Post 34--Terrorism in Paris; Freedom and Tolerance at Home

Another case of a broken promise!  I mentioned last time that we would continue with the lawyer thing today. “We’ll do that next time,” I wrote. But I also wrote that when important events take place that require more urgent attention, then we’ll go there and leave the previous subject for a more suitable day. Well, that’s what’s happening.

Matthew Fisher of Postmedia News wrote an interesting column in the Vancouver Sun (“We must confront extremism without fanning its flames,” Jan. 8/2015) about the Paris murder of journalists in retaliation for publishing irreverent stuff about Islam, including cartoons (“We must confront extremism without fanning its flames,” Jan. 8/2015). That’s a “now-now” issue that needs our attention. 

(Thus, our lawyer friends will have to wait for another day. Just hope this will not lead to extended nightmares for some of you!  I definitely will come back to that topic for it continues to haunt me, especially right now. I have lying on my desk right in front of me as we speak/write, a lawyer’s bill for over $1100 for the revision of a simple will and of a power of attorney document—at most two hours of work. It did not give me a nightmare, but I did lay awake the first night after its delivery, steaming with anger and indignation.  Who the hell do these lawyers think they are? What gives them the right to charge so exorbitantly?  Especially since I have been referred to them as Christian lawyers by another Christian manager of charity funds. Okay, I’ve spouted off and leave it there for now, even though spouting off at lawyers does not give me the relieved feeling spouting off is supposed to give you.)

Alright, that Parisian terror thing and Matthew Fisher. Sorry for the delay, Matthew, but don’t worry. This is your day in court—eh, sorry, in the blog.

Apart from the terror of it all, Fisher reports a wide-spread agreement that the aim of the exercise was to destroy liberty, particularly the freedom of the press.  Among examples of crimping freedom in the West is the fact that al-Qaida and “its even more virulent stepchild, Islamic State (ISIS), have already terrified western media to the point where almost no journalists have tried to bear witness to the outrages now being perpetrated by ISIS.”  Another example is the closure of western embassies in the Middle East. Even those remaining open have lost their effectiveness, because their staff are too frightened to collect reliable information.

Possibly one of the worst effects is the “grim paradox” of new “tough laws that restrict freedom” in order to “protect it”!  Europe has elected some politicians who have vowed to “further restrict freedom in the name of freedom if they gain power.”  European populations are divided and aggressively campaign for and against further emigration from Muslim countries. Divisions have crept in, bitter divisions between “progressives” and “hardliners” that have developed into a “see-saw battle for the hearts and minds of Germans.”

Fisher warns that “we must try to understand this evil as best as we can and figure out ways to confront it without making things worse.”  That is to say, we must not allow these developments lead to restrictions on our freedom of expression. “We have to remain tolerant of all ideas” except those that involve terrorism and, I would add, the ideas that spawn it. 

He concludes, “Preserving liberty is a tricky business” for which “there are no easy or obvious solutions.”  Well written, Fisher. Thank you.

However, we must recognize that the freedom we have grown accustomed to was developed under more peaceful conditions.  Yes, we had our terrible aberrations in the form of dictatorial authorities and their agents. Yes, we had our Nazis that ignored every norm of human decency.  Yes, we needed protection against serious human rights violations. However, those threats were internal and indigenous. We understood them and, once the Nazis and their allies had been contained, we knew how to curb them with an effective human rights regime buttressed by the authority of the United Nations. 

However, none of that took into account what we are seeing and suffering today. Our human rights legislation simply was not designed to counter this kind of violent, heartless and mindless barbarity. We need to revisit and, probably, rewrite that legislation to take into consideration current realities. Amongst other things, the following immediately come to mind. That means, these are things we need to seriously think about and only after that serious thinking has taken place, act. So, what comes next is not a fixed programme that we must follow so much as a list of things to be considered—and possibly to be (partly) rejected.

• We need to write it out clearly that everyone is legally free to criticize the ideas or beliefs of others, even when they are satirical as were the writings of Charlie Hebdo, that group of Parisian journalists, “ridiculous and highly offensive” even. 
• Political incorrectness must be exposed for what it is and be rejected by society as well by as our government agencies.
• We definitely need to give our security agents the freedom and responsibility to rein in and arrest every individual who is known to support Islamic violence before they act on their ideas. Those ideas and sympathies themselves need to be outlawed.
• If they have come to our shores from elsewhere, citizen or not, repatriate them forthwith.
• It is time to throw away our gentlemen’s gloves and take a harder line.
• And for now, at least, we need to restrict further Muslim immigration till we get a handle on all this—and until the Muslim nations and their citizens take both responsibility for and effective action to counter all this nasty stuff emanating from their cultures and/or religion.

