Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Canadian Conservative MP Calls Christian Political Activists “Taliban” and “Flowers of Evil”
LifeSiteNews ^ | 5/9/06 | John Jalsevac

Posted on 06/09/2006 5:11:56 PM PDT by wagglebee

HALTON, ON, June 9, 2006 (LifeSiteNews.com) – The verbal sparring match began on May 28, when Conservative MP Garth Turner appeared in a television interview, alongside pro-marriage/Christian political activist Charles McVety.

The issue at hand was homosexual “marriage” in the RCMP.

During what McVety—who is involved in or represents the views of groups including Defend Marriage Canada, the Canada Christian College, and the Canada Family Action Coalition—calls a “spirited” debate, it came to the fore that one of the goals of Christian political activists is to work to ensure that anti-marriage, anti-life, anti-Christian Conservative MPs are defeated and replaced with more family-friendly and Christian candidates during the nomination meetings that will occur before the next election.

Turner responded, accusing McVety and those who share his beliefs of employing anti-democratic tactics. On his blog that same night Turner responded to McVety’s arguments, saying “I have no time for groups in our society who try to force their morals, or their culture, on the rest of us.”

He concluded his remarks saying, “Call it Defend Marriage Canada. Call it the Taliban. Fleurs de mal [Flowers of evil]” (http://www.garth.ca/weblog/page/6/). 

In a later blog entry Turner labeled those who share McVety’s political and religious views as “people who share his divine Kool-Aid,”  (http://www.garth.ca/weblog/page/5/) an apparent reference to the infamous Jonestown Massacre of 1978, during which 913 members of the Peoples Temple cult committed mass suicide by drinking grape-flavoured Kool-Aid laced with potassium cyanide. And in another post he called those who would attempt to nominate politicians whose politics is informed by their faith as “religious vigilantes,”  (http://www.garth.ca/weblog/page/2/) and elsewhere, “single-issue monochromatic militants” (http://www.garth.ca/weblog/page/6/). And elsewhere, mere paragraphs after back-pedalling and saying "No, I did not call the fundamentalism Christians Taliban," he continues and compares the very same Christians to Afghan Militant Muslims, although avoiding the explicit term "Taliban," saying, "But a faith-based government? Forget it. Our brave troops in Afghanistan spend every day tracking down and squishing the freaks who tried that one"  (http://www.garth.ca/weblog/page/2/).

Joseph Ben-Ami, Executive Director of the Institute for Canadian Values, expressed his confusion at Turner’s accusations that recruiting supporters to attend nomination meetings is anti-democratic.

“When Garth Turner arranges to bring his family and friends to a nomination meeting on a bus he calls it democracy, but when a challenger who happens to be brown-skinned, or perhaps a member of the local church or synagogue, does the same thing for their family and friends, he calls them Taliban and accuses them of ‘taking over’,” observed Ben-Ami.

“Garth Turner’s behaviour is a sharp illustration of the vicious and deep-rooted bigotry lurking just below the surface of the secular-left in our society,” continued Ben-Ami. “People like him claim to be champions of tolerance, but when their own ideas and positions are challenged, they resort to name-calling and fear mongering, laughably invoking the principle of tolerance to justify their bigotry.”

Jim Hughes, president of Campaign Life Coalition, a group that works to help elect pro-life candidates, said of Turner, “We said right from the beginning that Garth Turner wasn’t somebody that could be supported. A lot of people said we just have to vote Conservative regardless of the candidates. And here we’re paying the price.”

Hughes continued, saying “The Prime Minister has had this man in already and told him to clam up. Now the only thing is for his expulsion from Cabinet. That would satisfy the bulk of people who supported Mr. Harper from the life and family movement.”

LifeSiteNews.com tried to contact party leader Stephen Harper’s office to find out if an apology for Turner’s remarks was forthcoming, but was unable to speak to anyone with information on the matter prior to publishing time.

Throughout the debate Turner has also—despite his often expressed approval of a majority-based democracy—repeatedly called into question the need for a free vote on the same-sex “marriage” issue in parliament. 

In one post Turner admits that traditional-marriage supporters represent a large portion of the Canadian population: “In a moral sense,” he says, “they have a huge current behind them since most churches are solidly behind traditional marriage. In a cultural sense, many ethnic communities represented in Halton [Turner’s riding] are massively against same-sex marriage. In a political sense, these highly-motivated voters are not going to let their views be ignored.” Turner continues, admitting that he has also had strong reservations, “about the wisdom of the Liberal move to change the definition of marriage, especially without a whole lot more public input and debate.”

The Halton MP, however, dismisses the concern that the Liberal government side-stepped proper democratic processes in pushing through the same-sex “marriage” legislation, and failed to properly take into account public opinion on the redefinition of marriage.

“It is behind us,” says Turner about the passage of the legislation, “the Right has been extended, and there seems no compelling reason to take it back.” He did not say whether or not the majority of Canadians being opposed to the extension of the “right” would be a sufficient reason. Numerous polls have indicated that the majority of Canadians are indeed opposed to same-sex “marriage”. A CBC poll conducted in January of last year indicated 54% of Canadians were opposed to Bill C-38, while a National Post/Global National poll in February of the same year indicated 66% opposition.

