So then, brethren, stand firm and hold to the traditions which you were taught by us, either by word of mouth or by letter (2 Thess. 2:15). Guard what has been entrusted to you. Avoid the godless chatter and contradictions of what is falsely called knowledge, for by professing it some have missed the mark as regards faith (1 Tim. 6:21-22).

Tuesday, June 9, 2015

Bad Mouthing Cardinal Burke. NDP Labelle attacks Catholics?


An NDP parliamentarian with a predictable need to campaign on fear and intimidation, or so his actions have made it seem, rose in the House to make a statement that gives the impression that some people possess little substance both in their thinking and in terms of their character by playing the hate card without any foundation or reason.

The actions of Pierre Dionne Labelle, MP for Rivière-du-Nord, QC, reinforce for readers the distinct impression that the NDP does not respect true diversity. He, like so many other misguided individuals, routinely misuse their positions of power by resorting to defamatory statements in an attempt to demean anyone who refuses to support an agenda that, because it promotes a weakening of morals, harms marriage and thus harms society.

Seeing Red

A faithful cardinal of the Catholic Church well known for his compassion toward all is the wrong target for the honourable member of parliament's invective. Before projecting outward a sense of indignation, monsieur Labelle should take a long look in the mirror first thing in the morning and at the end of every day to enhance his appreciation of reality and his recent misuse of an opportunity to promote dialogue with a cardinal who, precisely because he wears the cardinal red, must teach what Christ and His Church teaches. If monsieur Labelle has a problem with Cardinal Burke's witness, then perhaps he should take it up with Cardinal Burke's master, i.e., the Lord Jesus Christ.

When someone rises in Parliament to demean a faithful Catholic because of his beliefs, does he not attack all faithful Catholics who believe as Cardinal Burke does? Labelle's choice of words leaves little room for any interpretation other than that his comments attack all faithful Catholics.

If people of goodwill do not see Labelle's attack for what it is—i.e., promoting hatred toward Catholics—and act to curb such bigotry, then our country will descend even further into moral oblivion because of the state's failure to uphold the most basic of rights: freedom of religion.

In the introduction of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, freedom of conscience and religion are articulated first (2a). Does Labelle wish to associate himself with others who, if they could, remove the inalienable right to freedom of religion from the Charter?

Anyone with a spine?

Will Justin Trudeau, leader of the Liberal Party and a self identified Catholic, take issue with Labelle's comments, or will he like so many others allow himself to be pressured into silence by the intolerant few whose tired attack mantras cause men and women of weak virtue to cower in fear? How many politicians, fearing a loss of power, will not speak up and do the right thing by criticizing an MP who, by rising in Parliament no less, has attempted to lend legitimacy to anti-Catholicism?

There is little reason to doubt that Pierre Labelle's feelings reflect the feelings of many or perhaps most of his NDP colleagues. Canadians would do well to reflect on the socialist credo for which the NDP stands,... and falls. Socialists have proven themselves extremely hostile to the Catholic Faith.

 The following is a record of the exchange which took place in Parliament.
Pierre Dionne Labelle, MP for Rivière-du-Nord 
Mr. Speaker, I rise on a point of order. I feel like my privileges as a parliamentarian have been breached. During question period, we were introduced to Cardinal Raymond Burke, who is known for spreading homophobia and for his anti-gay campaigns. I deeply regret that the House was not informed of the situation and that we applauded such a person.—
The Response from the Acting Speaker Barry Devolin.
I am not sure whether that is a point of order. The chair will give it consideration and, if necessary, return before the House with a response.—
House Keeping

Is Labelle right to assert a point of order, or could his blather be, in addition to bordering on hate speech, an attempt to curry favour with a small minded intolerant special interest group? Does he need the media attention? Has he attempted to use his parliamentary platform to further his career? These are serious questions that should concern all Canadians, especially Labelle's constituents.
13. Rules of Order and Decorum
Points of Order
A point of order is a question raised by a Member who believes that the rules or customary procedures of the House have been incorrectly applied or overlooked during the proceedings. Members may rise on points of order to bring to the attention of the Chair any breach of the relevance or repetition rules, unparliamentary remarks, or a lack of quorum. [257] They are able to do so at virtually any time in the proceedings, provided the point of order is raised and concisely argued [258] as soon as the irregularity occurs. [259] Points of order respecting procedure must be raised promptly and before the question has passed to a stage at which the objection would be out of place. As a point of order concerns the interpretation of the rules of procedure, it is the responsibility of the Speaker to determine its merits and to resolve the issue. [260]
Although Members frequently rise claiming a point of order, genuine points of order rarely occur. Indeed, points of order are often used by Members in an attempt to gain the floor to participate in debate; in such cases, the Speaker will not allow the Member intervening to continue. [261] One point of order must be disposed of before another one is raised. Should a point of order be raised during consideration of a question of privilege, the point of order will be given precedence until the Chair has determined whether or not a rule has been breached and the matter settled. [262] The Speaker has, on occasion, refused to hear a point of order during the consideration of a question of privilege. [263] The necessity to control disorder either on the floor or in the galleries would oblige the Speaker to put aside a point of order temporarily.
Does Mr. Labelle's intervention qualify as a point of order? Based on the above text, the answer would seem to be an obvious 'no'.

The only way for certain pernicious ideas to solidify in the public square is for people of goodwill to do nothing to challenge and debate the intolerance and ugly ideas of people of ill will. Of course, identifying what is vice and what is virtue requires that people be capable of virtue themselves. Mr. Labelle seems incapable, in this instant, of identifying Cardinal Burke's moral rectitude.

Cardinal Burke speaks truth to power. Those prone to misusing power to achieve immoral ends rarely react positively to criticism of their immoral agendas. Cardinal Burke is disliked because he stands up to injustice and immorality. His gentle, loving witness qualifies him as a disciple of the Lord. 

The world hates faithful disciples because of Who they stand for. The world hates Christians because it hated Jesus first. Enemies of truth, because they live and move in darkness, hate the Light.
Jesus speaks:
If the world hates you, know that it has hated me before it hated you. If you were of the world, the world would love its own; but because you are not of the world, but I chose you out of the world, therefore the world hates you. Remember the word that I said to you, ‘A servant is not greater than his master.’ If they persecuted me, they will persecute you; if they kept my word, they will keep yours also. But all this they will do to you on my account, because they do not know him who sent me. If I had not come and spoken to them, they would not have sin; but now they have no excuse for their sin. He who hates me hates my Father also. If I had not done among them the works which no one else did, they would not have sin; but now they have seen and hated both me and my Father. It is to fulfil the word that is written in their law, ‘They hated me without a cause.’—Holy Gospel according to St. John 15:18-25.
Mr. Labelle, rather than speaking to substance, has simply engaged in character assassination without any attempt whatsoever to abide by the rules of Parliament regarding points of order.

Those who feel comfortable attacking inalienable rights rarely consider themselves subject to rules and regulations. Justice, fair play and respect for the rule of law were excised long ago from certain Canadians' playbook.

No comments:

Post a Comment

"A multitude of wise men is the salvation of the world(.)—Wisdom 6:24. Readers are welcome to make rational and responsible comments. Any comment that 1) offends human dignity and/or 2) which constitutes an irrational attack on the Catholic Faith will not go unchallenged. If deemed completely stupid, such a comment will most assuredly not see the light of day. Them's the rules. Don't like 'em? Move on.

Related Posts Plugin for WordPress, Blogger...