May 012011
 

Hi Kendra,

These are interesting questions and ideas.   I have responded to all but a couple. 

I do not wish to respond to questions I haven’t thought about, unless there is a principle that is easily apparent and therefore provides direction. 

My thinking on religion has gone through a number of different stages over the course of my life.  I view “religion” as an interpretation by a group of people of the spiritual side of existence.  Often it’s a way for some people to exercise power over others, which means dis-empowering those others. 

My work is related to  the empowerment of individuals so they can develop their potential. 

Related to religion, in today’s world I am particularly concerned about the need of the military-industrial complex to create “enemies”.  They use propaganda and the target is often Muslim people.  It is not different from the lead-up to World War Two when the targeted groups were Poles and Jews.  My thoughts on “religion” are cushioned by the need to protect people who may be vulnerable because of a choice they have made, or been conditioned to make, regarding the expression of their spirituality. 

These are simultaneously troubling and exciting times.  On the troubling side:  there is growing corporatocracy (corporate values, militarism, fascism).  In order to work our way to a new economy, one that is not based on destruction,  we need to work together.  Work that polarizes is not helpful.

You refer in one question to the Charter.

I have been on trial over my refusal to fill in the 2006 census which I would not do because of the involvement of Lockheed Martin (American military) in the Canadian census.   The legal argument available to me is the Charter Right to privacy of personal information. 

Many Canadians either never knew, or have forgotten that we have that Charter Right (mind you – – I was found guilty! in January,  but the verdict is under appeal;  I expect that the decision will be overturned.)  To me Orwell’s Animal Farm does a nice job of describing how we forget.  There are times when we need to fight to uphold the Rights and to teach younger generations WHY we have the rights.

I see part of your work as a contribution to reversing our slide down the slippery slope.   However, I have pointed out what I think are errors in logic in some of your questions. 

You may also be interested in John Ralston Saul’s work to balance the role of our “rational” faculty with other faculties we have such as values, memory, and so on.   There is a brief description on my blog, click on:  2010-03-10 Propaganda, Democracy: Imagining “the other”. Ralston Saul. The Cellist of Sarajevo.

Best wishes,

Sandra Finley

Secularism
1. Do you support the separation of religion and state, and government neutrality in all matters between believer and non-believer?   

Yes I do.  And you will find a number of statements on my blog www.sandrafinley.ca to that effect.   I use the separation of religion and state as an example of the need to separate the “powers” in a democracy.  From there I argue that the same logic applies to the separation of the commercial powers from the state.   Failure to separate the powers leads to corruption and the decline of democracy.   You may be interested in this posting:    2011-03-26 Xcorporatocracy: update – democracy fighting back in North America!

Freedom of Speech

2. Do you believe there should be any legal limits on the criticism of religious opinion in the public square? 



3. Would you support repealing the law against blasphemy in the Criminal Code of Canada?

I vaguely remember laughing when I stumbled across this law in the Criminal Code.  How could it ever be enforced?  Obviously it is not being enforced.  

Questions:

–        When was the law passed?

–        Have there ever been charges laid under the law? 

 There is a further point:   in my opinion, laws should not be allowed to stand, even if they are not being used.  By virtue of just being there, there is an option of using them.  Laws are often used as instruments of coercion and intimidation.   

It should be fairly simple to obtain agreement to repeal this law.  I support doing so.

Religious accommodations

4. “What is your position on granting people exemptions from neutral, generally applicable laws and policies based on their religious beliefs (e.g. religious accommodation)?

Charity status



5. Do you support granting an organization tax-exempt charitable status for the sole purpose of the “advancement of religion”, if such an organization undertakes no other charitable activity such as feeding the poor?

 I think we need to table and sort out all the grievances on the question of charitable status.   I am an activist.  Charitable status is denied to organizations that “advocate”.  It serves to curtail needed community-based action to address problems.  The arrangement weakens democracy.    

There are vested interests in maintaining charitable status.  I have wondered whether it would be better to get rid of it altogether and address funding needs in other ways?  I think discussion is needed.  Otherwise you polarize people with the vested interest,  and it becomes very difficult to move forward.

Anthem

6. Would you support an amendment to the National Anthem Act to remove the reference to “God” in the lyrics of O Canada?

Will you read this posting on my blog:?

2011-04-12 Lesson in democracy: Challenge to the notion that YES / NO responses are appropriate to democratic functioning. 

I think you have to work things out with people.   What is the actual wording that you would like to see?  I am uncomfortable with the use of “God”.  I personally would use something along the lines of “Life force” but I have no idea whether something like that could be worked in.  Someone else will probably have a better idea.   

Charter of Rights and Freedoms

7. Would you support an amendment to the preamble of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms to remove the reference to the “supremacy of God”?