“I’ll go down fighting to stop any faith-based group, Christian, Islamic or whatever, from using our precious political system to impose their value system and religious beliefs on the rest of us,” Turner wrote on his blog on June 6. “There’s a reason wise people decided the state and the church should be separate, and Canada – proudly multi-racial, multi-cultural, multi-faith and multi-hued – is no d**n place to start gluing them back together.”

“That does not mean,” he continues by way of clarification, “we can’t be ethical, moral, responsible, principled and virtuous. In fact, our government should be an example of humanity gone nuts with goodness.”

Throughout the debate Turner has repeatedly labeled himself as a “Christian”, although it is unclear if he draws his beliefs of what is “ethical,” “moral” and “good” from his Christian faith, or from some other unnamed source.

To express your concern contact Stephen Harper at: pm@pm.gc.ca



TOPICS: Canada; Culture/Society; Extended News; Foreign Affairs; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: antichristianbigotry; christianity; homosexualagenda; homosexualmarriage; leftists; marriage; moralabsolutes; newbie
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 121-140141-160161-180181-182 next last
To: Fair Go

"Nations have to move on and not perpetuate old grievances."

Of course, you are right. But, it would wrong for Canadian conservatives not to appreciate there are some really hurt feelings from the past few years.


161 posted on 06/11/2006 8:58:30 PM PDT by spatso
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 160 | View Replies]

To: spatso

Ever seen pictures of Aussies when they came out of Japanese prisoner of War camps in World War 2?


162 posted on 06/11/2006 9:00:26 PM PDT by Fair Go
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 161 | View Replies]

To: spatso
Heat got scorched by Mavs. Going to bed, Goodnight
163 posted on 06/11/2006 9:02:30 PM PDT by spatso
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 161 | View Replies]

To: spatso

Good night, spatso


164 posted on 06/11/2006 9:06:52 PM PDT by kanawa
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 163 | View Replies]

To: wagglebee
“I’ll go down fighting to stop any faith-based group, Christian, Islamic or whatever, from using our precious political system to impose their value system and religious beliefs on the rest of us,” Turner wrote on his blog on June 6.

Writing this crap in an online diary (and from a politician no less) is just BEGGING for an ass whipping.

Future politicians: Don't keep an online blog/diary/crap-quota-manifest if you dont want your ass handed to you by the general public.

165 posted on 06/11/2006 9:09:27 PM PDT by Windsong (Jesus Saves, but Buddha makes incremental backups)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Fair Go
I have seen a British production on the siege of Hong Kong and the imprisonment of the soldiers over the balance of the war. It was incredibly brutal. Were Australians there? I don't think I have ever seen anything else on Japanese prisoners of war. One of my all time favorite movies is Bridge Over the River Kwai. But, I got the impression that the movie would be pretty tame if you compared it to the actual conditions of some of the camps such as Hong Kong.
166 posted on 06/11/2006 9:12:17 PM PDT by spatso
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 162 | View Replies]

To: spatso

Try Changi and the fall of Singapore. Also, I believe Canadians were involved at Hong Kong.


167 posted on 06/11/2006 9:18:10 PM PDT by Fair Go
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 166 | View Replies]

To: spatso

Also have a look at the prisoner of war camps on the Burma-Thailand railway.


168 posted on 06/11/2006 9:22:46 PM PDT by Fair Go
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 166 | View Replies]

To: spatso

Hong Kong was mostly Canadians and Brits. The Aussies fought in Singapore (and maybe Burma).


169 posted on 06/12/2006 2:42:02 AM PDT by Squawk 8888 (Yay! It's Riding Season!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 166 | View Replies]

To: spatso
But, it would wrong for Canadian conservatives not to appreciate there are some really hurt feelings from the past few years.

Now we are discussing your feelings?

You really are a liberal.

170 posted on 06/12/2006 3:18:29 AM PDT by fanfan (I wouldn't be so angry with them if they didn't want to kill me!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 161 | View Replies]

To: Squawk 8888; Fair Go
Just spent 45 minutes on Digger History web site. Amazing site. Read stories on Changi and the Burma Railway and the big Japanese Prison break (I think they said 231 prisoners were killed, mostly by their comrades for not cooperating in the breakout). It was interesting to read the comparison stories on the bridge over the Kwai River and the movie.
I am not sure it was on Digger History, it may have been another site but, it was a summary of a study on some of the Changi prisoners lives after the war. The study looked through the eyes of the Australian war prisoner's wives on the affect of their prison experience over the rest of their lives. It was really interesting to read about the affects of PTSD 30 and 40 years after the fact.
171 posted on 06/12/2006 3:22:15 AM PDT by spatso
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 169 | View Replies]

To: Squawk 8888

Aussies were in places like Singapore, Burma, and of course New Guinea. The Japanese dropped more than 50 bombs on Australia. Initially the Japanese did not intend to invade Australia as they thought the locals would be very hard to subdue. However, they did intend to invade New Zealand. Apparently they thought it would be a nice place for holidays. Canada, the US, Britain, Australia, New Zealand - all contributed to victory in the war in the Pacific.


