A slow-burn bonfire of liberties

MARK STEYN: Here’s what you get when the state hauls nobodies off to jail for quoting the Bible

by Mark Steyn on Thursday, May 13, 2010 8:00am - 285 Comments

Suzanne Plunkett/ Reuters

At the time of writing, I have no idea who’s won the British general election. At the time of reading, you probably have. But, whatever the result, I doubt it will make much difference to the fate of the United Kingdom, which is in the fast lane of the not-so-slow-burn bonfire of the liberties consuming much of the Western world.

The official “defining moment” of the campaign was Gordon Brown’s unguarded post-photo-op dismissal of Gillian Duffy as a “bigoted woman.” Mrs. Duffy, a plain-spoken working-class granny and lifelong Labour voter, had made the mistake of asking Mr. Brown, her party leader, a very mild question about immigrants from eastern Europe. He got back in his car and wrote her off, forgetting he was still miked. So she’s a “bigot.” He’s not. That’s why he makes all the decisions for her, and she just makes the best of them. What part of that don’t you understand?

The other “defining moment” got less coverage. Another “pensioner,” 74-year-old Roy Newman, got sick of the various party hacks knocking on his door and put a sign up in his front window: “GET THE LOT OUT.” Ninety minutes later, two police officers arrived at his home to arrest him for “racism.”

Racism? Why, yes. His sign was a piece of white card with red and blue lettering. Red-white-and-blue, geddit? The colours of the Union Jack. If using the same colour scheme as the national flag isn’t coded racism, I don’t know what is. Mr. Newman was prevailed upon to alter some of the letters to yellow, thereby diminishing the racist subtext.

With bigotry and racism running rampant, it was inevitable that homophobia would raise its ugly head. Dale McAlpine, a practising (wait for it) Christian, was handing out leaflets in the town of Workington and chit-chatting with shoppers when he was arrested on a “public order” charge by police officer Sam Adams (no relation), a gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender community outreach officer. Mr. McAlpine said homosexuality is a sin. “I’m gay,” said Officer Adams. Well, it’s still a sin, said Mr. McAlpine. So Officer Adams arrested him for causing distress to Officer Adams.

In fairness, I should add that Mr. McAlpine was also arrested for causing distress to members of the public more generally, rather than just the aggrieved gay constable. No member of the public actually complained, but, as Officer Adams pointed out, Mr. McAlpine was talking “in a loud voice” that might be “overheard by others.” And we can’t have that, can we? So he was fingerprinted, DNA-sampled and tossed in the cells for seven hours.

The other day, upholding the sacking of a black Christian for declining to provide “sex therapy lessons” to gay couples, Lord Justice Laws ruled that “law for the protection of a position held purely on religious grounds is irrational, divisive, capricious, arbitrary.” Actually it’s the law of Lord Justice Laws that is increasingly “irrational, divisive, capricious, arbitrary.” Or as George Orwell, in Animal Farm, formulated it: all animals are equal, but some animals are more equal than others. In the land of Laws, a gay is more equal than a Christian. A Muslim is more equal than anybody. A black man is more equal than a white man, unless the white man is gay and the black man a Christian. An eco-zealot is more equal than an Anglican. Not long before Lord Justice Laws’ decision on the “irrationality” of legal protection for Christianity, Tim Nicholson, a “Head of Sustainability” fired for questioning his property management group’s environmental policies, sued for wrongful dismissal under “Employment Equality (Religion And Beliefs) Regulations.” He wound up with the best part of one hundred thousand pounds after Mr. Justice Burton ruled that Mr. Nicholson’s faith in anthropogenic global warming was a “philosophical belief” on a par with religion. So the Employment Equality (Religion And Beliefs) Law protects belief in apocalyptic “climate change” but not in Jesus.

Bookmark and Share
  • ROB-RAGE

    Liberals make the people in the Nut Houses look completely normal and reasonable…England is on the verge of financial and Social collapse…It they don't chane course and let the Grownups run the country…they will look more like Zimbabwe in a year or two….America is right behind 'em…the Left is incrementally destroying the Worlds best hope to fight Tyrants and Morons …We have to exile them to an Island where they will self destruct.! Mark Steyn Rocks..!!

