Letter From Canada: The New Christian Right

[the caracal kid]

indeed jay.

It comes down to the leaders aligning with parties that reflect their perspectives, more or less. "light christians" are more accepted than "hard christians", for a variety of reasons, to non-christians.

So, it is not whether they are liberal or not in determining how they are tolerated but their own stances and tolerances.

 

[CDNBear]

Oh, now I get ya!

 

[Karlin]

a demented reflection of George Bush's America

a demented reflection of George Bush's America

Wow, that poetic. And there is more than a ring of truth to it - P.M. Harper is very much one of those "less than moderate" christians who are NOT the majority, Jay.

I think these Corporate-Christian leaders are dangerous.
They really do believe they get instructions from god, Bush even said god told him to invade Iraq ; and that preacher who said god told him to kill Chavez [Venezuela]; .

These guys have taken us backwards on several issues, but bringing religion back into politics is the worst... others are Marijuana reform, Global Warming, and rhetoric about 'tough on crime' that is troubling [but good on him for the gun crimes and street racing bills!].

I cant figure out if a religious liberal is just no in strict adherance to the old ways [doctrine], or if they are politically 'left'.
Here is something to read about that [but I just skimmed it and found that quote, lol] -
"Why America Needs a Spiritual Left"

http://www.spiritualprogressives.org/magazine/tik0501/050111a.html

What we are advocating for is a Left that is friendly not only to secularists and militant atheists, but also to people of faith who share a commitment to peace, social justice, and ecological sanity. We advocate for a Left which believes that the most powerful critique of this society must be rooted in challenging the way this society's capitalist marketplace fosters an ethos of selfishness and materialism.

"The Network of Spiritual Progressives" :
http://www.spiritualprogressives.org/community/what-is-nsp
http://www.spiritualprogressives.org/community/what-is-nsp

 

[BitWhys]

The difference is Paul Martin stood in opposition to the teachings of his church. In contrast Harper is forwarding his church's agenda.

The church has fostered and championed many different movements over the years, some of which are fundamentally opposed to each other. This latest manifestation is not one I can endorse. At its roots it is politically naive, ideologically dysfunctional and socially self-serving.

The Evangelical church operates on the assumption that conversion of the world will prompt the realization of universal justice, ignoring the truth that inescapable self-interest will continue to breed tension and result in struggle. It equates the salvation experience with sanctification, making the born-again christian more equal than others. It promotes an insular individualism that fails to recognize its alignment with the advantaged classes. They assume their purposes and God's are one and the same.

 

[Jay]

In contrast Harper is forwarding his church's agenda.

Other than the SSM debate, could we have some examples of this.

 

[BitWhys]

Ignoring the fact this holds me to a different standard than Colpy and CDNBear, this will get the point across...

The other philosophy is Burkean conservatism. Its primary value is social order. It stresses respect for customs and traditions (religious traditions above all), voluntary association, and personal self-restraint reinforced by moral and legal sanctions on behaviour.

- Stephen Harper, April 25,2003

Burke, not incidentally, although brilliant in his own right was decidedly elitist. It fits the pattern.

 

[Jay]

I suppose I meant as PM not just an essay he wrote.

 

[BitWhys]

It all starts from there.

Adam Smith didn't believe the invisible hand of the unhindered marketplace to be the ultimate arbitrar of justice. The Classical Liberals who errantly lay claim to his legacy certainly did though, and still do. The failure to acknowledge the underlying Malthusian economic Darwinism of Harper's libertarian philosophy, demonstrated by how he prefers court to social justice and disparages the collective effort required to prefer otherwise, very much at the behest of his "social conservative" base, is all too common. A sign of the times, I suppose.

 

[BitWhys]

that being said...

Other than the SSM debate, could we have some examples of this.

court challenges
women's advocacy
Israel
pot

 

[Jay]

These aren't religious issues at all....and as far as the "it all starts from there" what would we say about Trudeau then.

 

[BitWhys]

These aren't religious issues at all....

Then McVety really should mind his own business.

Israel
pot (and how McVety relates to Harper)

and you should be able to find the other two items on proud display over at the Institute for Canadian Values (which is endorsed and supported by McVety) when they get their site working again.

...and as far as the "it all starts from there" what would we say about Trudeau then.

if we want to stay on topic? nothing.

 

[Jay]

Well Pot is STILL a controlled substance and I can't believe you would think the Liberals don't support Israel and if Trudeau is off topic than so is McVety.

Your reaching to the very, very bottom of the barrel in this.

Harper has done nothing as PM that would lead anyone to the conclusion he is running a religious platform here. (That’s why we only see rhetoric in this thread, no substance)


Besides what kind of policy is this pot issue anyways....Liberals like to chastise people for smoking and spend gobs of money on this issue and write draconian laws concerning it but encourage pot smoking. Hmmm, one costs their commi healthcare system money and the other puts drugs in the hands of teenagers....oh I get it now.

 

[BitWhys]

Your reaching to the very, very bottom of the barrel in this.

you asked a question and I answered it in spades. if that bugs you so much then next time don't ask.

 

[Jay]

It doesn't bother me, I'm simply replying to your points. I think you guys are reaching on this.

It is true Harper is religious and it is well known.


Trudeau for instance had no problem radically changing the constitution, so much so that religion couldn't be taught in Ontario schools anymore, unless your a Catholic that is....are Liberal up in arms over this? No, he's a hero.

 

[BitWhys]

It doesn't bother me, I'm simply replying to your points...

no you're not. you're avoiding my points, asking stupid questions and putting words in my mouth when you don't like the answers. as usual.

 

[Jay]

court challenges
women's advocacy
Israel
pot

Ya these are all the great religious topics of the day....but only if a conservative deals with them.


The only thing people remotely have on Harper as a religious issue is SSM; he hasn't even talked about abortion...in fact the only recent motion put forth about abortion was put forth by a Liberal, and I support the motion 100%, so should Harper and any other sane person.

I can see this conversation doesn’t sit well with you, Bit. Let’s just agree to disagree. Maybe someone else can take up the challenge.

 

[BitWhys]

...Let’s just agree to disagree. Maybe someone else can take up the challenge.

You asked for examples where Harper is forwarding his church's agenda. I gave you four of them, with references. There's nothing to disagree over. Either you choose to keep playing stupid or you don't. You chose.

 

[Toro]

that being said...
court challenges
women's advocacy

What are examples of these two in relation to religion?

 

[BitWhys]

...and you should be able to find the other two items on proud display over at the Institute for Canadian Values (which is endorsed and supported by McVety) when they get their site working again...

Patience, young man. Patience.

from the google cache so I'll mark 'em while they're hot just in case their webmaster is late for morning prayers...

court challenges and women's advocacy
women's advocacy
(although your rather clever trick question is duly noted - heh)

 

[Toro]

http://www.libertyhaven.com/theoreticalorphilosophicalissues/ethics/capitalisticcom.htmlcourt challenges and women's advocacy
women's advocacy
(although your rather clever trick question is duly noted - heh)

But BitWhys

These aren't religious issues, even if religious conservative groups support them.

Programs that fund advocacy groups with government funds have been opposed since the day Trudeau started funding them by libertarian/classical liberals on the Right - which are far greater in number than religious conservatives - because we don't want our tax dollars used by special interest groups to advocate positions.