15 July 2009
The Difference with Differences
I was speaking to a person I consider to be a very strong, moral and ethical person today, but then he said something that caught me off guard. We were speaking about another person I'd just met, and he was giving me some background. He told me the person's daughter had Down's Syndrome and then said "and that's a bigger burden than anyone should have to carry. Poor guy."
I was so shocked, I didn't say anything. And by the time I recovered, we'd moved on in the conversation and I didn't feel up to bringing it back up. So now I'm blogging about it. Don't get me wrong- I know that the attitude society promotes is that people with disabilities are somehow less human or less worthy of life, but I'm shocked when people I respect say things like that.
Why is it "poor guy"? Why is it such a "burden"? Why is it a burden no one should have to carry? Doesn't he see the implication in his speech- that the daughter would be better off dead? I don't understand. I know that raising a child with a disability is not easy, but I don't think raising any child is easy. A disability might create more challenges, but it also has the potential for great blessings. I don't have a lot of experience with people who have Down's, but what I've seen is people who are more human, loving and caring than the vast majority of this world (myself included.) What do you say when people say things like that?
This brings me to the other recent experience- the area I am living and working in has a lot of immigrants, and these immigrants are visible minorities. Before I moved here I was aware that there are tensions as a result, but I can't help but wonder in the last few days if those tensions are excacberated by people's conduct.
I've noticed that when these immigrants (many of whom are now Canadian citizens, or at least permanent residents) deal with others, they are looked down upon as being unintelligent. I don't think they are- they don't always speak English well, but that doesn't make them stupid. And yet, people assume that because they don't speak English, they must be idiots, and they speak down to them, role their eyes or avoid dealing with them all together. And I see the frustration on the faces of these immigrants who are just trying to get though each day.
I can't imagine how scary and difficult it would be to leave my country and move to another one where, not only do I not speak the language, but I look like an outsider. I got a small taste of that in Italy this summer-I don't speak Italian and I'm so pale that I just screamed tourist and it was hard- and most people there wanted to help me.
Here, people seem to go out of their way to make things difficult for these immigrants. For example, I've seen people be denied appointments, or forced to come back 3 or 4 times because they didn't understand, yet if they spoke better English, someone would take the time to explain it for them.
Maybe the worst was a comment I heard today- "yeah he's Chinese, but his English is pretty good, so there's no reason to not help him."
To me this is the same attitude as the attitude towards people with disabilities. We are all human- equal in dignity and deserving of respect by virture of that inate dignity. Yes, some people are more work to deal with than others, but if we are all children of God, we should do the extra work, and be happy to do it.
If we call ourselves Christians, should our lives not be a witness of His gospel? We need to be Christ to each other, and we need to stop seeing everyone as other and start seeing everyone as our neighbor.
And maybe if we can do that, we can reverse this culture of death we seem to be spiraling further and further into.
27 October 2008
The Dignity of the Person
An Australian "artist" presented a display of his photographs in New York City after having ignited a furor over his work published in an Australian magazine. Why the controversy? His exhibition contains nude photographs of underage young girls. Some people have claimed that the images are pornography, he and the magazine claim they are art, and that the girl's parents gave consent for the photographs to be taken. For detailed facts, read this.
The debate over pornography vs. art is a long one, and gets even more heated when you are talking about images of children- do they constitute child pornography? If they do, then the images are criminal and an offence in the Criminal Code. The Supreme Court, in R. v. Sharpe [2001] 1 SCR 45, held that freedom of expression in s 2(b) of the Charter does not extend to cover child pornography. As a society, we have decided that child pornography is wrong, but in the wake of changes to the social mores of the Western world, I wonder how long that will last.
I believe that our society is increasingly sexualizing children, especially girls at a young age. It's an interesting shift from how things "used to be." Our modern, progressive society is horrified that we used to treat children as miniature adults. During the industrial revolution (and before) they held jobs at an early age, and helped to provide for their families. We've now passed child labor laws to prevent that, so we can let kids just be kids. Or have we just exchanged one type of miniature adults for another one?
An example of this can be seen in girl's fashions. We put little girls in clothes that emphasize their sexuality; their clothes reveal "assets" that haven't even developed yet, and we market make-up and beauty tools to increasingly younger and younger children. We ask the girls to dress older, look old, to embrace their sexuality, and then we toss up our hands and wonder why my generation and the younger generation have so many issues. Why do we feel the need to take the innocence of our children so early? Why do we want to erase and destroy that spirit and turn it into an adult with adult issues and problems? Why has our society launched an all out war on the dignity of the human person?
