Labour candidates calls Christianity “toxic wares”
Liam Hehir writes in Manawatu Standard:
Thursday is Christmas Day. For most New Zealanders, this is not much more than a hard-earned day-off, an occasion to gather with family and licence to eat a quite a bit more than one’s diet allows.
It is also (particularly for children) about the material aspirations of gift giving.
For New Zealand’s Christians, of course, it is also an important religious festival commemorating the nativity of their Man-God. It is the end of the penitential season known as advent and a time of great celebration. …
Instead, the wider culture is now hostile to orthodox Christianity, which is held to a much higher standard of scrutiny than other religions and cultures.
Those who are quite happy to casually sneer at Christians around the office coffee machine seldom have the courage to do the same when other minority identities are concerned.
Where media commentators are purposely respectful of other faiths, they are seldom afraid to propound ignorantly about Christian doctrine or issue bone-headed advice to Christian leaders.
Last month one of Labour’s candidates at the election took to a popular Left-wing blog to publish a tirade against Christians in the party.
The Bible was repeatedly denounced as “snake-oil” and the Christian God was described as “a mean Mutha” who “nailed up his only son as a lesson to other wrongdoers”.
It’s a free country and those kinds of screeds should not be censored.
But just picture the outcry that would have followed a major party candidate writing anything as remotely incendiary about Islam, Buddhism or Hinduism.
Can you imagine the high-dudgeon and editorial hand-wringing such an outburst would occasion?
This is a good and valid point. There is a double standard. Let’s look at what Labour’s Whangarei candidate wrote:
The brutal scars of Christianity do not discriminate, but there is no doubt that that Christian fundamentalism has taken a great toll on the Rainbow community and followers of the Pope have been responsible for most of it.
Imagine what Labour would say if a National Party candidate wrote about the brutal scars of Islam?
We all know the misery that has been inflicted in this Christian god’s name. There’s a smile from one. We’ve already had a discussion about how this Christian god is such a mean muthafucka that he nailed up his only son as a lesson to other wrongdoers.
Again imagine a National Party candidate talking about the misery inflicted in the name of Allah, and how Mohammed was a pedophile. There would be complaints to the Human Rights Commission.
The brutal scars of Christianity do not discriminate, but there is no doubt that that Christian fundamentalism has taken a great toll on the Rainbow community and followers of the Pope have been responsible for most of it.
Again try this as “The brutal scars of Islam do not discriminate, but there is no doubt that Islamic fundamentalism has taken a great toll on the Rainbow community, and follows of Islam have been responsible for most of it.”
I’m no fan of the Catholic Church when it comes to their views on sexuality, but last time I checked you didn’t have any Catholic or Christian states that executed people for being gay.
These bible-bashing god-botherers have no greater claim on our time than Amway sellers or other marketers of snake oil. And, yet, even an organisation as broad and inclusive as the Labour Party allows these toxic wares to be purveyed at its meetings.
One can have a rational discussion on whether party meetings should allow prayers, but the hatred and bile at Christianity is something that would be unacceptable about any other religion – coming from someone who was standing for election just two months ago.