I have a feeling that these “suggestions for serious thought and action” on my part, may go further than Fisher intended, but, if we wish to nip all this in the bud, we have no choice but to take some radical actions that may rattle us after we have been chained in by our own human rights regime. Yes, when our gentrified human rights are applied to the rough and bloody situations we face today and for which they were not designed, they turn into chains and require some serious rattling on our part. Some of the gentrification to which we have grown accustomed has to be pulled back for the time being.  The kids’ gloves have to be replaced by boxing gloves, especially legal boxing gloves.  We need to become intolerant of violent and bloody intolerance, particularly of every embodiment of Islamism.  Legislate it to death. Take it out of the human rights regime. Quit being gentlemanly and just go for it.

Post 33--Of Courts and Lawyers--Why This Interest

I wonder whether you were able to fill in the blank near the end of the last post?  The complete sentence reads, “And the biggest obstacle to justice is the legal establishment.”   

We’re going to unpack that statement bit by bit as time goes on. Don’t expect an unbroken sequential series on the topic, for you will probably get bored, unless you have an intense interest in the topic. Not only that, but I have learned from experience that promising or planning a long series on one single topic gets in the way of current events that cry out for attention.  So, bit by bit; drip by drip, in between other topics.  

To explain my interest in this topic, let me reproduce a couple of paragraphs on the subject from our—i.e., my wife’s and mine—memoirs. You should know that we spent 30 years as missionaries in Nigeria and moved to Vancouver BC in 2001 to “retire.”  I  intended to make our retirement years there count in terms of both writing and social action that would have noticeable effect on the society. Yes, even at that age, I still entertained large vision with respect to improving the society. Even now, fourteen years later, I have not surrendered it. A nation or individual without vision, says the Bible, will perish, even seniors—though we will perish anyhow as far as this side of the “Beyond” goes. So, here goes:

One of the things I decided to explore was the whole area of Christian involvement in the legal profession. This was not something that just happened to occur to me. I had long thought about some kind of crusade addressing Christians in the legal professions, particularly lawyers. As I observed evolving North American culture from my Nigerian perch, I noted that the legal profession was contributing strongly to distortions in society and, in fact, had created an atmosphere of fear and suspicion. I also observed that with their exorbitant fees and methods, lawyers had taken justice beyond the reach of the common people. In addition, I noticed that they were not interested in justice per se, but, rather, in winning their cases regardless of the truth and in making as much money as possible. I was aware of national Christian associations of lawyers, but few if any of them did anything to transform or redeem the profession. At best, they champion causes with religious colouration without transforming the profession itself.

So I invited church members to a series of meetings to begin exploring the issue and a number of them attended. I soon realized that I needed to become more sensitive to the culture of both the nation and CRC. I was a cultural stranger and could not find a way to move the project forward. In addition, I became aware that I could not do both: Develop this lawyer programme and write that series on Christian-Muslim relations; it would be one or the other. I also concluded that I had started off with the wrong crowd. I should have been more patient to find a more suitable target group to work with, more ecumenical and with more passion for this specific issue. So, I wound up the series of meetings and abandoned the effort for now.  However, I have been saving newspaper and other clippings that deal with lawyers and justice in the hope that perhaps I can do some writing on the topic after we have completed these memoirs.  Many are the times I get enraged and my blood pressure rises when I read stories from that cultural segment, especially at the uncritical Christian participation in what I consider the totally unjust “justice” systems of North America.

As I wrote in the previous post, nothing like quoting yourself!

That quote, in fact, the entire memoir is accessible to you free of charge as an ebook from   < www.lulu.com  >.  Just type in “Every Square Inch” and it should surface. The memoir at this point consists of five volumes; The quote is taken from volume four, pp. 77-78. which goes by the title Every Square Inch—A Missionary Memoir: The Life and Mission of Jan & Frances Boer. Vol. 4:  Our Post-Nigeria Life.

