“Mind your own business. If people don't bother you, don't bother them.”
The other day, police raided a drug house close to our church. We had been working with Community Police officers and Manitoba Justice to get the place shut down.
If these had been a couple of people doping it up in their own private space, it wouldn't be our business and I probably wouldn't have called authorities. I might think about it, probably pray about it, and maybe even talk to them about it.
But this place was different. They made their business our business. This place was to hookers and druggies what Tim's and Robin's are to coffee and donuts. Steady traffic from early morning to late evening. Visiting prostitutes regularly propositioned anyone walking or driving by.
These folks weren't just breaking the law - they were mocking the law. It got too hard to ignore. Especially right across the street from us and less than 40 yards from an elementary school.
They made it so obvious and obnoxious that minding my own business required taking care of their business.
Unless something happens to threaten the safety, health or freedom of my immediate community, I leave it to others. Generally that's my philosophy.
Recently, however, I was drawn into the fuss about Ottawa's Bill C-250. Ottawa seems pretty far away most days. I generally don't get too upset over their political encyclicals. There's enough right here in the neighbourhood to keep me busy.
A pastor friend phoned me to see if I had heard about Bill C-250. It's a law Ottawa wants to pass that would include people of different “sexual orientation” in the group protected from genocide and hate speech.
I told him that sounded like the right thing to do, though it raised some questions. I thought criminal law already protected every Jack and Jill, John and Jane from genocide and hate crimes.
I asked my friend incredulously. “Are you telling me that unless we pass this law it's okay to advocate genocide or incite hatred against gays?” What about feminists, financiers, and furriers? Until they're specifically targeted by legislation are they also unprotected (or less protected) by the law?
Are the theological, ideological, or occupational orientations of people less worthy of protection than their sexual orientation? I figure all crimes are either implicitly or explicitly hateful. Is there a different legal standard for “love crimes?”
Anyway, I figured I'd mind my own business. After all, if someone advocated genocide or worked to inspire hatred of gays in our church, they'd be out the door in a not-so-gracious second.
But my friend reminded me that parts of my Bible (as well as the scriptures of most other religions), have been interpreted by some lobby groups as hate literature. Will people be allowed to rip pages from my Bible? Will we lose our charitable status because the book we follow is sometimes less than charitable to certain behaviors?
I read about a court case where a Christian printer was fined when he refused to print material for a gay lobby group. He had no problem doing printing for people he knew to be gay. He just felt that printing promotional literature for a behavior opposed by his scriptures violated his religious beliefs.
In another case, a religious institution was sued for refusing to hire staff that contravened their faith and code of conduct. What's next? Should “Gay Pride” be sued for not hiring Jerry Falwell? Should the local Islamic mosque be sued for not hiring Shimon Peres as their receptionist?
It's significant that the complainants in both cases had other options to meet their promotional and educational needs. It seems this was more about curtailing the rights of others than defending one's own rights.
I've been embarrassed by some self-righteous Christians making careless and obnoxious pronouncements about homosexuals. On the other hand, I've been offended by gays that interpret any lack of approval for their behavior as homophobia or hate-mongering. Disagreement is not the same as hatred.
If we're writing laws about hate, we should be aware of how the courts interpret hate. Former Chief Justice Dickson suggested that hate propaganda is that which causes “emotional damage” or which has a “severely negative impact on the individual's sense of self-worth and acceptance.”
Wow! Now we're not just legislating morality, we legislating emotions and self-acceptance. We're heading to a legal position where meaningful debate is muzzled and religious convictions are castrated.
I like to mind my own business. But when someone brings nonsense to my doorstep, I feel like I have to get involved.
Rev. Harry Lehotsky
514 Maryland Street
Winnipeg, Mb R3G 1M5
(204) 775-4929
lehotsky@escape.ca