Is political correctness destroying diversity of thought in the West?

Whether in Canada or the U.S., liberal politicians and their supporters, particularly those in the mainstream media, love to tell us what to think and how to feel about just about everything. Well, I for one, am sick and tired of it. Take for instance:

Kellie Leitch: In Canada, Conservative leadership candidate Kellie Leitch is being criticized and ridiculed for a video her leadership campaign put out that suggests all refugees and immigrants entering our country, should be screened for Canadian values. In fact, by making this view part of her leadership campaign, she is seen by some of her colleagues and the media as an extremist. Yet, a Radio Canada poll showed that 74% of Canadians surveyed agreed with her.

Motion103: M103 is an Ottawa House of Commons Private Member’s motion that essentially says Canadians should never be allowed to publicly question or criticize Islam. Yet, as far as I know, an Imam at a Toronto mosque has not been condemned for calling for the killing of all Jews. There is also the fact that the Toronto Public School Board allows Muslim prayers in secular public schools even though Christians have not been allowed to do so for decades.

Feminism: Feminism as it is preached today covers only half of the female population — those who believe it is their reproductive right to destroy a fetus that is growing within their bodies. Yet, when I came of age in the 1960s, the fight for reproductive choice was about the right for women to have access to the “pill.” Yet, now, when any woman says she is pro-life, she is dismissed as extremist and certainly not a feminist.

Climate Change: When Barack Obama was still president in the U.S., he declared climate change as the most serious threat to humanity. Thankfully, President Trump is grounded in reality and that view is changing. However, in Canada, PM Justin Trudeau and Premiers Rachel Notley and Kathleen Wynne have instituted either a carbon tax or a cap-and-trade system — which most of us know, that while those taxes will do nothing to reduce our emissions,  they will definitely destroy jobs and investment opportunities.

CINOs & RINOs: Unfortunately, it is not enough that conservatives are condemned by liberals and progressives. You also have to be a “real” conservative. Meaning, you cannot have any beliefs involving progressive policies — even though provincial conservatives are called “Progressive Conservatives.” If, however, you have the nerve to admit you are a progressive conservative, you will be called a CINO or RINO — a Conservative and/or Republican in name only.

The crux of the matter: Well, as I said at the start of this post, I am sick and tired of such political correctness and the lack of tolerance for a free exchange of ideas. In fact, as a former academic, I cringe at the notion that university students, like those at Berkeley and Middlebury College, no longer seem to know how to freely debate ideas, what Socrates called the dialectic. I mean, at Middlebury, a well liked Professor actually received a concussion when she tried to stop a student mob from attacking a sociology guest speaker — Charles Murray — who holds some controversial views.

In my opinion, then, the crux of the matter is that conservatives in the U.S. and Canada, be they considered “real” conservatives, moderate conservatives or libertarians, must fight against rigidity of thought and the intolerance of liberal political correctness. And, dare I challenge university faculty everywhere in the West — to teach their students how to debate a diversity of ideas.

Leitch’s screening for Canadian values not racist

kellieleitchJust like liberals are bashing President Elect Donald Trump in the U.S. for wanting to screen Muslims from the Middle East, Conservative leadership candidate Kellie Leitch is being called a racist for suggesting the same thing in Canada.

In fact, she even had to beef up the security at her home (H/T NewsWatchCanada). That’s not right. Canada is supposed to be a free country with free speech.

So, what exactly is the problem? What is so wrong with screening all immigrants for their views about such Canadian values as freedom of movement, free speech and gender equality?

True, it is mostly Muslims from the Middle East that are objecting to that type of screening, or their apologists. The problem? While most immigrants want only to contribute to their new country, even while being encouraged to hold on to their traditions, far too many Muslims want to bring Sharia here. Plus, they make demands as soon as they get here– such as having prayer rooms in the same Canadian public schools where no prayer has been allowed for years.

Like all Canadians, I love the fact that immigrants to our country have come from just about every country in the world and up to recently, have been able to live side by side in harmony with their neighbours.

I mean, I grew up with Muslim friends and had many university colleagues who were Muslim. But, I honestly don’t recall any tensions with my Muslim friends. They accepted me and I accepted them. Some were from such countries as South Africa, Egypt or India — or their parents were.