Rather than start the discussion near the end of this post, we’ll do that next time. See, there’s that annoying American GRRR stuff again! Keeping you hanging….  In the meantime, spend some time on those quoted paragraphs and observe your reactions to them.  No doubt, if you’re involved in the “justice” system as a professional, it may annoy you. If you’re involved in other areas, especially if you’ve had occasion to become a “consumer” of legal services or, God forbid, if you’ve ever faced a judge in court, and remember the bills you received as well as….  Ach, don’t let me go on. Just let me say your reaction will be quite different. 

Don’t let these bad memories give you nightmares. May God give you His Peace.

Post 32--Of Courts and Lawyers (preliminary)

I must warn you at the outset today: This is an outrageous and annoying post. It hardly deals with the heading except at the very end with a hint. The outrage and the annoyance are somewhat overcome, I hope, by my slightly dubious sense of humour.

One of my favourite quotes is penned by myself. I know, that sounds pretty bad and ego-centric. But please hear me out even if it is so. In addition to egocentric, it is also outrageous, but it’s still my favourite, because, in spite of its negatives, it is right. It is not the quote that is outrageous. Rather, it is the situation which generated the quote that is outrageous. 

Before I spill the beans, I must admit that I penned it in response to American situations when I lived there off and on for a total of some fifteen years. But that only proves that I am a genuine Canadian. You don’t know how many American lecturers I’ve endured who were invited to address a Canadian audience and then flood them with American statistics and research, making the facile comment that Canadian situations are assumed to be similar. And their Canadian hosts, being the polite creatures that we are, pay them generous honoraria for their sloppy work, letting them get away with it without a single comment.  I often feel like screaming at them and the Canadian organizers of the event. Ach, our minds are so colonized by our assertive southern cousins. 

It gets worse. When Canadians want to make any grandiose social statement about Canada, they also tend to base it on US data and statistics and then follow it up with the same broad generalization that Canadian data are fairly similar.  This Canadian characteristic annoys me to no end. I always feel like telling such “researchers” that if they can’t do genuine homework, i.e., do serious research on home soil, to pack up and leave. 

Another American practice, this time in sales. How often have you clicked on an online add as on Facebook and ended up listening to an endless harangue that repeatedly brings you to the brink, to the major point, namely price, only to back away from it with further info, endlessly playing with your patience and intellect? I have endured such painful sales pitches quite a number of times to the point where I click off with disgust. The sales trick did not work. I lost valuable time and “they” lost a potential customer never to return. Those Americans!   GRRRR!  They are so annoying. 

But, you know something? We Canadians are even worse in that we politely accept such insulting treatment when it is directed our way.  And we even copy them.  Are we crazy or something? 

Well, folks, this Canadian is giving you that kind of treatment today. You are going to be subjected to a quote that slowly forced itself on me while in America and that, I assume, also holds for Canada. And you are right now being subjected to that kind of delaying tactic. Here this post has about come to its end and you have still not been given this quote of mine.  

Okay, before you run away or, worse, pay the usually outrageous sum demanded, here it is!  

The biggest obstacle to good health is the medical establishment. The biggest obstacle to good religion is the religious establishment. The biggest obstacle to a healthy economy are the banks and the economists of “on the one hand” and “on the other.”  (For this “hand” stuff, I am indebted to my oldest son, who did undergraduate economics and ended up with a Yale MBA.) And the biggest obstacle to justice is….

Alright, like those GRRR Americans, I’ve brought you to the brink and am going to leave you hanging there till the next time. In the meantime, try to complete that quotation yourself. Hint: Go back to the title of this post. If you’re inclined to write me, whether to scream at me for my American behaviour or to complete the quote, you’re welcome at  < boerjf@hotmail.com >.  Otherwise, see you in a few days.

Post 31-- Introducing the Evangelical Fellowship of Canada

I wish all of you, my readers, a most blessed and prosperous New Year 2015.  This would be a fitting time to reflect with you on issues of time and hope for this world as well as the promise in the Bible for a New Heaven and a New Earth in which righteous dwells. There is a great deal to say around this topic that would be worth your while. Furthermore, it is a topic that interests me deeply. 

But sorry, I had had a topic waiting in the wings that is pushing me hard. In fact, it was written some time ago, and has been pressing me every since. The topic? The Evangelical Fellowship of Canada (EFC) and its legal struggles.  But, first, an introduction is needed.

The Evangelical Fellowship of Canada (EFC) is the major voice of Evangelical Canadians.  This is a group situated between the so-called mainstream more liberal churches and the more fundamentalist ones.  One day I will explain more about these various Christian streams, but today I deal with the EFC. 

