Ridge District schools and begins to run for office? Or are we going to get nothing more than another bunch of ‘character(s)’ -albeit educated characters?
February 21st, 2008 at 11:08 pm
What is it about religion that it has the power to muzzle a free press? Other Western organizations (corporations, government) don’t have the same power that religion has to muzzle the press. Blasphemy. The repression is making a comeback via religion. It’s currently being wielded very well by Islam. Is religious belief so fragile that it makes criticism of it a lethal offence that scares the b’jesus out of Western media?
For instance the local papers always have a column by some religious leader in the community on a regular basis. All faiths are reflected. Nicely egalitarian. There’s a flaw. No column for an athiest. Really. Why should this be so? The athiest community deserves to have its contention well represented by a very articulate anti-christ. Mr Christie has the clear and crisp resume for it.
February 22nd, 2008 at 8:12 am
A column by an atheist published to give balance to the represented religions would make atheism a kind of de facto religion. I’m an atheist. But to preach atheism (or even extol its virtues) would make me a prosletyzer for my (non) beliefs. Next thing you know I wouldn’t be handing out literature at people’s doors.
February 24th, 2008 at 9:11 am
I see that the Cobourg Dainty Star has published a flurry of letters-to-the-editor consequence to Jack Foote’s letter No Tolerance For Intolerance. Of course it brought out the public scolds and their groundless accusations of racism. They remind me of the Victorian tut-tuts who repressed society by covering up table legs, making us say “White meat:” instead of breast, or dark meat, instead of thigh. They are the bigotted busy-bodies ranting that people must say thing precisely THIS way, not THAT way, and if not, then we will smear you with that arguement stopper — RACIST.
So if the Cobourg Dainty Star is publishing racist letters-to-the-editor, then I presume that my letter that I sent Feb 14 is beyond the pale. The Cobourg Daily Star has the courteous policy of acknowledging receipt of all letters sent to them. Below is the text of the satirical letter that was so offensive to the Cobourg Dainty Star that they declined to even acknowledge that it was sent to them.
So go ahead. Read and be offended. Once you are offended, go run off to your nearest Human Rights Commission and lay a complaint.
================================
Letter-to-the-Editor, February 14, 2008
I take exception to Jack Foote`s assertion that `certain mode[s] of female attire including the hijab, etc. will not be tolerated.”
I will defend a person`s right anywhere in the world to wear whatever attire they wish; a tarpaulin with a peephole for all I care. Whatever is worn must be freely chosen.
I also want to reserve the right to wear a burqa or niqab myself, if I so freely chose, for whatever reason. After all, how would anyone know what gender is behind the drapery? And so what, anyway?
On several occasions I have performed in the public domain wearing a chrome faceless shield, a device made of chrome mylar that concealed the entire face. It had the same characteristic as chrome sunglasses – I could see out, but no one could see in. My facial identity was better protected than wearing a gansta hoodie, and with no loss of peripheral vision.
http://www.flickr.com/photos/8039250@N08/1108922558/sizes/m/in/set-72157601063676965/
The chrome faceless shield permits the enjoyment of being private in public. Likewise, a burqa provides the same experience. The burqa is exceedingly retro, whereas the chrome faceless shield was like so 21st. Interestingly, I was able to persuade many people to perform in the public domain wearing chrome faceless shields.
For heaven’s sake, 70 Units of Verse of the Unitverse wore chrome faceless shields and performed
R-VERS OF Two Minutes Hate, August 20, 1978, on Parliament Hill. http://www.flickr.com/photos/8039250@N08/2258976653/sizes/m/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/8039250@N08/2258969731/sizes/m/
The government continued to occupy the nation, but not the imagine nation.
On another tangent, note that there is a group of white-skinned folks in the USA who wear white burqas with dunce hats and hang out at the local Flaming Cross Bar. So if they can legally wear their dirty linen outside, then why can`t some retro culturati wear their burqas?
And wouldn`t it be delightful if some graduate from the art college, a first generation Canadian of a Muslim family, made it a project to celebrate the burqa for the 21st century. There is a wide array of fabrics and embroidery and motifs and, and . . . Burqas made of the flags of every nation at the UN. In summer, young women can wear their mini-burqas. I’ll let you imagine burqa beachwear.
The Slobourg Dainty Star sent an intrepid reporter down the 401 to interview young women for the back to college insert. “I like to feel a bit like a woman, yet retain the security of my private identity,“ said little Ms Guided outside a downtown mosque that had been celebrating the diversity (aka freedom) of Canada. Her friend, Ms Andry added, “On club nights I have a satin layered burqa with a slit all the way up to the knee. Believe me, it doesn`t take that much bait to hook a man`s attention.“ This was trumped by Ms Sippi, “ I just tighten my waist cord a tad, just enough to suggest the curve. It drives men to . . . “
Imagine burqas and niqabs all over Toronto on festive occasions. Lots of children dressed in leprechaun green burqas for the Irish Parade. Lots of brightly coloured burqas, some with strategic slits, getting down at the Caribana Parade. A group of Burqa Boys wearing black mini-burqas solemnly following behind a float in the Gay Pride Parade. The float would consist of Evin Prison wallpaper around the float, and heliumed black balloons fastened to the floor of the Evin Prison. The balloons would float above the wallpaper of the prison. IN IRAN THERE ARE NO HOMOSEXUALS – BECAUSE WE KILL THEM.
