In Vancouver, Canada, postal workers walked off the job rather than handle delivery of a booklet that blames gays for AIDS and, it seems, just about every other ill affecting Western culture. Technically "hate mail" is prohibited from the post and they regard this as falling into that category, but post managers disagree and insist that the booklets must be delivered.
"We don't have specific guidelines for hate literature," [Canada Post spokeswoman Lillian Au] said. "It was approved by the corporation and was not deemed sexually explicit or obscene."
"We don't have the right to censor the mail. It is not our place to do that. We have to deliver that particular piece of mail. We are bound by the Charter of Rights, which guarantees freedom of religious expression."
Union local president Ken Mooney says that he has received assurances from Canada Post managers that Canadian Union of Postal Workers members will not be asked to deliver the brochure. "I won't be surprised if managers take it out, but it won't be the letter carriers," Mooney said.
Not so, says Au. "It is scheduled to be delivered. It will be delivered," Au said. "It is business as usual. That piece of mail is scheduled to go out."
Source: The Vancouver Sun
I don't personally support the postal workers — I think that they should carry the mail regardless of what message is being communicated. The fact that mail delivery is a government function makes it even more imperative that every viewpoint be treated equally, but I would say the same even if this were a private company. I wonder, though, if any conservative Christians are equally consistent and support the right of postal workers to refuse to deliver this material?
To be fair, it is pretty vile:
The booklet was produced by the Fundamental Baptist Mission of Waterford, Ont., and is headlined The plague of this 21st Century: the consequences of the sin of homosexuality (AIDS).
In a lengthy text with headings such as "Homosexuality is Unhealthy" and "The High Cost of Low Living" the booklet describes the host of ills it says are brought about by homosexuals and homosexual behaviour. In the tract, homosexuals are blamed for the AIDS epidemic, thousands of orphans in developing nations, increases in sex crimes such as rape and contributing to the death of nations.
Also:
The pamphlet calls homosexuality "ungodly," "unhealthy," and "unnatural" and blames homosexual people for spreading AIDS by living without "any moral restraints."
Source: CTV
If the same things were being said about Jews, there would probably be a lot less criticism of the postal workers — and I suspect that the material would more easily qualify as prohibited under the postal code. If that's the case, then the fact that such statements about gays isn't prohibited simply reveals how bigotry against gays is given a free pass.
Even if you disagree with the regulations banning "hate literature" from using the post, these postal workers would thus appear to be acting more consistently and fairly than the postal managers. If such regulations are going to exist, they should at least be applied fairly and consistently rather than only against hate that is unpopular but not against hate that is more popular. If that's not possible, then this would demonstrate that such regulations are unenforceable and should be dropped.
Rev. Sterling Clark, a Baptist pastor for almost 60 years, wrote most of the booklet at the centre of the controversy. ...Mr. Clark, 77, dismissed the allegation that he had written a piece of homophobic hate literature. "What do they mean by hate? Is it a matter they do not agree with? Is it coming down to, you have one point of view and I have another, and that is classified as hate?" Mr. Clark said in an interview.
He did not retreat from the message of his booklet. He said AIDS is a plague sweeping the world that can be stopped by people honouring monogamous relationships between husband and wife.
He said that homosexuality was responsible for the problems caused by AIDS because homosexuals were responsible for the start of AIDS.
Source: The Globe and Mail
I wonder if Sterling Clark supports the right of pharmacists to refuse to dispense emergency contraception when it violates their religious beliefs? I wonder if he supports the right of doctors to refuse to provide certain kinds of treatment to certain kinds of people when that violates their religious beliefs? This is basically the same sort of situation, just directed at him and his behavior.
Gay Rights, Gay Marriage, and Religion:
- Does Equality for Gays Threaten Religious Liberty?
- Does Religious Liberty Protect a Right to Treat Gays as Unequal?
- Is Religiously Motivated Discrimination Against Gays OK?
- Evangelical Christianity & Homosexuality
- Catholicism & Homosexuality
- Roman Catholicism on Gay Marriages (Christianity - Catholicism)
Whereever there is power, there is the power to censor. These employees should be fired. so they can pursue their causes somewhere else.