Times, however, have changed, and not for the better, which is why the screening Leitch suggests is a good idea. Read this story, for example, about a woman in the UK. Then, tell me Leitch is not right.

In summary, Lubna, a young woman from Pakistan married a man her family chose for her. She had two children. That man beat her as did his family. He eventually left her to go to America with another woman and she had to find work to support her children, herself and her husband’s elderly parents. Yet, those same parents, the grandparents of her children, eventually threw her out of the home they had shared.

Lubna eventually gets a divorce in civil court, goes back to university and starts to make a new life for herself. However, because she was a devout Muslim, she decides to get a divorce in a Sharia court as well — which unfortunately turned her life upside down to say the least. With the Sharia court’s approval, her husband returns, demands she go back to him, does nothing when he kidnaps the children and won’t let her explain about his abuse. 

That is not gender equality. Thankfully, Lubna eventually follows the outcome of the civil court, gets custody of her children and goes on with her life. I can’t help worry for her safety though, given the distorted view some Muslims have on family honour.

Look, as far as I am concerned, all Muslims are welcome in Canada just like anyone else as long as they are willing to adjust to our way of life and legal system. Sure, some Muslim women may want to cover up their faces, something I disagree with. But, like it or not, that is what freedom is all about.

What we definitely don’t want is the kind of Sharia court described in the Daily Mail article or the values which drive those courts.

So, the crux of the matter is that Leitch is right to say that new Canadians and refugees should be screened for their willingness to accept our Canadian values of personal freedom, freedom of speech and gender equality — hardly a racist view.

That said, where do the other Conservative leadership candidates stand on this issue? Most, unfortunately, are so worried to offend anyone, they criticize her instead of the anti-Canadian values I discussed here.

Page separator

Endnote: While Thaddeus Alexander’s rant is pointed at the anti-Trump liberal protesters in the U.S., his message is related to why Kellie Leitch thinks we should screen immigrants. It is about all Canadians working together for the greater good. Well said Thaddeus!

Free speech in Canada except when we talk about Muslim values

Kellie Leitch was right to bring up the topic of screening immigrants and refugees for Canadian values — a topic I wrote about last week here and here.   Leitch was right because it has opened up the opportunity for a national debate — finally.

Of course, the progressives and liberal media are all over Leitch for daring to bring up the topic. Their favourite put down, it seems, is to compare her views to those of Donald Trump. This is laughable because Trump has millions of supporters and could very well win the U.S. election in early November 2016.

All the criticism ignores reality. There was a recent Canadian poll,  for example, that showed 67% of us think we should do more to screen immigrants. Then, of course, there is the inconvenient truth that Canadian values include “free speech.”

Strangely, no matter how many Islamic terrorism episodes we see happening throughout the Eastern and Western world, the media doesn’t think we should talk about them in realistic terms so that we don’t offend Muslims. Just imagine this type of politically correct reaction in the 1940’s when, as my mother has told me repeatedly, the media and political establishment talked freely about Nazi terrorism. I mean, terrorism is terrorism.

Anyway, for the latest:

  1. Check out the CBC’s “At Issue Panel” from Thursday, September 8th, 2016. In their second segment (Line 650), they talk about the motivation for Leitch to bring up this topic. All three journalists — Andrew Coyne, Chantel Hebert and Jennifer Ditchburn — couldn’t imagine why she had done so other than for strategic reasons. Huh? I mean, these are usually excellent mainstream journalists, yet they seem so out of touch with reality. Can’t they see why so many Canadians are scared about the society they are going to leave their grandchildren and great-grandchildren? Talk about head-in-the-sand thinking!
  2. Check out the Sunday Night Panel on Wendy Mesley’s National (above). The three panelists were John Kay of the Walrus, Adrienne Batra of the Sun, and Alamin Abdelmahood of Buzzfeed Canada. You can listen to the whole video but the key part is towards the end at line 11:14. Abdelmahood suggests that talking about screening immigrants from the Middle East is racist. Wow! Which motivated me to look up what he has written at Buzzfeed. As expected, he called Donald Trump’s ideas racist. The thing is, Islam is not a race, it is a religion and Muslims coming from the Middle East represent many ethnicities.

