I sent an email to the address I had listed in a previous post – this is the reply that I received….

Thank you for your e-mail. I have forwarded your comments to the Moderator, General Secretary and to staff here in the  General Council Office who take the lead on matters related to the church’s public witness. We have been monitoring this debate – as we have the student strike in Quebec – but the initiative to respond to concerns or issues that are primarily provincially based usually starts with the church’s regional bodies –the Presbyteries or Conferences. You may know this is exactly what happened this past weekend when the Montreal and Ottawa Conference passed a motion at its annual meeting regarding the Quebec student strike. The same may happen with regard to the anti-bullying legislation in Ontario – a number of Ontario Conferences are meeting this weekend and next. I am also aware that early on in this debate there were initiatives taken locally in cooperation with Toronto‘s Metropolitan Community Church.

While it is true that most often the General Council does not issue public statements on specific provincial matters – like the Ontario anti-bullying legislation or the Quebec student strike – that does not mean we are silent on the issue of bullying in a broader context. For instance, here is an example of  the United Church’s public witness on this matter.

http://www.united-church.ca/communications/news/general/111021

Thank you for your encouragement for the United Church to continue exercising its commitment to  “seek justice and resists evil” in addressing issues of public concern.

......

I heard on CBC radio at 5:00 p.m. today that the Roman Catholic Archbishop (might have the title wrong) couldn’t figure out why the vote had been moved to next week as he noted that most of the comments that were presented were negative. 

From the email above, it would be nice that at some of the conferences in Ontairo say something – but will it really matter as we don’t have a “united” voice.  London Conference has already met and I don’t see anything about this issue on the update from London Conference news….

One of my fears is that “we” seem irrelevant – that the “local” church – with the structure we have – really has no voice….or a “small” one if any.

I am not sure we are “resisting evil” by not letting our voices be heard…..since we have a corporate structure – let’s use it!  Our regional bodies – let’s see – that would have to come from local churches to Presbytery – ours meets 4 times a year, then to conference – oops….just missed it (meets only once a year and they keep suggesting that we move to 2 or 3 years) . There isn’t much structure/communication to allow this to happen as a provincail united front,

Will we rock the boat – perhaps – or do we really have any Christian influence left?

Better yet, young person, spend some time here at wondercafe reading posts and seeing Christians in dialogue. Then go check out one of the atheist sites online and see which is more to your liking. Where can you find more caring, more compassion, and more forgiveness? Which group promotes the idea better that you are a unique individual designed with a wonderful purpose in mind? The exploration is yours.

Rich blessings.

---

MC jae

Your venom is quite remarkable. And misplaced. This issue is not about dogma or doctrine or even anti-bullyng initiatives. It's about power and who has control of a large educational system and billions of dollars. And a lot of latent anti-Roman Catholic rhetoric. The United Church should stay out of this one. It has no iron in the fire.

Well said, Jae. well said.

Young people are making those comparisons.  And the net changes are coming at the expense of Christianity.  Christianity doesn't care about the person - it only cares about what the person believes.  Some Christians care about people, but you don't need to be a Christian to care about people.

Again, that is a stereotype and simply not true. You pain with a broad brush; too broad, unfortunately.

Some Christians care.  I get that.  But you don't need to be a Christian to care.

And look at some of the Christians here - they're all about having others believe the exact same fairy tales they believe, in exactly the same way.  They're fanatical about people believing prcisely how they "should", then they'll pretend that it's all about the person's eternal soul.

I welcome young Christians comparing Christian material to atheist material to Islamic material, and texts from other beliefs.  This is exactly what we need - young people comparing religions, and looking at non-belief.  You make Christians by surrounding kids with other Christians.  You make atheists by exposing kids to a wide variety of beliefs and skepticism, and letting them find their own way.

But you know that non-belief is rising among young people, while belief in Christianity is falling.  In this age where kids have access to information and communication outside their neighbourhood that we never had, they're leaving the faith of their parents, in droves.  They're informed, they're smart, and they're abandoning belief in your God.

Here is an opportunity to do the right thing and recapture the imaginations of kids who think your church's place in the world is pointless.  Wave as it goes by.

Folks - we are talking about creating safe places in schools for queer kids. kIDS are dying. Seems pretty petty to be worrying about a belief system rather than the actual reasons for having a GSA. If belief systems don't have tolerance, love and understanding for these kids perhaps they are to blame for the next suicide. I am sure Christ would be impressed!

Jobam, the Bill is not just about GSAs. It includes the creation of other kinds of specialist groups as well.