  • Lloyd

    Wonderful column. Great article pointing out the erosion of free speech in the UK, and now coming to Canada.
    Christianity seems to be especially picked on. But Islamists are allowed to threaten death over a cartoon? Sick.

  • Patricia Blevins

    I am so thankful for Mark's ability to pin down the ideas of those who would rob us of our liberty with their twisted philosophies and logic. I am also thankful that my reading of Ayn Rand many years ago gave me the perceptive wisdom to recognize these snakes and their pervisions of the English language that permits them to fool too many of our citizens. With Mark's voice, there is some hope. PB

  • http://intensedebate.com/people/RunningGag RunningGag

    It stems from my continuing frustration with liberals, people who generally consider themselves more sophisticated and enlightened than conservatives but who – time after time in my interactions with them – prove to me that they are not only woefully uninformed, but are prone to remarkable intellectual gymnastics in order to conform reality to their ideological preconceptions.

    I completely see where you're coming from but the opposite is just as true (don't make me pull out the Glenn Beck videos :P). Arrogant, self-righteous people live on both sides of the spectrum. The way out of that spiral is to raise the level of debate, not stoop to their level.

    This is not about you and me, this is about the issues at hand.

    If you are trying to convince another person to your side, it is rare that you'll do it by insulting them. Nor is questioning their motives a valid tactic either. Refute the argument by refuting the facts presented. That should be enough.

    But I accept your apology, and I'll take a look at the arguments presented in your post.

  • Corae Tayler

    Steyn — another great column, as usual. It's unfortunate that there are so many uneducated young people out there that just don't get it. Oh, they think they are educated but not really. They have been indoctrinated, poor little techno babies who have eaten up everything their left wing so-called teachers, sorry educators (NOT) have taught them. Spoon fed them, this leftist, marxist (not deserving of a capital) pablum. Thank God (with a large G) in which I still believe, he has granted me the ability to REASON, which these poor leftist sots (so-called EDUCATORS – not) have stolen from them (the young people). At least I had an opportunity to travel and learn from other cultures — CAP AND TRADE is going to seal their fate to within a few miles of their hometowns. Oh, and congrats to Steyn for beating that feeble attempt by the Human Rights (ha! ha!) Commission on his McLeans article on his book, America Alone. It's a brilliant book and everyone, if you think you still have a working brain should read.

  • alieu

    We are a people who happen to have a government. Not a government that happens to have people. Anybody who wants to manage "free speech" needs to remember that.

  • http://intensedebate.com/profiles/rogersnowden rogersnowden

    This will not end quietly, of course. All the secular nonsense will provoke an eventual backlash. We see it in the US in the form of the Tea Party movement, which the statist rulers decry as "racist", though it it not.

    This will become violent. And if any group on the planet is given to violent backlash, it is Europe.

    • http://intensedebate.com/people/M_A_N M_A_N

      Or possibly Montreal hockey fans.

  • JBar

    Take responsibility back. Raise up your children to know right from wrong, using logic and goodwill as your guide posts.
    It's almost too late.
    The Greatest Generation would never stand for such global nonsense. Imagine Them being bullied by insanity?
    Who wil start the next righteous revolution? Who will lead us off this mind numbing, castrating path that we've foolishly been lulled into taking?
    God help us. God, wake us up.

  • Lost History Buff

    While I do not agree with all of your points or your ideological beliefs RunningGag, I will say that 1.) I respect your right to your views and 2.) I appreciate that you take at least some time to research your points. I also offer you my utmost respect to researching points for the "devil’s advocate".

    In my opinion it is people like you who should be leading our political parties as you defend your points with facts and do not spend an inordinate amount of time insulting the oppositions’ ideologies.
    Well done RunningGag!

    Sincerely,
    Canadian Libertarian

  • http://intensedebate.com/people/Viva_Vivian Viva_Vivian

    I see my name here amidst accusations of posters perpetrating abuse on you, Running Gag, and though I'm not thin-skinned I am sensitive to passive aggression. I must have missed all times posters called you a c*nt, threatened violence, or even said you were stupid. Incredulity might sting a little, but it's not abuse! That's pretty offensive to Maclean's posters as well as victims of real abuse. Maybe you should pack it in if you're that sensitive.