There are plenty of short videos on You Tube of women in Tehran`s streets being beaten, arrested and otherwise harassed by the fascion police, female agents of the Decontamination Squad dressed in their black gowns like medieval scarecrows from a Shakespearian play, a tragi-comedy. Please note Mr Foote, that in Tehran there are certain modes of dress that are not tolerated.
The advocacy of prohibitions increases inhibitions. It can be argued that prohibiting a hijab, or burqa, is a small thing; few people wear the burqa or niqab in Canada, so the impact now would be manageable. What would be achieved by such a prohibition? For one thing, such a prohibition unnecessarily confines the imagination from soaring the wild winds of freedom. Just as water follows gravity, the imagination follows freedom.
Look at various world cultures over the past 500 years. The most successful culture the planet has ever known is Western culture. It enriches itself every minute of every day of every year century after century because of ever expanding individual freedoms, and a government’s prime objective is to defend those freedoms.
A dictatorship is defined by the policy that everything is prohibited except that which is permitted by law, whereas in a democracy everything is permitted except that which is prohibited by law. Dictatorship means theological totalitarianism and communist totalitarianism.
The Peoples Republic of Poetry’s Prime Policy is Poetry Proliferation. It asserts that the most effective defence of freedom of speech is freedom of speech. Wherever freedom of speech is restrained poetry proliferation becomes poetry poverty
February 24th, 2008 at 9:24 am
Probably too long.
February 24th, 2008 at 11:39 am
Well, if length is the sole criteria, how the hell do Foote and Gilchrist get away with their 2,500 word door stoppers?
February 24th, 2008 at 12:42 pm
What gets me is that religion is so weak that laws are needed to protect it. The Cobourg Dainty Star, as well as other news media are enthralled with the social laws of religion. Blasphemy. It appears that the big powerful religions are so weak, in spite of GOD/ALLAH/ETC being on their side, that they need their delicate sensibilities protected and will utilize all means (law, postrated media) to enforce their rule over secular society.
For GAWD’s sake, we cannot even publicly debate whether Jesus Christ is a better man than Mohammed. Would Hillary Clinton be better for the USA than Barrack Obama? That can be discussed, why can’t we openly discuss whether the Church of Scientology would be better for society than Haitian voodooism or Christianity or Islam.
Of course I can say all kinds of critical and satirical stuff about the religion of Scientology, including insulting comments about its founder. Likewise I should be permitted to do the same with other religions and their founders.
Assorted IMAMmary blands assert that Islam is a religion of peace. Can this assertion be challenged in the media? If society can accept the Life of Brian movie, and let us note that the Cobourg Ditzy Star had accepted money to publish ads for this movie — ie. to proselytize a satire, but demures if someone makes a suggestion that there should also be a movie produced about the Life of Mo. But, of course, to suggest such is to bring out all the accusations of racism, Islamaphobia, etc.
Well, my concept is “I Slam A Phobia”.
I can welcome the burqua, niqab, burqa, into the mosaic of our culture, as easily as I accept the kilt, turban, etc into Canadian culture. I’m not Scottish, but I can wear a kilt if I so wish.
A friend of mine is a Sikh. On Robby Burns Day I suggested that he should wear a tartan turban in honour. He replied that if I provided the tartan fabric, he would wear it. Can a non-Sikh wear a similar turban? Of course, he replied.
One of the charming elements of the annual Gay Pride parade is a small group of men who dress up in nun’s habits and call themselves the Sisters of Perpetual Indulgence. No they don’t shave their God-given hairy legs.
It seems that every group of people gets respect except for old white men. Them and Americans, can be trashed with impunity. And note, I encourage the freedom of speech that permits that — the same freedom should be applied in all circumstances.
However, the sensibilities of the religious have the Cobourg Dainty Star by the throat. Travel over to the Ben Burd blog where I had earlier posted a letter that the Cobourg Daily Star rejected. It’s on the bottom of the section called THE MONDAY READ. Go over there, and see the pattern.
These two letters are not the only letters rejected by the Cobourg Dainty Star. They consistently reject anything that might bruise the delicate thin-skinned sensibilities of GOD & the GANG of enforcers.
As for this old white man, I whole-heartedly support multiculturalism because it permits me to go anywhere in Toronto, to the shops, where I can buy a turban, burqua, kilt, cowboy hat, etc, etc and I can wear them.
A couple years ago, I walked into a Condom Shack on Queen Street West. It was on impulse — never been in one before. So while I was browsing, and young man came over to me.
“Hello sir, can I help you?”
“Maybe you can. Do you have any condoms in Islamic green?”
“I beg your pardon”
“Do you have any condoms in Islamic green?”
“We have these over here,” he said, pointing to a package of three.
“No, those won’t do. That green is of the Irish. There’s a shamrock on the package. I need Islamic green.
“I’m afraid we have nothing else.”
“Well, you do beieve in multiculturalism don’t you?
“Yes.”
“There’s condoms here with the Stars & Stripes, maple leaves, Union Jack, Ireland, . . . but nothing in Islamic green. That certainly puts a damper on intimate relations.”
And so I left. I can see in some store windows a bobblehead Jesus, Jesus action figures, Jesus dildoes in some sex shops. If we permit this regarding the prophet/founder of Christianity, then the principle should extend and apply to all religions. Why should one religion be exempt from this freedom. Since when did sharia law begin to be applied as policy for Western media to obey?
February 24th, 2008 at 1:09 pm
Sorry, Daniel J., I thought my irony was obvious.