It is targeted at fighting several types of bullying -- which is exactly what I think is wrong with the Bill. It does not go far enough. Imho, we should be striving to stop all bullying of all kids for all reasons, not picking and choosing specific people groups to not be oppressed.

Rich blessings.

---

MC jae

Kids are bullied for a variety of reasons, but this one is specific and targetable.  And, the kids themselves are asking to be allowed to create these clubs, with this name.  Those who oppose the kids are doing so based on an old book.  So, on one side we have kids trying to gain inclusiveness for themselves and their friends and literally save lives, and on the other side we have some trustees and Catholic leaders saying these clubs offend their religious sensibilities.  Fuck their religious sensibilities - they don't matter.

Voucher system, scholarships paid by better-off families. Special Saturday classes, homeschooling. Sponsorships would be an excellent opportunity for tithing and service.
If a conservative religious group is genuinely serious about "protecting" kids from other kids & ideas, then public school isn't for them. I'm all for freedom of worship, but Canadian schools need above all to follow the laws.

You have summed it up well McJae......

Those sorts of Christians feel that they have the biblical right to impose their views on others.   Of course that is called witnessing I suppose although I do not feel that is accurate.  I do find it rather sad that there are those that feel that one cannot both respect GSA clubs and God at the same time.   I feel that one has to do both and they are not mutually exclusive.   Indeed ..... as a Christian ...... I feel compelled to do both.

By the way .... a religious group can hold whatever views they care to and express those views within the group.    That is the whole idea of groups .... to express and share views with each other.   As for sharing those views in the common public forum then both groups should and would be held to the same code of conduct.

It is time and once again it seems that we will have to drag the more fundamentalist flavour of christianity along kicking and screaming once again just like what happened with integration and interracial marriage.

Thank you for again pointing out why we need a law to lead the "church" since the "church" is not willing to step up and take a leadership role.

Regards

Rita

MC Jae ..... a few further thoughts if you don't mind.....

For a moment ..... consider this from a first aid viewpoint.....

The idea of first aid is to treat a myriad of problems on triage basis.   This is not done to ignore any problem but rather to start with the most urgent and to work you way down the list.   Sometimes there are several problems all receiving attention on a rotating basis and many all at the same time.

Right now LGBT persons are feeling their call to come out and just be.   The backlash has been most intense from the religious.   Sadly so....... inappropriately so.

The suicide rates for LGBT students is reported to be far higher than the general population of students.   There are several studies that show this and Wikipedia points to a study that reports a figure for attempted suicides of some 30% to 40%.

This I would say from a first aid standpoint requires urgent critical care.

This is why the present legislation is targeted for this issue right now.

The legislation is not ignoring other forms of bullying and saying they are not important ... the legislation is focusing on a very critical issue.

As in first aid .... there are the times to focus on a particular problem.   This is such a time.

Now is the time to focus and address.  There will be time to address the other issues as well and I am very glad we are on the way...

Regards

Rita

Ah. The secular, kind, compassionate caring model has spoken.

You say that. Not in my context.

If we're weighing the lives of kids vs. instructions from imaginary friends, I'm perfectly happy to suggest the priests can go pound sand.  I think that is compassionate and caring.  I see the religious - even some within the UCCan - think otherwise.

There's one reason young people think your beliefs are an epic fail.

The Catholic Church is not an organised  crime ring.  It is possible to refer to it's goverbnment as being the equilivant of an orgainsed crime ring. In fact that is what many menber of of the Catholic Church is saying. Just look at the writers at the National Catholic Reporter.; They and other Catholics  are the ones who are most involved in exposing the  the crimes of the bishops.   Just as Harper is the head of governement of Canada, he is not Canada.

True according to Canadian law on orgainised law they fit the definition, but that speaks as much to the broadness or weakness of the Canadian law.

Everyday Priests and Nuns are speaking out againsty the criminal activities of many bishops.  Later this week or early next  week we will see a response from American Nuns, to the take over of their organisation by the bishops.   This type of opposition is not what you will find in organised crime.  They are fighting for their rights.

These Catholics who are fighting against corruption are to be cheered on, just as we cheer on dissenters  living in countries like Burma, or people fighting corruption in secualr organisations like the Teamsters.

The fact that there are people in the church working to clean house does not diminish the fact that the corruption and coverups can be traced to the very top.  That's what makes it a criminal organization.  Otherwise, it would be an organization with some criminals in it.

As I said, the compassionate, kind, caring athiest speaks again. Stereotypes and all. And no, I don't believe otherwise. As I said, I do believe the province of Ontario has made a huge mistake and embroiled itself in a huge power struggle that is both unnecessary and inappropriate.

