Harper Refuses to Answer Stupid Question

If they'd have dropped it, I'd have dropped it.

Yesterday the Globe & Mail took the non-issue of Christian canadidates being nominated in their ridings and put a sinister spin on it. Be afraid . . . be very afraid . . . Christian Activists will 'penetrate' a riding near you.

Apparently the very clever Gloria Galloway thought she'd found the smoking gun of the Conservative 'hidden agenda' -- who'd have thunk it -- Conservatives --- actually vying for their riding nominations (almost unheard of in this country). Wow, this is news. That a small percentage of those Conservatives also happen to be Christians is what makes this story inkworthy to the big-brained Ms Galloway:

Christian activists have secured Conservative nominations in clusters of ridings from Vancouver to Halifax -- a political penetration that has occurred even as the party tries to distance itself from hard-line social conservatism.

She goes on by quoting a failed candidate in a riding, who despite his failed bid, apparently speaks for the entire party:

Some Conservatives argue that the selection of a large number of candidates from the religious right is an unfortunate turn for a party that was accused in last year's election campaign of harbouring a socially conservative "hidden agenda."

"The difficulty, from a party perspective, is that it begins to hijack the other agendas that parties have," said Ross Haynes, who lost the Conservative nomination in the riding of Halifax to one of three "Christian, pro-family people" recommended by a minister at a religious rally this spring in Kentville, N.S.

Our party spokesman wasn't finished yet either. And of course he wasn't talking out of his own disappointment. He has the best interests of both the country and the party at heart:

Candidates who are running on single issues such as opposition to same-sex marriage "probably can't get elected because they certainly don't represent any mainstream population view," Mr. Haynes said.

So apparently the economy, corruption in government, the democratic deficit, health care, child care and all those other non-sex related issues are the exclusive domain of non-Christians.

The Globe has attempted to make this like an exposé. They've started with the assumption that Liberal Christians will act in the best interests of the country and that Conservative Christians will compromise democracy.

I thought they'd had their fun trying to 'out' the Conservatives, but they were back at it today:

Mr. Harper, who was touring a Toronto housing and recreational complex, would not answer questions about a separate issue relating to concerns that Christian activists are organizing to nominate Conservative candidates who will fight against same-sex marriage.

Stephen Harper, a man who's known for not suffering fools -- wouldn't answer a stupid question! Did they really think he'd stand there and try to justify people within his party, exercising their rights within a democracy?

Isn't it better that the party leader doesn't interfere in the local nominations process? Or do Gloria Galloway and Karen Howlitt prefer the Liberal practice of hand-picking and parachuting candidates, circumventing the local nominations process altogether.

Perhaps the Conservatives should have people fill out a quesitonnaire before they are allowed to join the party to weed out the undesireables. If they check the little box that says: 'Are you now, or have you ever been a Christian?' then you know to burn the membership or at very least their nomination papers.

Instead of this being a debate about how we are going to structure one of our fundamental institutions, it has become a monologue. The Globe continues to play into this with their anti-Christian inferences. If you're not onside with the gay agenda, you must be homophobic.

The left has framed the question in a manner that silences and marginalizes a good portion of the population -- not just born-again Christians ----people of all religions and people with no religion who have legitimate reasons for objecting to same-sex marriage.

Galloway and her ilk are fuelling the fires of intransigent anti-Christian zealotry. They openly pander to left-wing conspiracy-theorists. In any other public arena, against any other group, these small-minded fantasies of a subversive plot to over-take the political process would be mocked and scorned.

There aren't that many sources of news in Canada. The ownship of our various outlets are concentrated in very few hands. The Globe's prominence and national base demand a responsible handling of contentious issues.

If Galloway wants to be cheerleaders for the Liberals, that's her business, but if the Liberals were truly worthy of support, she wouldn't have to do it by Christian-bashing.

Galloway uses emotionally charged words like 'infultrate' and 'penetrate'. She asks loaded questions, and suggests by her tone that Christians should be stopped -- and that Stephen Harper won't answer the call.

And Canada either shrugs or applauds.

"As nightfall does not come at once, neither does oppression.... There is a twilight when everything remains seemingly unchanged. And it is in such a twilight that we must be most aware of change in the air -- however slight -- lest we become unwitting victims of the darkness."-- William O. Douglas, US Supreme Court Justice from 1939-1975

canadianna