I think this really began in the 1960's. During the sexual revolution, everyone was encouraged to do whatever felt right. Women were to shake off the oppression of men and indulge in sex on their own terms. This was supposed to be empowering. Here we are 40 years later, and that long dark road has all but erased the dignity of the human person, and as the debate around child pornography continues, we are erasing that dignity at an earlier age. This is not empowerment, it is objectification. Popular music all but screams this objectification, calling women ho's and bitches to be slapped around. Any man who opens a door or acts with any chivalry is mercilessly mocked, or is accused of chauvinism.
Sex has been trivialized, mocked and abused, much like the dignity of the men and women who engage in it so freely. Its beauty has been denied in popular culture, and this has cheapened and degraded everyone. If, as a society, we recognized and appreciated the dignity of every person, inherent in them because we are created in God's image and likeness, how many of society's ills would fix themselves? How many marriages would last and how many children would be allowed to keep their innocence and not grow up faster than they should? How many children would be allowed to live? How many vulnerable people would be allowed, not only to live, but to share their special gifts and graces with us all?
This may all sound pie in the sky, and it maybe is, but I just want everyone to stop and think when they read the news, watch TV or read a magazine. Is Mr. Henson's photography child porn or art? The court seems to think it's art, but maybe, just maybe, we shouldn't be allow the court to make our decisions for us; we should stop to think for ourselves; is what we are reading or watching demonstrating the dignity of every human, or is it destroying it?
If you want to see what started this rather random, incoherent rant, read this.
23 October 2008
The Red Mass
The St. Thomas More Lawyer's Guild had its annual Red Mass tonight. It's a mass where lawyers, judges, politicians and law enforcement personnel gather to pray for the outpouring of Holy Spirit on all who are involved in the administration of justice. I went last year too, but tonight I heard the most AMAZING homily I have ever heard. The Roman Catholic Bishop and the Ukrainian Catholic Bishop co-celebrated, but the Ukrainian Catholic Bishop gave the homily. He's newly appointed to the diocese, and I've never heard him speak before, but he was amazing.
The mass had the who's who of the local legal profession in attendance- the Chief Justice of the Court of Appeal, several other justices, the provincial attorney general, a city councilor, the superintendant of city police, the dean of the law school, several QC's and a whole host of lawyers and law students. Last year's homily by the RC bishop was pretty wishy washy and feel good- about how we should all help those in need and use our legal skills for the benefit of all. There was absolutely no comparison with this year's homily. I know that I had the stupidest looking grin on my face, and it just got bigger as the homily went on.
He started the homily by referencing Bill C-38 (same sex marriage) and moved quickly to talk about how moral relativism pervades our society, and how as Catholics and lawyers we have a duty to use our God given talents in the law to work to defend objective truth and to show that there is objective truth in our the way we live our lives. He then spoke about the inherent dignity of every human being, and how we have a duty to ensure the law recognizes this. He stated that life is more than a human right; it is part of our human dignity that comes from Christ. I am doing a terrible job of paraphrasing his homily, but essentially he told everyone there that to be Catholic means that they have to reject relativism and work to promote human dignity in all forms of human life (including the unborn, disabled and terminally ill). I have never, ever heard a priest, let alone a bishop spend an entire homily on the inherent dignity of all humans. This homily was an exhortation to follow church teachings, and it was directed at a crowd that is rather hostile to that message. (I heard mutterings and whisperings all around me)
The Bishop was an amazing witness of the gospel message. I spoke with him after mass, and he said he wasn't sure what to speak about- he said it was intimidating getting up before the chief justice to speak when he has no legal training, but the Holy Spirit must have inspired that homily, because there was no hesitation in the message- just a confident priest speaking to his flock. And if people don't like the message, that's just too bad for them. If they are going to call themselves Catholic, the least they can do is follow church teachings. I told the Bishop how much I appreciated hearing his homily. It makes it much easier to be a Catholic lawyer in a secular world.
I don't often hear a homily that sticks with me like this one did, and when I do hear one, I am reminded of how much I love the church. There is objective truth, and relativism is wrong. I have been so impressed with bishops lately- they have been speaking out about life issues with increasing regularity this year- especially the US Bishops. All I can say to end this is God Bless the bishop and all priests, religious and laity who speak the truth without hesitation or fear.