I also suggest that if you look carefully at those spearheading this issue against the Roman Catholic Church, you find the usual gang of suspects who have shown huge anti-Roman Catholic vitriol in the past. A pox on both their houses. There is a better solution.

Are my beliefs an "epic fail"? I don't really care about your judgement. You are entitled to be judgemental and insulting of my beliefs, after all.

Gee, I wonder why people would have something against a global organization with a long history of child rape and enabling child rapists, accumulating massive wealth while watching people starve, opposing condoms as a form of disease prevention and helping to cause needless death and suffering, misogyny, and now, refusing the requests of their own kids to start something as noble as a GSA club in Catholic schools to combat bullying?

Again, if this were an international chain of daycares, the CEO would have been hanged by now.  Because it's a church, very little has happened.  Only now are we starting to see the wall of the church start to crumble as investigators finally start to take serious looks at what has been happening.

Being against such an organization is not simply "anti-Catholic vitriol" - it's showing comtempt for the contemptible.

It's not just me making that judgement - it's the young people you aren't seeing on Sundays any more.  In increasing numbers, they think you're a loon, and you're not giving them any reasons here to change their minds.

Interesting perspective....

http://ca.news.yahoo.com/blogs/canada-politics/supporting-gay-rights-no-longer-taboo-canadian-politicians-193751371.html

Well it may not be "taboo" for poiliticians, we still have a long ways to go in some faith communities.....as noted in this thread.......

Thank you for that analogy Rita. It is quite a refreshing one -- i had not thought along that line of thought. I appreciate your fresh perspective. However, please allow me to say that if we are to truly follow that line of thought, those who need the emergency care first may not be the students in the LGBT community. As I understand it, the number one reason kids get bullied is their physical appearance. Bill 13 does nothing to help these poor kids out. Should we just turn our collective backs on them? You have a very good heart Rita -- surely you will join me in answering no.

Very sad to hear, and I am certainly with you in being against bullying of those students as well.

Rich blessings.

---

MC jae

I beleiev you are wrong,  Catholic High School students do not have a history of anti-catholic vitriol.  

Those groups that have a history of being antiCatholic like Orange Lodges and certain Protestant sects have largely stayed silent on the issue.

LMAO

Sorry, they are not leading the issue. Do some research.

The Roman Catholic Trustees have given in to the government.

1) No legal challenge to the bill.

2) The Trustees suggest the government is wavering on funding support for the Separate School system.

3) The offensive langauge remains in the legislation.

4) As this whole story thread sadly shows, this has just been another excuse to attack the Roman Catholic Church and the foundational laws of Canada.

http://www.thestar.com/news/canada/article/1205519--gay-straight-alliances-topic-for-monday-meeting-of-catholic-trustees-laurel-broten?bn=1

Yes, it's you making the judgement. At least have the guts to stand up for your insults and ad hominiems.

Are you claiming that non catholic outside groups of adults are somehow forcing Catholic students to join and setup gay straight alliances?   While Bishops are trying to stop outside non catholic groups from  forcing Catholic students to form and join gay straight alliances?  Do you believ it is impossible to be gay and Catholic? or that is impossible for straight Catholics to be supporters, friends and allies 

This thread just shows how you misunderstand what motivates others and where they are coming from. I will not suggest that you do more research, but that perhaps you just read the Star story  yoiu linked to above, where it clearly sates that it is Catholic students who have been trying to form Gay Straight Alliances in Catholic schools.  

You make an assumption that any battle between lay Catholics and Bishops is an attack on the church.  The bishops are not the church. The church is comprised of all members.

Also I do not get how you see this as an attact on the foundational laws of this country. If you are refering to the British North America Act, it was abolished in 1982. Today the Constitution of Canada is said to include:

(a) the Canada Act 1982  (which includes the Constitution Act, 1982 )

(b) 30 Acts and Orders contained in the Schedule to the Constitution Act, 1982 (including the Constitution Act, 1867), and

(c) any amendments 

Demands for admendments are not in my opinon attacks on the constitution, because the constitution in itself provides for the possibility of admendments.  Including one that was passed 10 years ago that abolished Protestant and Catholic School boards in the province of Quebec.

And likewise, you fail to understand the faith position of the Roman Catholic Church.

And you fail to understand the nature and structure of the Roman Catholic Church. This argument is not about a battle between lay Roman Catholic and the bishops. It is between the church and the Ontario government.

That is sadly misinformed. More accurately,

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Separate_school

You might wish to do some reading on the history of the abolishment of separate schools in Canada. It was a long, drawn out and very messy affair, especially in Manitoba.

