Catholics should not support "equity"

I had been having an email conversation with members of Ottawa's Catholic School Board. It began with their support of Black Live Matter (which was a big red flag for me). Then I discovered the board supports Bill 67, Racial Equity in the Education System Act. Catholic bishops and other Catholics have come out against "equity". And so should our schools. But in fact, they support it.

From the BC Catholic.https://bccatholic.ca/news/catholic-van/wokeness-and-pseudo-religions-catholic-colleges-look-for-ways-to-challenge-growing-cancel-culture 

Bishop Gomez:

"Los Angeles Archbishop Jose Gomez recently said, “Today’s critical theories and ideologies are profoundly atheistic.” An integral part of the agenda is “diversity, equity, and inclusion” mandates that critics say end up discriminating against members of groups that have not been identified as oppressed or under-represented."

 

And this from Peter Nolan:

“Adults themselves need to be educated before our young people can stand against cancel culture,” he said. “One problem has been that woke ideology has been camouflaged by terminology like ‘diversity, inclusivity, and equity,’ and ‘social justice,’ which sound like they are secular initiatives that could be aligned with Catholic social teaching. They are not.” 

And this from Bishop Baron:

“Fourth, they tend to demonize the market economy and the institutions of democracy as part of a superstructure defending the privileged,” Bishop Barron explained. “Fifth, they push toward equity of outcome throughout the society, rather than equality of opportunity.” And finally, “wokeism” employs divisive strategies of accusation that are contrary to the Gospel demand to love our enemies.”

Bishop Barron, Bishop Gomez and Peter Nolan, did not change the Board members' minds.

This is a very dangerous path our Catholic Board is taking. Jordan Peterson and Rex Murphy go into detail about how harmful this Bill 67 will be for our schools (see link below).

So today I wrote a final letter to the Ottawa Catholic School Board. It seems we need to pray a lot for them.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Dear Ottawa School Board,

I hope you will listen to this video Jordan Peterson made yesterday on Bill 67, with newspaper columnist Rex Murphy.

They discuss the impact Bill 67 will have on our schools, which includes our Catholic schools here in Ottawa. 

From the responses I have received from those of you who have responded to me, it seems very clear that my emails have not changed your minds on the subject of implementing "equity" policies in our Catholic schools. 

Nevertheless, I feel that in good conscience, I must make this final effort to reach out to you. I will not contact you again on this subject. 

I will pray for all of you that your hearts will change regarding the dangers this bill will have on our children, their parents and their teachers.

Sincerely,

Patricia Maloney

[0:00 ] Intro

[1:30 ] Education & Dogma

[2:00 ] Related Podcasts (links above)

[6:10 ] Why Education Matters

[9:20 ] Is Bill 67 Anything but Ideology?

[12:00 ] Bias Training

[19:00 ] Racial Equity, Judgment, & Power

[24:00 ] Teachers, Bill 67, & "Anti-racism Awareness"

[28:00 ] Nadia Murad, Disinvited from Speaking in Toronto

[32:30 ] Diversity & Inclusión Programs

[36:20 ] Bill 67 & Affirmative Action

[42:30 ] Alleged Offenses

[46:10 ] Potential Long-term Consequences

[50:40 ] An Example

[53:40 ] Outro

Rex Murphy's excellent advice to Justin Trudeau on his feminist foreign aid policy

Poor Fern Hill. She just couldn't bring herself to watch Rex Murphy discussing Justin Trudeau's feminist foreign aid policy.

I guess Rex just made too much sense.

The canonical phrase “a woman’s right to choose”

Rex Murphy gets it in today's National Post with his insightful How Trudeau’s trendy ‘pro-choice’ secularism became the left’s new religion.

Murphy talks about the values of old, most often based on religious values:

"...as people have turned away from the religious framework, they have not jettisoned that interior certitude, that feeling of absolute confidence that used to be associated only with religious doctrine and belief. When people stop believing in God, they quickly find surrogate beliefs, construct surrogate values, and embrace a conviction that, in its force and depth, is no different, from that which had previously been supplied by religion. 

Does anyone doubt that the intensity with which people speak of and support “diversity” signals a sort of ersatz religious fervour? Does not the environmentalist’s regard for “the planet,” and her mystical view of every blade of glass, not have the same character as a nun lost in her devotions? 

When I hear Justin Trudeau defending unfettered access to abortion — he uses, of course, the canonical phrase “a woman’s right to choose” — he speaks in those perfect accents of assurance and certitude that used to belong only to religion. He speaks of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms with something that sounds very much like Godly reverence. 

Other parties, including the NDP and Conservatives, hold certain of their core ideas with the same absoluteness. We “appoint” certain ideas as having an unchallengable place in our politics and discussions. Secularism, in fact, may place a stronger silent pressure to conform to accepted values than even religion could in its heyday. 

However, nothing is as plain to someone else as it may be plain to us. To try to place some matters out of the range of discussion — because they are so obviously “right” or so obviously in tune with the times — is hardly a form of coherent argument. 

It is very curious to see and hear the accents of the absolute spoken by the secular left with the same fervour we once heard in the chapels and cathedrals of the 1950s. There are as many ostensibly “sacred” topics today as there ever have been — even if the very concept of sacredness seems alien to Mr. Trudeau and his ilk."

I've just returned from a pilgrimage to Poland. While many may feel the notion of "pilgrimage" quaint in the 21st century, I suggest that rather, it is an antidote for the rampant secularism Murphy so aptly describes. It was a breath of fresh air to witness the humble devotion displayed by the people of Poland, as well as the pilgrims with whom I traveled.

I hope to be writing more about this pilgrimage on my faith blog in the upcoming days.

