Thursday, February 14, 2008
Posted by David Berner at 6:07 PM
Gotta comment on this one. And I know I'll be flamed. But there's a lot of misunderstanding, and people are misinformed. I attended the church at the center of this controversy, and followed carefully the battles that were fought.
I have gay friends, I like them, I work with them, I sit next to them, I have nothing against them, and the vast majority of people in these churches feel the same. Including the clergy. In fact, intolerance is heartily discouraged.
The Anglicans in question are not against sitting in the pew next to a gay couple (and often do). They are against being forced to perform gay marriages. Which is what was really happening here.
But that's not all there is to this issue. There are also other issues of faith where the local archbishop insisted that he was right and the Bible was wrong, and was actually locking congregations out of their churches until they caved in to his demands.
The local archbishop also was going against historic Anglican doctrine, as well as the majority of Anglicans in the world to push through his own personal brand of new theology.
This issue was about the core of our faith - the truth of the Bible, and went a long way beyond gay marriages, and was never about homophobia or a dislike for gay people.
It WAS (at least partly) about the definition and sanctity of marriage, however.
But to say that Anglicans cannot tolerate gay couples is completely misrepresenting the facts. It was never about that.
It was about a single archbishop trying to bully an entire diocese into changing their belief in the Bible. Unfortunately, he knew how to play the media, and the churches in question were naive in that respect.
Posted by David Berner at 1:32 PM
The Following was written for Friday's Province but will not run because it conflicts with editorials and other pieces on the same subject.
I wrote it, so I thought someone aught to read it.
Tuesday was a big day for criminal justice in this neck of the woods.
Surrey Provincial Court Judge Ken Ball sentenced 18 year-old Enrique Quintana to 10 years in an adult prison for his part in the vicious and unprovoked hatchet attack that left Michael Levy incapacitated for life. Levy, 19, is now a quadriplegic, confined to a wheelchair. He requires daily care, lives on painkillers and depressants and his lungs function at 50% normal capacity. Judge Ball called the attack an act of “such brutal savagery as to be difficult to comprehend."
On the same day, Lt.- Gov. Stephen Point delivered Premier Gordon Campbell’s throne speech. Among the shopping list that included trans-fats, smoking restrictions, pharmacy refills and nurses’ roles was this gem.
“British Columbians want to understand why sentences in their province tend to be shorter than in other provinces for crimes such as homicide, theft, property crimes, fraud, impaired driving and drug possession. A comprehensive review of sentencing practices in B.C. courts will address these questions.”
No sooner were the words uttered than the knives came out.
NDP MLA Mike Farnsworth, the opposition’s public safety critic, said immediately that the government should act, not launch another study. And while thousands of us would agree with Farnsworth, he knows as well as any that “study” is usually the safe euphemism for taking no action. Doing things, after all, can draw attention.
Meanwhile, in the nation’s capital, also on Tuesday, the Hon. Gerry St. Germain rose in the Senate to speak in support of Prime Minister Harper’s Bill C-2, the Tackling Violent Crime Act, which consists of five bills dealing with violent crimes, dangerous offenders, and the age of sexual consent.
Here is some of what St. Germain, a former police officer, said.
“Canadians want criminal justice reform and they want it now. Canadians are not just appalled at the extent to which our criminal justice system has eroded – they are scared, angry and fed up. Violent criminals walk the streets free. Drug dealers ply their trade without restriction. Gangsters shoot at each other in our streets. Hard core sex offenders are released from prison while still a serious threat.
Victims of crime suffer while the legal elitists who have claimed the judicial system as their own exclusive domain play an endless game of plea-bargaining, legal hair-splitting, and meaningless justification of atrociously illogical decisions.
They hide behind the unjust principles inherent in the Charter of Rights—a charter of terrible wrongs in the minds of most Canadians.”
Last week, B.C. Supreme Court Justice Catherine Bruce declared a police search of a grow-op unconstitutional. Apparently the cops didn’t knock loud enough or long enough for the alleged crook to flush or burn the evidence.
I am a simple person. I understand the need to protect our privacies. But, like you, I also have a straightforward idea of what constitutes criminal justice.
When will the courts be so endowed with common sense?
Posted by David Berner at 1:27 PM
Posted by David Berner at 12:02 PM
Posted by David Berner at 8:23 AM
The issue of same-sex relationships/marriages/unions is so enormously minuscule it always amazes me that anyone can get their knickers in a knot over it.
Let me ask you this:
If you can't tolerate Bob and Ted sitting the pew next to you, what can you handle?
Somehow you put up with all the rude offensive people who dash through your lives on a daily basis. (Yesterday, during my BIg Walk, a pleasant-looking woman driving her little boy home from school, absolutely made the clear decision to NOT stop from a considerable distance and drive practically over me. I was close enough to pound on her passing car. I didn't.)
So if you can tolerate all the idiots in your community and you know how shaky your own marriage/relationship/union is, what's the problem with putting up with Jane and Carole?
You don't have to dance with them, break bread or drop by for tea. All you have to do is LIVE AND LET LIVE. Or, DO UNTO OTHERS.
Not new ideas.
Posted by David Berner at 8:13 AM
Posted by David Berner at 8:01 AM