Act the Second
In which I ranted for two hours on the computer in response to my mother's email (see last post):
Mother,
The separation of church and state is written into the Canadian constitution. Canada prides itself on being multicultural, not a melting pot. You have a right to say “Merry Christmas” to as many people as you want, at any time of the year. You do not have the right to see “Merry Christmas” in any store, or any other public space. Why? Because the Canadians who decorate the store have the right not to say Merry Christmas if that is their preference.
I have a Holiday Gathering, not a Christmas Party. Why? Because the Jewish people who come to my party do not celebrate Christmas and have the right not to be forced to do so. I respect that right.
Last time I checked, no one in Canada was forcing Christians to celebrate Eid al Fitr or Diwali or Kwanzaa. That “article” was written by a racist fool. I would love to know which Toronto newspaper published his work. I find this hard to do, as there is no name attached to it, no newspaper name, and no date of publication.
If by “patriotism”, the author of that email forward meant “the right to assume that every person of Middle Eastern or South Asian decent (or even just anyone with a beard) is a terrorist”, then they are wrong. If by “politically correct”, the author meant “atheist”, then they are wrong. If by “sovereignty” and “national identity”, the author meant “the right for white people to find a mostly empty piece of land an ocean away, kill or segregate the native inhabitants therein and force them to accept a completely counter indicative culture, and put a Starbucks on every other corner”, well, that is what happened, isn’t it? The existence of the situation certainly does not make it acceptable in any way.
The author states that “if God offends you, then I suggest you consider another part of the world as your new home.........because God is part of our culture.” What this person does not explain is the exact representation of God to whom they are referring. Perhaps it is the literal representation of God and the Bible currently enjoyed by the masses in the United States. This is the same God that is turning that country into a global laughingstock. This is the same God that allows many Christians to deny that Catholics are Christian at all. Perhaps the author does not realize that Canada is often a last resort for immigrants who would much rather live in the land of their birth. Perhaps the author has not considered that many immigrants arrive here having been forced to practice traditions that are not their own under threat of torture and death.
The email forward below suggests that people who do not accept the author’s desire for them to conform to a non-existent view of uniform Canadian culture should leave the country. This generalist view goes against everything from which this country grew. It is a divisive view that displays they author’s desire to exist in a homogenous world where everyone believes and acts in the same fashion as the author.
The email ends with the following passage: “I figure if we all keep passing this to our friends (and enemies) it will also, sooner or later get back to the complainers, lets all try, please.” The author is, sadly, wrong. New immigrants to Canada, who have arrived here as refugees moving from situations that are dangerous or deadly, are among the poorest citizens of this country. While they have the right to choose which email forwards to which they read and respond, many do not have the privilege to afford a computer, or the privilege to know how to use one. The author of that email is confusing rights and privileges.
I write this response sitting in a warm house in a province where people who speak French and not English are often treated with the same disdain the email author shows for people who speak neither English nor French; a province where an influx of immigrants from other parts of this same country are routinely treated as second class citizens. I am a Canadian who would rather see folks from other parts of the world in Canada, not blown up, not enslaved in the countries in which they were born. I am a human being who, regardless of which God I do or do not believe in, would rather live in a glorious country where church and state are constitutionally separated, than a police state where we are all forced to be the same.
Please see the text of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) here: http://www.udhr.org/UDHR/default.htm
It was adopted December 10, 1948 by the United Nations without dissent. Canadians were part of that process.
Now, if you want to send me an email forward that rationally and respectfully describes how many immigrant women endure severe, and oftentimes fatal, physical abuse from their partners because they are used to this abuse being socially acceptable in their countries of origin, I would read it, and I would help you to do something to stop it. Human rights do not include the right to injure another human being, nor do they include the right to force other human beings to behave the way the majority finds the most convenient.
I am glad to have received this email from you: it is your right to free speech and thought and idea. I am also ridiculously disappointed. I still remember the person who searched high and low for Christmas candles with no luck. Is it still Christmas with Hanukkah candles on the table? I thought so. Are you still a Christian if you spend money at a store that says Season’s Greetings instead of Merry Christmas? You tell me.
