Dear Editor:
In her letter (School system has become belief-based, Burnaby NOW online), Suzana Kovacic of the Catholic Rights Civil League accuses me of being "theophobic" because I have been critical of those that oppose Policy 5.45 due to their religious beliefs.
First of all, I am not a "theophobe" as I believe in a religion, and I believe in God. Even if I was a "theophobe" due to my negative experiences of having to deal with annoying religious zealots such as Kovavic and her organization, what was her point? My arguments are valid and I will present my reasoning in this letter.
Not everyone that believes in God and religion is an ignorant homophobe like the members of Parents' Voice. Let me repeat myself if Kovacic is now seeing red for being exposed for the ignorant religious zealot that she really is; religious people are not necessarily ignorant and anti-homosexual like the advocates of Parent's Voice, Catholic Civil Rights League, and Roadkill Radio.
Kovacic's assumption that I am a "theophobe" is based on her ignorance of the fact that I am a religious person and by the fact that she does not even know who I am and what I believe other than what I have stated in my letters to this and other papers. I have neither made arguments against the concept of God or religion nor have I made arguments against the beliefs of agnostics or atheists in any of my letters. Kovacic is assuming that I am anti-God and anti-religion just because I have criticized people for trying to impose their dangerous religious beliefs on our public education system.
But the topic at hand is not whether or not I am a "theophobe" but whether or not Parents' Voice was born out of religious-based homophobia. The impetus behind Parents' Voice members is their religious conviction that homosexuality is wrong, immoral, and un-Godly. These people are such zealots that they are willing to actively prevent policies aimed at protecting LGBTQ people that are direct and indirect victims of the very homophobic belief that Parents' Voice members are perpetuating in their homes, churches, and religious schools.
Policy 5.45 was conceived to allow for a discussion of the issue to take place in Burnaby public schools. Parents' Voice is doing it's best to suppress that discussion for fear that the weakness of their moral argument regarding homosexuality might be revealed in an intelligent, civilized discussion.
Although the harbouring of such religion-based beliefs are dangerous, they are not stifled because they are protected under the Charter of Rights and Freedoms. Everyone has the right to believe in what they want to believe. With such a right comes a responsibility to be accountable for one's overtly expressed beliefs in a society modeled on the ideal that every individual is equal before and under the law. The members of Parents' Voice are attempting to avoid being accountable for the values that they teach by preventing a discussion that may bring their children (and society in general) to question their verbalized beliefs in an intelligent manner.
Kovacic is arguing that "Secular public schools must accommodate moral and religious diversity within the school community." Although I agree with this statement, Kovacic is mistaken on what qualifies for such an accommodation. One does not have the right to deny other people's rights on "religious" or "moral" grounds because such a right is justifiably not recognized by the Charter of Rights and Freedoms.
Parents' Voice's central argument is that it is discriminatory and a violation of other groups' rights to select a specific group (LGBTQ students) over them for a program of anti-bullying teaching. Section 15 (2) of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms quells this mistaken argument put forth by Parents' Voice;
Section 15(1) Every individual is equal before and under the law and has the right to the equal protection and the equal benefit of the law without discrimination, based on race, national or ethnic origin, colour, religion, sex, age or mental or physical disability.
Section 15(2) Subsection (1) does not preclude any law, program or activity that has as its object the amelioration of conditions of disadvantaged individuals or groups including those that are disadvantaged because of race, national or ethnic origin, colour, religion sex, age or mental or physical disability.
It has been clear to any reasonable person that the arguments made by the proponents of Parents' Voice do not hold water and that their opposition to Policy 5.45 is indeed based on their traditional religious homophobia. When their arguments are confronted, their typical reaction is to first cry "foul" because they feel that they have been ridiculed when their motives are questioned, and then change the focus of the discussion to skirt around the very issue that they initially brought forth.
This is a reflection of the poor faith in which they are participating in this debate. All one has to do is Google "Policy 5.45 Burnaby" and see how Parents' Voice has behaved during the past few months. The purpose of my criticism of Parents' Voice has been to counter the deceitful denials by members of Parents' Voice that their "activism" is fuelled by the bigotry espoused in their version of religious teaching. I have clearly articulated how Parents' Voice was born out of homophobic bigotry.
I do not expect my critics to accept my logical and reasonable argument that they are homophobes because they have yet to accept the fact that their version of religion has been a major cause of the societal attitudes that have led to marginalization and suffering for LGBTQ people throughout our society's history.
Harmel Guram, Burnaby