I  can not just reply I am right and you are wrong. . It would make a better disscussion if you were to provide reasons for thinking I am wrong or misinformed, or any of the other things you use to dismiss my opinions.

Howevr you did bring up Manitoba. I should point out that Manitoba abolished funding for Catholic School Booard in 1890, not 1990. That was a long time ago. More recently in 1998 the Quebec governement abolished Cathoic and Protestant schools boards at it was done without any trouble.

I am glad that you appreciate the fresh perspective MC Jae.....

Now as for your thoughts about appearance....

Certainly we need to stop all bullying ..... and that includes appearance... on that point we do agree.

My point is this .... whenever the more conservative religious sensibilities are involved then the LGBT community receives but a passing nod at best.   There is always the deflection of the initiative to something or someone else .... just as long as it is not a LGBT focus.

....

This bill is not about turning "our" backs on anyone .... it is all about squarely facing a very sensitive and overlooked issue and addressing it specifically.    Hopefully as time goes on there will be more such initiatives.   This will lead the way and show that yes .... it does get better ... and it is possible.    This is an initiative of hope .... not just for the LGBT community ... but for all groups and I am proud that we have taken a lead.

......

Here is a question for the evangelical conservatives ....which includes your particular denomination.....    Where were you when bullying was not being adequately addressed?   Where were your initiatives to bring awareness and stop bullying of those that are bullied because of physical appearance?   Where were you to stand up for the LGBT kids and protect them?   When has anything of any strength been said specifically about such things from your pulpits?    Personally .... in all my years in evangelical churches I have never ever heard anyone stand up for us ..... ever.......      There has been no leadership in regards to this whatsoever.    If you feel I am wrong .... please provide specific examples, policy statements, or whatever.   Specific please .... not that wishy washy generic nebulous stuff that is like fog .... it's sort of damp .... but never really gets you wet.

.....

Sorry .... all I have heard from the religious conservatives is a lot of moaning and crying about the initiative to protect LGBT students and and educate and bring awareness and peace.   All the polite deflection and the sudden championing of another form of bullying is nothing more than a cover up of a deeply held prejudice against LGBT persons.

....

The right thing has been done here ..... Bill 13 has passed......

This should have been pushed and applauded by the church.

This should have been seen as hope and a way forward to begin to specifically target any number of other forms of bullying.

In order to stop it .... we need to name it and define it .... and then address it .... specifically....

If a nebulous generic approach was going to work ... it already would have....

I am really saddened that once again the government has to drag the religious kicking and whining to where they already should have been.    If those churches cannot lead ... then please politely stay out of the way while we do what we need to to protect "the least of these"....

Those are my thoughts.....

Hugs

Rita

There does seem to be a pattern developing.

Once again, secular values are being seen by many as more moral than religious values.  The Catholic kids are hopefully watching, and learning, just how immoral their church really is.  This will further erode the membership and influence of the Catholic church down the road.  As if Catholic kids needed another reason to leave.  I mean, just look at the student leaders openly defying the will of Cardinal Thomas Collins by even asking for these clubs be allowed.

It's not the same world we're living in any more, where "good Catholics" follow church teachings.  It probably hasn't been like that since at least the invention of the pill, but the rifts are expanding to other areas.

chansen ... unfortunately it is more than just the catholic leadership.....   The evangelical denominations have resisted just as strongly....   Fortunately for them and unfortunately for the kids that attend privately funded evangelical schools ... they are out of reach of this legislation.   They still have to carefully hide.   Oh yes .... even evangelicals have gay kids.... Even though they don't like to admit it .... it's rebellion after all.  (sorry for the rant there).

I have close relationships with many catholics ... and by that I mean ones that actually go to church and pay attention.....     They seem to have rather different views than the church leadership.    They certainly don't buy it all.... They are watching and waiting....

I wish them well......

Regards

Rita

Sorry, Rita. That is simply nonsense. The point is not "church bashing", although there has been a huge amount in this thread, especially of the Roman Catholic Church. The point is that there are multiple ways to reach the single end, protection of young people from bullying, whatever the cause( and the causes are multipl;e; I have personal experience and family experience). The churhc is there. It's just that the force of the law is not the only way to get there.

BTW, BC premier Christy Clark said this week that BC went the legislation route on bullying in 2007 and found it failed. Now thay are putting money and training into anti-bullying efforts. Ontario is where BC was five years ago. Do you think we might learn?

I have far too much to do than to lead you through a tutorial on Canadian history; something students learn today in Grade 10. It's all out there. Use Google. And Quebec is not Ontario nor is it Manitoba. Every province is different.  