Striking a nerve about not voting Conservative

Today's National Post published three letters in response to a letter I wrote. All the letters are below.

(Note that my original letter actually had another line that never made it to print. It addressed two of these letters objections, about who we could vote for instead of the Conservatives? The deleted sentence read: "I would vote for the Christian Heritage party since I couldn't vote NDP or Liberal." One letter writer thought that "I should do what's best for Canada". I fully intend to do this, and as it currently stands, that means I won't be voting Conservative. Not unless I see some big changes with their leadership and/or their "pro-choice" stance. There is a lot more meat in these letters to argue with, and I'll leave it to others to do that.)

My letter as published in the NP:

I used to be a ‘hard-core conservative’

Re: For Harper’s Conservatives, 2013 Was All About The Senate Scandal, Rex Murphy, Dec. 27.

Rex Murphy talks about “genuine hard-core of Conservative followers.” That was me — up to the point when Stephen Harper made the decision to become pro-choice.

I had a glimmer of hope back in November when the Conservatives had their policy convention and finally condemned sex-selection abortion. Yet afterwards, we saw no real action on this practice. It also appeared to be a somewhat disingenuous move, since it didn’t jibe with MP Mark Warawa’s own motion on the same subject.

As well, the Conservatives also supported the Unborn Victims of Crime policy resolution at the 2008 Conservative policy convention. Yet, five years later, that support still has not translated into any kind of policy, bill, or motion.

I will have to see some pretty hard-core changes in the leadership of the Conservative party before the next election in order to vote Conservative again. As it stands now, if the government continues to support the status quo on abortion (i.e., a pro-abortion position) and/or Mr. Harper remains leader, I could not in good conscience vote Conservative. And I’m pretty sure I won’t be the only hard-core Conservative who chooses to move away from the Conservatives.

Patricia Maloney, Ottawa.

And the three responses in today's NP

‘The moral facts of abortion are not the purview of the state’

Re: I Used To Be A Hard-Core Conservative, letter to the editor, Jan.2.

A sure path to election defeat would be a decision by the Conservative party to take an anti-abortion position. I am also a staunch supporter of the party and the idea that government would be able to make decisions regarding a woman’s right to choose sends us back to the dark ages. Religious dogma has no place in political party policy.

Carol Joseph, Burlington, Ont.

Letter-writer Patricia Maloney is critical of the Prime Minister’s policy on abortion. I am also a hard-core conservative, but I support Stephen Harper for several reasons. First, he made a commitment to eschew the subject and has stuck by his word. He has not stated what his true stand on abortion is, but we all know that all opposition parties favour the matter; a dangerous, if not destructive political situation. In addition, legally prohibiting abortion would no more to stop it than prohibiting alcohol or drugs — those laws, in fact, made drug and alcohol use many times more destructive.

The moral facts of abortion are not the purview of the state, but are the responsibility of religion and Ms. Maloney should look to her religion to rectify this tragic situation. Finally, if I don’t vote Conservative, I have nowhere to go.

Hugh Buckley, Vancouver.

Patricia Maloney said that as a conservative, she would have a hard time supporting the federal Conservatives in the next election because of inaction on creating abortion law. Has she considered the alternatives? Justin Trudeau, who is Catholic, espouses many beliefs that are contrary to Catholic doctrine. So did Pierre Trudeau, Jean Chrétien and Paul Martin, all Catholics. I doubt if Thomas Mulcair could be counted on to defend the unborn, either.

Stephen Harper is not a Catholic but his government is focusing foreign aid on developing countries that work to save the lives of new mothers and their children. With men like Jason Kenny and John Baird in his cabinet, I have no doubt which party is the best for this country.

I sincerely hope that Ms. Maloney will rethink her position and do what is best for Canada.

Sybil Fretz, Pickering, Ont.

Federal Conservatives don't support all conservatives

Rex Murphy talked about 2013 and how Prime Minister Stephen Harper reacted to the senate scandal:

"As always in a crisis, Mr. Harper drew up the drawbridge and retreated to the fortress, i.e., his political base. There is a genuine hardcore of Conservative followers who will stay with the party however dark the clouds; and when in difficulty, Mr. Harper tends to them and them only. (The Liberals and NDP both can claim a similar core of diehards.) But in Mr. Harper’s case, the power of the Senate scandal was such as to detach even some from this otherwise unshakeable support group."

Here is my response to this in a letter in today's National Post:

I used to be a ‘hard-core conservative’

Re: For Harper’s Conservatives, 2013 Was All About The Senate Scandal, Rex Murphy, Dec. 27.

Rex Murphy talks about “genuine hard-core of Conservative followers.” That was me — up to the point when Stephen Harper made the decision to become pro-choice.

I had a glimmer of hope back in November when the Conservatives had their policy convention and finally condemned sex-selection abortion. Yet afterwards, we saw no real action on this practice. It also appeared to be a somewhat disingenuous move, since it didn’t jibe with MP Mark Warawa’s own motion on the same subject. [This motion was deemed non-votable because it was supposedly outside of federal jurisdiction. So how could it be legitimate for a federal party to condemn the practice, but outside of Parliament's jurisdiction to condemn the practice?]

As well, the Conservatives also supported the Unborn Victims of Crime policy resolution at the 2008 Conservative policy convention. Yet, five years later, that support still has not translated into any kind of policy, bill, or motion.

I will have to see some pretty hard-core changes in the leadership of the Conservative party before the next election in order to vote Conservative again. As it stands now, if the government continues to support the status quo on abortion (i.e., a pro-abortion position) and/or Mr. Harper remains leader, I could not in good conscience vote Conservative. And I’m pretty sure I won’t be the only hard-core Conservative who chooses to move away from the Conservatives.

Patricia Maloney, Ottawa.