nouspique.com

The BBC reports that, yesterday, the House of Lords upheld legislation that prohibits businesses from discriminating on the basis of sexual orientation. This legislation was effective in Northern Ireland as of Jan. 1, 2007 and now will be implemented throughout the rest of the UK. As indicated by the Canadian experience with same–sex marriage laws and a recent (unsuccessful) attempt by Harper conservatives to reopen the debate, it is an issue that polarizes people and tends to bring out the most vocal among us.

In anticipation of the House of Lords decision, I found myself engaged in a reasonably civil, but no less polarized, exchange with a priest in Kent – Fr John Boyle. I was drawn by curiosity to Fr John’s blog, wondering how it is that religious language and theological principles find their way into public policy debates. Does faith talk belong here? Even if it does belong here, might a highly polarized (and therefore extreme) pairing of viewpoints be damaging to both parties? The greater share of people may be tempted to pass by, dismissing the debate as the rantings of religious fanatics. Even the moments of clarity may go unheard. The only result may be yet another opportunity to confirm the growing suspicion that people who take their believing seriously, whatever their beliefs, are a band of whacked out nutbars.

Religion has crept into other areas of public life in the UK. Jack Straw’s comments regarding women who wear niqab’s has turned one man’s fear of non–Western garments into a clash between major world religions. Again, I wonder: when religious opinion enters public conversation, does it do any good? This is not a question directed at the vocal conservatives who, perhaps for vocational reasons, feel compelled to weigh in on absolutely everything; it is more a question for their wiser, more measured, well–meaning liberal cohorts who feel the need to correct the little gaffes of their simpler brethren. In short, it is a question I direct at someone like me. Is there any purpose served by even bothering to engage a member of the clergy, like Fr John? Will it only harm both of us by drawing attention to the fact of a general discord amongst believers at the expense of the issue at hand?

But a more menacing possibility exists. Could it be that believers like us have been manipulated to engage one another? Could it be that media have been strategically deployed to manufacture issues. Maybe we are “seeded” with xenophobia so that we will engage one another in relatively trivial debates that diffuse controversy around issues of greater consequence. Maybe our disaffections have been so widely dispersed that we find it impossible to gather the political will to join hands on issues which affect us universally. Protest has grown around the Blair government’s decision to renew the Trident nuclear missile system at a cost of £20bn, but without coordinated opposition, one wonders how effective such protest can be. Even as I write, George W. Bush is addressing the U.S. and the world with his announcement that the U.S. will escalate its military presence in Iraq. In addition, he alludes to plans to increase the size of the armed forces and marines generally, which raises the possibility of reinstating the draft. A bigger American army? Nuclear warheads in European waters? Maybe it’s time for believers to step beyond the relatively trivial points of difference and opt for simple survival.

No related posts.