According to the media, Steinbach is the only area opposing Bill 18. The reporting on it (the Winnipeg Free Press anyway) started respectfully and balanced. Then it ever so quickly became a hunt to see what illogical sounding things Steinbach, and its people, were saying about Bill 18. The front page yesterday was about one of the Soutland pastors giving a sermon on February 24, 2013 which included a dire warning about Bill 18. Having attended Southland once or twice, I was not at all surprised that the pastor was that excited about the topic. He gets excited about every topic, Biblical or non-biblical, so that he got uppity about Bill 18 is no surprise. My point on that though, is just that everyone who doesn't know that will jump to the conclusion that the paper wants them to, which is that he is a bad opinionated man leading a large force against the valiant Bill 18. The real point I wanted to make was that the Winnipeg Free Press is looking for news about this topic (that sermon is a week and a half old). They want to find dirt on Steinbach, and if it makes Steinbach look bad, then it makes better news. I'm disappointed that the newspaper would do that, because I see it as a real debate that could have been done respectfully.
Why do I see it as a real debate? SCHS, the school which had an information night on Bill 18 where 1200 people showed up (10% of Steinbach), has stated that Bill 18 infringes on religious freedom. The Southland pastor said so too. As an assertion, the why and how need to be explained. I think part of what they mean is that forcing schools to provide Gay-Straight Alliances (if children ask for it) is supporting a gay lifestyle, which the Christian sourcebook -the Bible- says is wrong. Loving and supporting people is not wrong though. Having issues is not wrong. It is saying that there is no issue when there is an issue that is wrong, and I'm not just talking about Bill 18. A more 'extreme' example? Saying it's okay to commit adultery. It's not, but you are still supposed to care about the person. The other thing I think "Steinbach" is saying is that they are being ignored for being a faith community. How many protestors does it take before politicians reconsider a bill? 1000? 10,000? If Christians and people of other faiths get ignored now, how much easier will it be for them to be ignored later? I don't think their worry about having their rights being infringed on is wrong. People already expect religious beliefs to be held privately, not publically. That in itself is an infringement on religious freedom. It's saying, "I can be who I want to be as long as I don't inconvenience someone who has a different, or popular, viewpoint." So... it's saying I need to pretend I don't have a religion. Thanks social mores.
____________________________________________________
One thing that's unrelated to the debate but rather interesting. I was looking at a print out of the Charter of Right and Freedoms in a local library and found this. The Charter of Rights and Freedoms protects religious freedom. It doesn't mention sexual preference.
I appreciate your comments about the Steinbach pastor, Ray Duerksen. Your comments are right on:
ReplyDeleteYOU SAID: "The real point I wanted to make was that the Winnipeg Free Press is looking for news about this topic (that sermon is a week and a half old). They want to find dirt on Steinbach, and if it makes Steinbach look bad, then it makes better news. I'm disappointed that the newspaper would do that, because I see it as a real debate that could have been done respectfully."
I have already seen people who have read this article and then made nasty comments all over the newspapers and Facebook about this man they have never met. It is frustrating to see how the media is handling this, and it is not with respect or balanced reporting.
Thank you for making it clear that not everything you read is exactly as it comes across. Thanks!
I think I have to disagree.I didn't even know about this Bill 18 until certain people in Steinbach started getting up in arms about it and the Free Press wouldn't have reported on it if Steinbach had not made a fuss about it. I don't think anyone was looking for someone to make fun of,as you suggest. That said, as a Christian I think that Duerksen's comments were hugely controversial and problematic and I am not the only Christian. A big part of Protestantism is the desire to have a church and state that are separate
ReplyDelete. As such this is not, as such, the church's business. Although I, like many other Christians, do not believe homosexuality is wrong I know that many Christians do believe it is wrong. So what to do? As long as a school receives public funding it is required to do as the Government says, in this respect. As for the "vitriolic" debates on facebook, I haven't seen any "nasty" comments. Most people are being reasonable about where they stand. But why do Christians immediately claimed they are being attacked when someone opposes their view? I am a Christian and I support gay rights but when I try to defend my point I am told I am attacking someone.
Within the Christian community it is certainly time for talk about this but to be honest, the why has this, something which should be a minor issue suddenly synonymous with Christianity. That's the real problem in my mind.