172 posted on 06/12/2006 4:38:31 AM PDT by Fair Go
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 169 | View Replies]

To: spatso
"You know that is exactly the self righteous, dismissive Canadian attitude that I am talking about."

Given that I clearly classed these sort of remarks coming from either side of the border as "emotional and/or opportunistic", how is this any sort of specifically "self righteous, dismissive Canadian attitude"?

Surely conservatives on both sides of the border routinely deride anyone anywhere on the ideological spectrum offering 'solutions' which plainly ignore the negative impact of same on cross-border trade as well as related jobs & economic productivity?

In terms of real-politik, Congressman Hostetler's proposal is as foolish & short-sighted as anyone in either nation endorsing the Kyoto Accord & for virtually the same reasons.

When it comes to your personal 'hot button' issues - like the gay agenda & illegal immigration - it certainly appears you become illogical, emotion-driven & lose all sense of 'bigger picture' political perspective.
173 posted on 06/12/2006 7:38:13 AM PDT by GMMAC (Discover Canada governed by Conservatives: www.CanadianAlly.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 159 | View Replies]

To: fanfan
I'm still waiting for your answer regarding what area of the world you live in.

(Crickets)
174 posted on 06/12/2006 10:10:49 AM PDT by proud_yank (Truth to liberals is as useful as a snowblower in hell.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 99 | View Replies]

To: GMMAC
"Given that I clearly classed these sort of remarks coming from either side of the border as "emotional and/or opportunistic", how is this any sort of specifically "self righteous, dismissive Canadian attitude"?

I think you make a mistake if you assume that the American and Canadian experience are symmetrical. Indeed they have been very different. Some, like myself, may take offense when a Canadian presumes he can attack a US Congressman in a cavalier, almost dismissive manner. When you do that, you not only dismiss him but, also, the like minded people who may have similar thoughts. I have no difficulty with your arguing against the merit of a policy proposal or an idea or an action or any failure to act, but you can still be respectful of a duly elected representative of the American people.
I realize I have made no headway. I have not been able to convince one person on this thread of the merit of my concerns. So, it is time to move on. I no longer have a desire to continue the thread. It is time for me to go back to border security, immigration and bible threads. I understand you will want to take one more shot at me and I shall read it, but I will post my response privately to you.
175 posted on 06/12/2006 11:52:05 AM PDT by spatso
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 173 | View Replies]

To: spatso; fanfan; Pikamax; Former Proud Canadian; Great Dane; Alberta's Child; headsonpikes; Ryle; ...
"I understand you will want to take one more shot at me and I shall read it, but I will post my response privately to you."

No shot per se.
Only the observation that your final (?) post confirms that you practice a double standard in two respects:

Doubtless, you'd have had no problem, if in the course of supporting (as I do) your opposition to the radical homosexual agenda, I'd made disparaging remarks with regard to its leading U.S. Congressional proponent: the ever appalling Barney Frank.

Secondly, you seem to believe permissible cross-border sniping by conservatives at liberal targets of opportunity to be an exclusively one-way street with ours always 'in season' but with the likes of Senators Clinton, Kennedy & Kerry protected by something akin to an imagined game law.

To cite a blatantly American source on the essence of being a liberal:
“The absolute conviction that there is one set of rules for you, and another, completely different set of rules for everyone else.” ~ Ann Coulter
176 posted on 06/12/2006 12:29:06 PM PDT by GMMAC (Discover Canada governed by Conservatives: www.CanadianAlly.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 175 | View Replies]

To: spatso
it would wrong for Canadian conservatives not to appreciate there are some really hurt feelings from the past few years

Ahh yes, - "feelings"... Now there's a nice liberal concept.
O.K. C'mon up to Toronto and you'll get a free massage..

177 posted on 06/12/2006 12:39:42 PM PDT by CaptainCanada ("Macht doch Eiern Dreck aleene!" (Take care of your own mess!).)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 161 | View Replies]

To: wagglebee

So...Canada has their RINOs too...


178 posted on 06/12/2006 12:44:04 PM PDT by DesScorp
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: DesScorp
"So...Canada has their RINOs too..."

Up here we mostly use the term "red-Torys" but "CINO's" nicely makes the same point on both sides of the border.

Once the "TRUE BLUES" left, ours had their own little Party - the 'Progressive Conservatives' - all to themselves for well over a decade ... until we crushed it - LOL!
179 posted on 06/12/2006 12:53:04 PM PDT by GMMAC (Discover Canada governed by Conservatives: www.CanadianAlly.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 178 | View Replies]

To: Fair Go

Clinton not so much, but Al Gore has been the Liberals' #1 cheerleader...


180 posted on 06/12/2006 5:41:28 PM PDT by Heartofsong83
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 157 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 121-140141-160161-180181-182 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson