Freedom to Chose

In my two recent posts (Ban the Burqa & Ayaan Hirsi Ali's book "Nomad" & the burka) I touched on the issue of the burka and tried to show that it has no place in Canadian society. I believe that it is part of a belief system that is repressive to women, and in opposition to our Canadian values of freedom of thought and expression, as embodied in the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms.

My reasoning is that our Canadian system comes from a Judeo-Christian heritage: both the Old Testament and the New Testament affirm the right to chose God or reject him. Here's one of many examples from the OT from Joshua 24:15 (English Standard Version)

And if it is evil in your eyes to serve the LORD, choose this day whom you will serve, whether the gods your fathers served in the region beyond the River, or the gods of the Amorites in whose land you dwell. But as for me and my house, we will serve the LORD." 

"Choose this day whom you will serve," there is no compulsion attached to this invitation, no threat of beheading as dictated by Mohamed if a conquered foe would not adopt Islam. If not face execution by beheading there was the alternative of becoming a second class citizen called a dhimmi; a grinding life of submission, a second class citizen who's testimony bears no weight at all against that of a Muslim. That is basically the condition of non-Muslims in most countries under Islamic authority.

If we read through the New Testament we will see the gentle invitation to accept Jesus.

The Charter should protects that right to chose, and therefore it would be a perversion of the intent of the Charter to use it to promote traditional Islam, which is committed to taking away a woman's rights to chose and a man or a woman's right to chose to leave Islam. A Muslim person in Islamic lands is not free to chose to become a Christian, or a Buddhist, or become an atheist. The sentence is death. 

Islamic lands prohibit the preaching of Christianity - how could we use our Charter of Rights  and Freedoms in a way that promotes a religion that does that?

If we argue that the Charter should protect a woman's right to wear the burka, then we use the Charter to further cause of Islamification, which is a step towards taking away a woman's right to chose.

I make a difficult argument because our freedoms are so deeply ingrained in us; but those freedoms cannot be used for the purpose of allowing tyranny, and that is what the burka represents: a tyrannical religion which seeks to take away the freedoms that we hold precious and subjugate the conquered people to the will of Mullahs.

Gurth Whitaker

Calgary, AB 

The Bible's Approach to Relationship's and the Body

A great comment by a friend and Christian brother reinforced the great gulf between what the Bible teaches and those beliefs that insist that a women must be hidden, and if she is not then she is a legitimate target for rape. Here's this wonderful comment from a reader on this post: Ayaan Hirsi Ali's book "Nomad" & the burka

In reading your comments Gurth I am reminded that in Ephesians Chapter 5, verse 21 there is a very different model given by the Apostle Paul on how men are to treat their wives. They are called to love their wives as they love their own bodies. Even more importantly, they are called to love their wives as Jesus loves the church. This is something that speaks to the very essence of the incarnational nature of Christianity. The God of the Christian Scriptures loves matter. Although infected by the Fall, all of matter is being redeemed in and through Jesus Christ. The way we treat our bodies, and the way we treat our wife's body is a sign of the redemptive and restorative work of Christ.

There the body is to be treated with respect. I Peter 3 speaks about modest dress but nowhere in the New Testament is there the dictate that women are to hide their bodies.

There is always a respect for the beauty of the body and the call to treat it as the Temple of the Holy Spirit.

Biblical Christianity instructs us to relate to our bodies in this way and for men to love their wives as Jesus loves the Church because Jesus loves us totally; our mind, soul, body and spirit. 

I do not know enough about the burka issue to comment on it directly. What I will says is that Ephesians 5 gives a very different way to relate to women from the one governing the burka practise.

Read Paul's Letter to the Ephesians, Chapter 5 at Bible Gateway

Gurth Whitaker
Calgary, AB

UN Undermines Real Human Rights Efforts

Gay McDougall is the United Nations' Independent Expert on minority issues; a job she has held for 4 years. You might imagine that Ms. McDougall has been a busy lady visiting some of the world's human rights hell-holes such as: China, Cuba, Iran, Libya, Saudi Arabia, and Syria, just to name a few of Freedom Houses list of the worst of the worst.

But actually no! According to this very disturbing editorial in today's National Post:  The wrong target. Ms. McDougall has no plans to visit any of those countries or any of the other human rights hell-holes:

But what is truly missing from Ms. McDougall's travel schedule is a trip to any of the world's vilest regimes such as Syria, Saudi Arabia, Cuba, China, North Korea, Burma or Chad.

Together, millions of people have been murdered by the 21 governments that Freedom House judges are the most repressive in the world, many simply for their minority status alone.

Millions more have been imprisoned and tortured. Yet not one of these countries has been the subject of one of her inspections, nor are any scheduled to be.

Just in case you missed that last line:

Yet not one of these countries has been the subject of one of her inspections, nor are any scheduled to be.

 So the UN's Independent Expert on minority issues focuses all her time on countries such as Canada, France and EU countries. As Steven Edwards,wrote in the National Post last Friday (Oct 16): Rights watchdog gives 'worst of the worst' a pass

Her previous "targets" were three European Union members: France, Greece and Hungary; as well as the Dominican Republic, Guyana, Ethiopia and Kazakhstan.

And this from Hillel Neuer, executive director of UN Watch in Geneva, the host city of the UN's main human rights branches:

"The reality is that every would-be immigrant in the world knows that Canada ranks at the top in its treatment of minorities, thanks to its constitutional guarantees, independent judiciary, elected parliament, vigorous civil society and free press - that all can speak for affected minorities and provide remedies where needed,"

"But there is not a single domestic institution that will speak for the two million black African migrants persecuted in Libya, the ethnic minorities oppressed in Tibet, or the women subjugated in Saudi Arabia."

"That is precisely where an international voice would be vital."

So cruel regimes get a free pass on their human rights abuse while the UN investigates the best of the best. The UN by abrogating their responsibility and putting zero spotlight on the repressive regimes, is a party to massive injustice.

The real abusers get off without even a wrist-slap, while the best nations on human rights records get scrutinised.

Freedom House evaluates how free countries are and assigns a score from 1.0 to 7.0; a score of 1.0  is considered FREE.

At left is shown some of the FREE countries, with a top score of 1.0, - these are the ones Ms. McDougall focuses on.

A score of 5.5 is judged NOT FREE

3.0 or higher  is considered PARTIALLY FREE

The image at the right shows some of the NOT FREE countries, such as: Afghanistan, Algeria, Angola, Azerbaijan, Brunei, Cambodia, Congo (Brazzaville), Cote d’Ivoire, Egypt, Kazakhstan, Mauritania, Oman, Qatar, Russia, Rwanda, Tajikistan, United Arab Emirates.

But it gets worse....

6.0 -NOT FREE: Cameroon, Congo (Kinshasa), Guinea, Iran, Iraq, Swaziland, Tunisia, Vietnam

and worse...,,,

6.5 -NOT FREE: Belarus,Chad, China, Cuba, Eritrea, Laos, Saudi Arabia, Syria,Zimbabwe

And the worst of the worst: 

7.0 -NOT FREE: Burma, Equatorial Guinea, Libya, North Korea, Somalia, Sudan, Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan,

The full table can be seen here: Combined Average Ratings: Independent Countries 2009

The UN has weight amongst the regimes of the world, that is why Arab and Muslim nations have hijacked the UN Human Rights proceedings to use it to attack Israel (here & here)

So by focusing on the best of the best and ignoring the worst culprits, the UN Undermines any Real Human Rights Efforts and denies those subjugated countries the vital international voice that should be performed by the UN.


Gurth Whitaker
Calgary Alberta