Dear Editor:
The recent exchange of letters in Burnaby NOW (online) by Suzana Kovacic ("School System has become belief based," 26 July, 2011) and Harmel Guram ("Theophobia vs homophobia," 27 July, 2011) demonstrates why name-calling does not assist in resolving the kind of problems that have been generated by Burnaby school board Policy 5.45.
Contrary to Mr. Guram's opening remarks, Suzana Kovacic does not speak for the Catholic Civil Rights League because she is not a member of the League. To my knowledge, she has never referred to herself as a league member or representative, nor did she suggest this in the letter that drew Mr. Guram's excited response.
As a director of the league, I can confirm that we have never referred to Mr. Guram as "theophobic." In fact, we became aware of Mr. Guram only after his mistaken claim that Mrs. Kovacic is a league member was brought to our attention.
Only then were we alerted to his interest in Policy 5.45, his devotion to "logical and reasonable argument," and his claims that the Catholic Civil Rights League is "ignorant, "anti-homosexual" and consists of religious zealots who harbour "dangerous" religious beliefs. We acknowledge his desire to challenge such beliefs "in an intelligent manner."
All schools ought to provide safe educational environments and encourage students to become good citizens and good neighbours. Policies that like adopted by School District 59 (Peace River) against bullying and harassment do not contradict the legitimate interests of any members of the school community because they are based on broadly accepted moral norms.
In contrast, the beliefs and practices of "members of the LGBTQ community" are sharply contested; so are the moral claims and faith assumptions implicit in politically constructed concepts like "heterosexism" and "homophobia." The recent protests in Burnaby and resulting petition to the premier are indicative of significant disagreement, as does the tenor of letters in Burnaby Now.
Now, the authentic teaching of the Catholic Church on sexuality is also contested. The belief that homosexual acts can never be approved is vehemently rejected by "members of the LGBTQ community," and many people believe that the Church's teaching against contraception is wrong.
Protests would most certainly erupt were a state school district to enact a policy that made these teachings normative for students and teachers, especially if the policy also mandated the "correction" or suppression of contrary views.
Such protests would be justified because principles acknowledged by the Supreme Court of Canada in the Surrey school book case prohibit state school boards from adopting the moral, religious or political views of one part of the school community as normative, to the exclusion of those of other segments of the community. According to the Court, state school boards cannot allow themselves to be dominated by one religious, moral or political view, "but must respect a diversity of views."
It is improper for public school districts in B.C. to formally adopt the faith assumptions and moral claims of one side in a contentious debate, and abuse the power of the state by attempting to make them normative for all. The appropriation of state power by interest groups or parties in an attempt to drive a rival conception of the good from the public square is inconsistent with rational pluralism and democratic traditions.
If we leave aside the remarks about "theophobia," that seems to be the point of Mrs. Kovacic's letter.
With respect to the league's alleged ignorance, dangerous religious beliefs and religious zealotry, Mr. Guram is welcome to draw attention to the evidence for this in the league's submission to the Burnaby board, our letter to the B.C. Civil Liberties Association, or in the Declaration on the Authority of Parents and Guardians in the Education of their Children. All of these documents are available on the league's website (http://www.ccrl.ca/).
Sincerely,
Sean Murphy, director, Catholic Civil Rights League (B.C.)
