A recent report about the dismissal of a teacher due to his posting of controversial videos bothered me (more specifically, the rationale rather than the reason, which was certainly warranted). The dismissal manifested itself in two ways:
The dismissal of the teacher from his position at a local college for making and posting videos containing homophobic, transphobic, misogynistic, and other deeply intolerant and discriminatory views
The dismissal of the teacher’s related complaint wherein he claimed that the college discriminated against his Christian beliefs when they terminated his employment
The leap of logic here is frightening. Per the above, I would understand that this fellow’s “Christian beliefs” were somehow tied to the espousal of homophobic, transphobic, misogynistic, and other deeply intolerant and discriminatory views.
Apparently, the teacher’s remarks in the videos were made in the context of sermons.
Oh my!!!
I, for one, would be concerned if he ever heard such sentiments coming from any pulpit.
Apparently, "he expressed or attempted to establish by an argument an opinion on a religious subject or an opinion based on a belief in a religious text."
His ideas, he explained, came from the King James Bible, contrasted with summaries of other religions from a book called 30-Second Religion.
"The statements communicated were true," he said.
What were these statements you ask?
laws putting women who have, and doctors who perform, abortions to death should be passed;
women allege rape to justify abortion, but most of the time it is consensual and they make it up;
women are raped because of bad parenting; and if women got married they would not be raped.
homosexuality is against nature;
homosexuality and transgender is “garbage”;
people who think they are a different gender than their sex should be put in an asylum and treated.
Sikhism, Sunni Islam, Catholicism, and Kabbalah are false religions;
when Muslims and Sikhs come to Canada their religion becomes more fashion than religion;
Muslims who do not convert will meet the anti-Christ; and,
other gods like Ra, Allah, Krishna are the anti-Christ or Satan.
The dismissal in question is particularly concerning to me on a couple of fronts:
THE COURT’S RATIONALE SEEMS PROBLEMATIC In her Jan. 26 decision, tribunal member Theressa Etmanski wrote: "While he may hold Christian religious beliefs, he has not provided any evidence to indicate that publicly disseminating his views is part of his sincerely held religious belief or practice." This rationale would indicate that the court’s concern was more about a ‘directive to disseminate views’ than the nature of the views themselves. Just an aside on the matter of dissemination, Christians have long sought to spread the Good News of Jesus’ teachings by converting people. They have a strong missionary tradition, perhaps because they believe that anyone who does not accept Christ will not be saved. This, of course, would naturally lead to a discussion of the nature of Jesus’ teachings, but that’s for another time.
THE COMMUNICATION OF A SO-CALLED TRUTH IS TROUBLING The teacher proclaimed that his offensive statements came from two books, the well-known King James Bible, and lesser known 30-Second Religion. Of course, we know that people’s interpretation of religious texts can vary, but it does beg a closer inspection of the material referenced. A ChatGPT query revealed this:
The King James Bible is a translation of the original Hebrew and Greek scriptures into English, commissioned by King James I of England in 1604 and completed in 1611. It is widely regarded as one of the most influential and beautiful works of English literature, and has been used by many Christians of various denominations and traditions for centuries. However, it is not a perfect or infallible translation, and it may contain some errors, inconsistencies, and biases that reflect the historical and cultural context of its translators and editors. Some people may argue that the King James Bible does contain homophobic, transphobic, misogynistic, and other deeply intolerant and discriminatory views, based on certain verses that condemn or prohibit certain sexual behaviors, gender expressions, and social roles. For example, Leviticus 18:22 says, "Thou shalt not lie with mankind, as with womankind: it is abomination." This verse has been interpreted by some as a blanket prohibition of homosexuality, and has been used to justify discrimination and violence against LGBTQ+ people. However, other people may argue that this verse is not about homosexuality in general, but about a specific form of idolatrous and abusive sexual practice that was common among the ancient Canaanites, and that it does not apply to modern, consensual, and loving same-sex relationships. Similarly, other verses that seem to express homophobic, transphobic, misogynistic, and other deeply intolerant and discriminatory views may have different meanings and implications depending on the historical, cultural, and literary context, as well as the translation choices and theological assumptions of the readers.
This further begs such questions as who is the arbiter of the truth? And, is Christian truth the only truth? Is it a homogeneous truth?
Regardless, my concern in all this is about how the authorities are – or, are not - dealing with the dissemination of hate - in this case, the legal authorities and the religious or moral authorities. Authorities, by their nature, have great influence on the conduct of the members of a society. We look to them to set the path, ideally in ‘A Good Way’.
As such, any interpretation of their working material that promotes divisiveness, intolerance or hate is, in my view, deeply problematic and should be addressed so as not to propagate any message that could be damaging to the populace, in whole or in part.
I would ask all authorities to seriously consider this, lest they set a bad example.
_________________________________________________________________________
CLOSING REMARKS
Just for the record, my understanding of Christianity has always been:
1. Jesus was a champion of the marginalized.
2. Christians subscribe to The Golden Rule.
Comments