The crux of the matter is that screening immigrants is common sense. Talking about such screening is an aspect of “free speech” that we are allowed under our Charter of Rights and Freedoms.  And, to throw epithets like “racist” in our faces is nothing but political correctness and extreme intolerance of differing views. I mean, imagine how Muslims would react if they were called racists simply for complaining about Christians!

Yes, one of the positives of Canada is that people of all sorts of ethnicities and religions are welcome to come to Canada, but, and this is a big but, they need to be willing to tolerate all Canadian values, not try to change our society to be like the wretched ones they left behind.

 

 

 

Kellie Leitch has forced debate re immigrants & Canadian values

kellie-leitch-2A few days ago, I wrote a post explaining how Kellie Leitch, a CPC leadership candidate, was right to want a national discussion about Canadian values in relation to whether or not immigrants and refugees should be vetted for those values. I was hardly alone. Many others have written the same message, including Candice Malcolm.

While it is true that immigrants coming legally into this country are screened for health and financial considerations, as far as I know, they are not asked whether they accept Canadian values.

For example, are they asked whether they agree with the value of free speech, the equality of men and women, and the rule of law under our Constitution (as opposed to Biblical or Shariah law). Certainly, refugees are not asked those questions. I mean, more often than not, they have no papers at all.

Yet, I watched the Power Panel of four journalists on the CBC’s “Power and Politics” earlier today and it was like there was something very wrong with Leitch asking a question related to immigrants and values. For sure, Host Rosemary Barton seemed nonpartisan and just asked the questions, but the journalists certainly were not. They all seemed to agree that, because a few of Leitch’s  fellow Conservative MPs disagreed with her opening this discussion, that she should just quit.

Talk about progressive bias. That journalist panel was suggesting, in effect, that Canadian politicians shouldn’t even talk about Canadian values — with the hint that anything goes or that to have such a discussion might offend someone.

Which makes me wonder how progressives like the four journalists on P&P view our military who are training foreign troops and/or risking their lives on behalf of Canadians. In fact, David Krayden has an excellent column on that topic today in the Toronto Sun. The military at home and abroad have a Canadian flag on their arm. He legitimately asks: Does that flag mean nothing?

Well, obviously to the military, it does mean something. It means that Canada values:

  • Freedom of speech,
  • Gender equality,
  • The rule of law under our Constitution,
  • Tolerance towards other views,
  • Freedom of religion, and
  • Freedom of political affiliation.

The crux of the matter is that today’s CBC P&P panel was wrong to suggest that Leitch simply quit the Conservative leadership campaign so that everyone will stop talking about Canadian values.  In fact, I would go so far as to say that it is only common sense that new Canadians, immigrants and refugees, not only know about our values but be willing to integrate into our society with a clear understanding of how those values will affect their lives.

For example, Muslims coming to this country have to understand they can only have one wife. Yet, as Tom Godfrey wrote in Sun Media in 2008 and updated in October 2015, Muslims were claiming social benefits for more than one wife. (H/T NewsWatchCanada).

Page separator

Endnote: While the Canadian media want Canadians to think that we don’t have an immigrant problem in terms of conflicting beliefs, the truth is out there on the Internet thanks to Google. For example, check out Jack’s Newswatch for his main entry on  “Canadian Values” by Candice Malcolm (also linked in my post above). His many sub-links under that main entry are all related to this topic as well. It may be inconvenient to the CBC but there “are” journalists who are asking the same questions as Leitch.

  1. In one recent column, The CBC compares Leitch to Donald Trump in the U.S. I agree with Leitch that such a comparison is unfair in that it has ntthing to do with who Canada accepts as immigrants and refugees.
  2. In another column published in 2010, Gerry Caplan of the Globe and Mail talks about Honour killings being worse than we thought.
  3. In yet another column, published sometime n 2012, Tobi Cohen, an expert on honour killings, says most such killings are done in the Muslim community. Specifically, he states:”The killing of one’s own child — usually a daughter — because her behaviour is believed to have brought shame to the family. It [can also be] the fate of some rape victims, as well as women accused of infidelity or premarital sex in countries such as Pakistan. But in the West, it’s increasingly popping up in courtrooms as first-generation Muslims struggle to balance the strict old-world ways of their parents with a desire to fit into a more liberal society.”

So, while I did not include the Canadian value of treasuring life and not believing in killing our loved ones for any reason, many immigrants still hold to these barbaric beliefs. Surely, they can be screened on this topic.