Rita, conservative Christians have been preaching godly love for homosexuals for decades now. I will give specific examples if I can find the time. Pretty busy with school right now.

Rich blessings.

---

MC jae

"Godly love" while actively working to deny marriage rights?  Sounds too much like "godly love" to me.

Former Toronto Mayor and Chief commisionerof the ontario human rights commission  said in her submission on the Bill  that  Ontario’s human rights code is the province’s “highest law,” and that “all schools, public, Catholic and private, have a legal duty to provide students with an educational environment free from harassment.  

I agree with her and it is only going to be a mtter of time before private school students also demand the right to form gay-straight alliances.

As a Christian who also came out of the closet in grade 11 in 1980, I have followed the issue very closely. Conservative Christians have opposed evry change that would provide for equality. Whether it was inclusion in provincial human rights law the term sexual orientation, the establishment  of equal ages of consent, or the right to marry.  They opposed them all. They only time the support extending rights is when it is done in order to prevent equality.

SO I would be interested to see any statement where they supported laws that promoted equality under civil law.

The Commissioner is sadly mistaken. The Charter is the "highest law".

No one is disagreeing with the assertion that schools have a legal duty to provide an environment free from harassment. The disagreement is in how that environment is to be provided. The government of the day is using a legal club. The Roman Catholic Church offers Gospel principles such as the Great Commandment (love your neighbour), justice (do jutice, love kindness, walk humbly with God). Same end, different means.

Paul Bliss on CTV Toronto News last night suggested that the whole discussion may be irrelevant. For all the huffing and puffing on both sides, the Roman Catholic Church has the constitutional ability to completely ignore the new law under the Constitution Act and the Charter.  Time will tell.

We will know how this works either by the end of the school year or next fall.  I know of one youth in the "seperate" system who will now try to start a GSA.   His principal and school board are opposed.  We will see how well this does or doesn't work.

Thanks for the chuckle   "if I can find ..."

It was in the late 1970s early 1980s that, by my memory, the UCC began the long, and long overdue process, of talking about GLBT and granting rights - first inclusiveness and the right to be ordained, and more recently the right to marry.  It was slow in happening, and some congregations have been slow to get onboard  (one congregation near here who was quite opposed ten years ago now is very happy having a lesbian minister and her wife living in the manse. 

It seems to me that, in my congregation, and in my Presbytery, I find a greater percentage of the people are openly GLBT or openly GLBT friendly than in the general population (neighbours, bowling league, friends). 

It was 1976. I was in theology at Emmanuel College when the first test case of a cadidate for ordination came out of Hamilton Conference. She was a classmate. There were several openly gay and lesbian candidates in my class. Of course there were gay and lesbian ministers long before, but this was the first open and out candidate. That initiated our discussions, I believe.

In the 1980's my first pastoral chaerge is had a transgendered candidate for

DKS ...... respectfully I must disagree with your assertion that my comments is church bashing.    I have no desire to demean a denomination simply for the purpose of putting them down.

I do believe that my point is valid regarding the more conservative and evangelical churches opposing Bill 13 simply because they do believe that the LGBT community should have any specific rights and or protections.

No matter how polite it is worded or how noble sounding their new found deploring of bullying in general seems to be .... it is nothing more than prejudice in a nice dress.

These same institutions have resisted and fought every bit of legislation that has been brought forth to help LGBT persons.   This is just the latest......

I feel it is time to call it like it is and challenge those churches.

When a person is wrong they should be challenged

When a group is wrong they should be challenged.

When a church is wrong they also should be challenged.

Such churches have fought hard to deny LGBT persons any rights whatsoever.   And when any rights are about to be won then they work hard to deflect and water down the proposed legislation so that it will be as ineffective as possible.

You make a point about the legislation in BC being rather ineffective and suggest that legislation is perhaps a waste of time.   I disagree....   We have to start somewhere and having the law of the land set the bar is a very proper place to start.

How effective will the law be? ..... We will see .... and there are those of us that will fight to make it increasingly effective.

If calling out and challenging such churches and their political organizations that go by a number of names is church bashing then I suppose I am guilty as charged.   So be it....

Regards

Rita

MC Jae ..... I do look forward to what you find regarding the preaching of godly love for LGBT persons.    I will be delighted to review the specific examples you find and perhaps we can start a thread and examine them in more detail....

More and more I am becoming inceasingly confused and curious about what is meant by "godly love"......

Perhaps I will start a thread about that soon.....

Regards

Rita

Toronto Conference makes anti-bullying statement re bill with Ontario legislature bit.ly/MzJJhl

After it passed?!?