Evangelicals in Canada have long neglected social and cultural issues, while they emphasized the spiritual side of the religion. Over the past few decades, they have become more worldly in that they pay more attention to social issues, especially on freedom of religion and family issues. To me, they still restrict themselves far too much, but more about that some other time as well. What I want to emphasize today is their role in the defence of freedom of religion in the courts. 

I do so by passing on to you an interview in Canada Watch, an EFC bimonthly four-pager. This one is from the December 2014 issue. I did some editing of the document.

EFC lawyer Albertos Polizogopoulos was asked “What it’s like to be a voice for the Biblical influence, impact and identity in Canada’s highest courts.”  He answered:

We bring the evangelical… perspective on these issues to the courts. It’s an important perspective to put forward on cases involving freedom of religion, sanctity of life, the family and so on. In the cases I’ve been involved in, the EFC consistently argues for religious freedom.

Question:  The EFC has intervened in Canadian courts more than 50 times. How is the EFC received in court?

We are usually well received. We are welcomed because the perspective we bring is unique. It’s intelligent and it’s based on biblical perspectives. We are generally well respected by the courts. They don’t always agree with us of course, but we take an approach that is not overly aggressive or judgmental. And the courts appreciate that.

In some cases, judges disagree with us totally; in other cases, they latch on to the arguments and the perspective we put forward—and you really see that resonate throughout their written judgement. In terms of a national voice, there is no other Christian group with such a wide-ranging constituency and with the experience that the EFC has. We’ve been doing this for 30 years.

Tell us about the preparation that goes into each appearance and submission.

It’s a going over the lower court decisions—going over the evidence, doing research of the law and the issues being argued by the parties, drafting the materials for the case and preparing orgal arguments. It’s more than most people would imagine.

Do you practice your presentations?

I prepare a script. I usually don’t take the script into court with me because I don’t want to be reading it. The preparation of the oral argument is also to anticipate questions you might receive and be prepared to answer them. ((In the one case) I had four or five questions. So I spoke for 15 minutes. Usually when they are asking questions, it’s because they are interested. It’s a good sign.

The EFC is often described as “the voice of biblical principles in the public square.” What does having that voice mean to Evangelicals?

It’s a blessing, a responsibility and a privilege. Although I’m the one on my feet, there are other lawyers and people within the EFC who have played a big role. If someone donated money to the EFC for an intervention to help pay the cost, or someone gave advice, or raised awareness, or wrote letters, or prayed, they are part of it.

How does it feel to know there is this huge body of EFC supporters thinking about you and praying for the EFC when you appear in court?

It brings about a sense of peace, comfort and confidence. When I’m in court…, I have my wife praying for me. When you have a team of thousands praying for you, it instills a lot of confidence.

What are the most important things donours can do to support the work of the EFC in the courts?

In addition to donating—which is absolutely necessary—prayer is an important tool of ours. Apart from that, they can research and learn about these issues and understand what’s at stake. They can read the arguments and perspectives we are putting forward. The more informed we all are, the more we will see the need to get involved, the more we will support.

Here is a comment from Bruce Clemenger, the EFC President:

I have stood with Polizogopoulos and other EFC lawyers in the Supreme Court of Canada as they boldly promoted biblical principles of truth, compassion, mercy and wisdom on all our behalf. I am so glad to hear Albertos share…how much the EFC is respect. That has been my own experience time and time again. We are listened to, not laughed at. We are dialogued with, not dismissed. We offer invaluable perspective to the courts, and the courts acknowledge and appreciate. When defining religious freedom…, this is what Polizogopoulos said…: “Freedom of religion insures individuals are able to practice their faith without fear of hindrance or reprisal or without any state interference.” Thanks, Albertos.

You can visit www.theEFC.ca  for updates on the cases in which EFC is involved. There is also www.theEFC.ca/calendar to find out about events across Canada. This not only brings you up to snuff with respect to the EFC itself, but, perhaps more important, this access can serve to increase your awareness of where freedom in Canada is being seriously threatened and where some of the most respected and honoured organizations in the country practice discrimination against minority opinions.  Most of the stuff in the last sentence occurs behind the scenes in expensive offices and by expensive officers of the law.  It’s time this stuff goes public so that the public can begin to resist.

Still another benefit is that you can even post your own event online for free. Now that’s a worthwhile offer!