Note: I did not actually send this email. I thought on it and decided it was too hardcore.
Mother,
The separation of church and state is written into the Canadian constitution. Canada prides itself on being multicultural, not a melting pot. You have a right to say “Merry Christmas” to as many people as you want, at any time of the year. You do not have the right to see “Merry Christmas” in any store, or any other public space. Why? Because the Canadians who decorate the store have the right not to say Merry Christmas if that is their preference.
I have a Holiday Gathering, not a Christmas Party. Why? Because the Jewish people who come to my party do not celebrate Christmas and have the right not to be forced to do so. I respect that right.
Last time I checked, no one in Canada was forcing Christians to celebrate Eid al Fitr or Diwali or Kwanzaa. That “article” was written by a racist fool. I would love to know which Toronto newspaper published his work. I find this hard to do, as there is no name attached to it, no newspaper name, and no date of publication.
If by “patriotism”, the author of that email forward meant “the right to assume that every person of Middle Eastern or South Asian decent (or even just anyone with a beard) is a terrorist”, then they are wrong. If by “politically correct”, the author meant “atheist”, then they are wrong. If by “sovereignty” and “national identity”, the author meant “the right for white people to find a mostly empty piece of land an ocean away, kill or segregate the native inhabitants therein and force them to accept a completely counter indicative culture, and put a Starbucks on every other corner”, well, that is what happened, isn’t it? The existence of the situation certainly does not make it acceptable in any way.
The author states that “if God offends you, then I suggest you consider another part of the world as your new home.........because God is part of our culture.” What this person does not explain is the exact representation of God to whom they are referring. Perhaps it is the literal representation of God and the Bible currently enjoyed by the masses in the United States. This is the same God that is turning that country into a global laughingstock. This is the same God that allows many Christians to deny that Catholics are Christian at all. Perhaps the author does not realize that Canada is often a last resort for immigrants who would much rather live in the land of their birth. Perhaps the author has not considered that many immigrants arrive here having been forced to practice traditions that are not their own under threat of torture and death.
The email forward below suggests that people who do not accept the author’s desire for them to conform to a non-existent view of uniform Canadian culture should leave the country. This generalist view goes against everything from which this country grew. It is a divisive view that displays they author’s desire to exist in a homogenous world where everyone believes and acts in the same fashion as the author.
The email ends with the following passage: “I figure if we all keep passing this to our friends (and enemies) it will also, sooner or later get back to the complainers, lets all try, please.” The author is, sadly, wrong. New immigrants to Canada, who have arrived here as refugees moving from situations that are dangerous or deadly, are among the poorest citizens of this country. While they have the right to choose which email forwards to which they read and respond, many do not have the privilege to afford a computer, or the privilege to know how to use one. The author of that email is confusing rights and privileges.
I write this response sitting in a warm house in a province where people who speak French and not English are often treated with the same disdain the email author shows for people who speak neither English nor French; a province where an influx of immigrants from other parts of this same country are routinely treated as second class citizens. I am a Canadian who would rather see folks from other parts of the world in Canada, not blown up, not enslaved in the countries in which they were born. I am a human being who, regardless of which God I do or do not believe in, would rather live in a glorious country where church and state are constitutionally separated, than a police state where we are all forced to be the same.
Please see the text of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) here: http://www.udhr.org/UDHR/default.htm
It was adopted December 10, 1948 by the United Nations without dissent. Canadians were part of that process.
Now, if you want to send me an email forward that rationally and respectfully describes how many immigrant women endure severe, and oftentimes fatal, physical abuse from their partners because they are used to this abuse being socially acceptable in their countries of origin, I would read it, and I would help you to do something to stop it. Human rights do not include the right to injure another human being, nor do they include the right to force other human beings to behave the way the majority finds the most convenient.
I am glad to have received this email from you: it is your right to free speech and thought and idea. I am also ridiculously disappointed. I still remember the person who searched high and low for Christmas candles with no luck. Is it still Christmas with Hanukkah candles on the table? I thought so. Are you still a Christian if you spend money at a store that says Season’s Greetings instead of Merry Christmas? You tell me.
Note: I did not actually send this email. I thought on it and decided it was too hardcore.