Again,  I do not think that “yes/no” responses are appropriate in a democracy.  What wording do you propose?   I am not agreeable to the idea of the “supremacy of human beings”!!    Our record is too abysmal. 

Religious law



8. What position do you hold concerning the legally-binding use by religious communities of separate religious courts (e.g. in family law)?

Your question  assumes that courts are the only option in matters of family law (or other law).  I am not so sure that your premise is valid.  Many of our institutions are obsolete and in need of overhaul.    

Medicine and Health

9. Do you support the requirement that all products labeled “medicine”, including homeopathic or naturopathic remedies, be required to pass the same rigorous testing as pharmaceuticals?

You have stated a false premise:   rigorous testing (of) pharmaceuticals     My experience says your statement is propaganda.   If it was true, why are so many drugs pulled off the market because of the deaths and other extremely serious adverse health effects they have created?  (You will find a lot of documentation on my blog regarding the corrupt nature of the pharmaceutical corporations.)

10. Do you support vaccination as a good public health measure?  

I am curious regarding the relationship between this question and  the mission of your organization>  the Canadian Secular Alliance, a national non-profit organization seeking church-state separation and government neutrality with respect to religion?    

Notwithstanding, I will reply.

I preface my remarks:   yes/no responses shut down the inquiry to get closer to the truth of matters. 

 There may be “good vaccinations”.   But there are definitely very bad vaccinations that no one in their right mind should take.   Many contain mercury and/or aluminum (heavy metals are extremely toxic) and other foreign ingredients.

I refer you to my blog.  Please click on:  Heavy metals in vaccinations, Mercury in dental amalgams.   

Yours in good health!  You’d have a very difficult time forcing a vaccination on me!   The pharmaceutical corporations have undermined faith in the system.

Best wishes,

Sandra

———- Forwarded message ———-
From: Getty, Kendra    Date: Tue, Apr 26, 2011 at 9:31 PM
Subject: Policy Questions on Church-State Separation and Science from Educational Charity Centre for Inquiry
To: Kendra Getty    Cc: saskatoon.freethinkers   AT  gmail.com

Greetings,

The Centre for Inquiry is a registered educational charity that promotes reason, science, secularism, and freedom of inquiry.  We are also Canada’s most vocal organization representing atheists, agnostics, and secular humanists who constitute one of the fastest growing minorities in Canada. According to a 2008 Harris-Decima poll(1), roughly one quarter of Canadians are atheists or agnostics.

The Centre for Inquiry represents a membership of over 1,000 individuals, and is constituted of 10 branches in the cities of Vancouver, Kelowna, Calgary, Edmonton, Saskatoon, Regina, Toronto, Ottawa, Montreal and Halifax.  In Saskatchewan, we have members across the province with active branches in Saskatoon and Regina. 

In partnership with the Canadian Secular Alliance, a national non-profit organization seeking church-state separation and government neutrality with respect to religion, we have prepared the set of questions below. The responses we receive will be posted, without modification, to our website and circulated to our members.

We understand that some of the questions reference propositions that might be complicated to implement, but we are looking for your position on the principles they embody.

Given how busy you are, we trust you appreciate the unique opportunity this request grants of reaching a community that, until recently, had little organized presence.  We thank you in advance for your time and consideration.

QUESTIONS

Secularism
1. Do you support the separation of religion and state, and government neutrality in all matters between believer and non-believer?

Freedom of Speech

2. Do you believe there should be any legal limits on the criticism of religious opinion in the public square? 



3. Would you support repealing the law against blasphemy in the Criminal Code of Canada?

Religious accommodations

4. “What is your position on granting people exemptions from neutral, generally applicable laws and policies based on their religious beliefs (e.g. religious accommodation)?

 Charity status



5. Do you support granting an organization tax-exempt charitable status for the sole purpose of the “advancement of religion”, if such an organization undertakes no other charitable activity such as feeding the poor?

Anthem

6. Would you support an amendment to the National Anthem Act to remove the reference to “God” in the lyrics of O Canada?

Charter of Rights and Freedoms

7. Would you support an amendment to the preamble of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms to remove the reference to the “supremacy of God”?

Religious law



8. What position do you hold concerning the legally-binding use by religious communities of separate religious courts (e.g. in family law)?

Medicine and Health

9. Do you support the requirement that all products labeled “medicine”, including homeopathic or naturopathic remedies, be required to pass the same rigorous testing as pharmaceuticals?

10. Do you support vaccination as a good public health measure?

Best Regards,

Kendra Getty

Saskatchewan Chair

Centre for Inquiry Canada
Canadian Charity/Business No. 833642614RR0001

www.cficanada.ca

www.secularalliance.ca

Saskatchewan Address:

Box 31043 RPO Broadway & Taylor

Saskatoon, SK  S7H 5S8

(1) http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/story/2008/06/03/f-religion-poll.html

 Leave a Reply

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>

(required)

(required)