    Second, read Ayaan Hiris Ali ("Infidel" her memoir or "The Caged Virgin," her manifesto on escaping Islam for apostate women). I don't have it now, but I'll quote Indonesia Shari'a Court Judge Ibuy Mahdiah: "Indonesia does not apply the Islamic LAW which says that adulterers should be stoned to death…Personally I agree with Islamic law." Though she doesn't believe in killing, just 100 stones for a virgin and 80 for a widow. Just a taste; read up.

  • Bob

    Since they invented "political correctness" in order to silence the majority that opposes them, Liberals have loved laws that limit free speech, as those laws have silenced their critics. However, they best be careful what they implement. As the societal pendulum inevitably swings the other way, their own laws may eventually put THEM in jail for touting things like gay rights (which will ultimately – as repeatedly throughout history – become unpopular once again) or bashing the Christian faith, or any of the other current fads that they use the law to promote.

  • setnaffa

    Steyn has, in fact, enumerated the reasons for those who emigrated from England to other countries with less ridiculous restrictions on religion.

  • http://intensedebate.com/people/RunningGag RunningGag

    In response to the rest of your post:

    I'll be honest when I tell you that my statement about the creation of Israel being a poor decision was mostly from my very basic understanding of the events surrounding the creation. I knew very little about the back story. Even after reading the History of Israel and Jewish diaspora Wiki articles, I'm sure I know very little. Although, the History of Isreal is quite interesting, and I definitely recommend it.

    From what I've read, the creation was simply another step in a series of short sighted decisions by the British government, resulting from a number of factors – not the least of which were lobbying from both Jews and antisemites.

    I guess the point is that while I still say it was a poor decision, it was probably the best option of all the bad options.

    I do agree with what you say regarding appeasement. And you are certainly correct in that the countries for which Islam is the state religion have much to answer for. But I am hopeful that the moderate Muslims (like that lady from Saudi Arabia who defended herself against the Islamic Inquisitor) will eventually win out over the crazies.

    Also, I think that I may have made a typo in my response to you regarding Renaissance. I should have said 'could have led to a Renaissance' not 'would have led to a Renaissance'. While I agree with what you've said about Saudi Arabia, I still say that an Islam without the influence of Ayatollah Khomeini may have looked significantly different than it does today. Probably not a shining beacon of freedom, but likely more moderate than it is now.

  • http://intensedebate.com/people/minaka minaka

    Regarding the HRC's Running Gag you appear to know nothing about their workings. Otherwise you wouldn't say naive things like "there must be a method of tracking complaints if for no other reason as to see how effective the HRC is in curbing 'human rights violations'.

    HRC's as anyone who has read Mark Steyn on this subject or followed the MacLean's kangaroo trial have no rules or public accountability. They are truly renegade government funded entities that make up the rules as they go along and give contradictory decisions twisting into pretzels to get the desired result, putting conservatives and Christians into the dock and brushing off any complaints anyone from those unfavored groups may have.

    Instead of playing poor-me, read Ezra Levant's book "Shakedown" as I suggested earlier. There's no room to educate you here. Start with becoming aware that NONE of the protections in real courts apply to the HRC tribunals that nevertheless have wide leeway to 1) drag out proceedings for years costing huge lawyer's fees for the defendant while the complainant pays not a penny for a raft of government lawyers, 2) levy punishing fines and strictures on future speech (even murderers are not given such strictures on speech), 3) dismiss truth as a defense, 4) try someone for the same speech "crime" in multiple jurisdictions, 5) appoint "judges" who are not trained judges and many more abuses of an individual's rights.

    These bulls in the china shop of human rights are not going to track or make public anything they don't want the public to know like their own biases. Levant was dragged into their maw as a victim and made it his business to investigate them. Read his book and weep if you really care about freedom of speech and individual rights in Canada.

  • Lord Kitchener's Own

    As a white, heterosexual, male Christian aged 18-35 I thank God there are finally people like Mark Steyn to stand up for us.

    I have a dream that one day, white Christian men won't need the protection of such brave souls. However, as it is, Steyn is a shining light at the end of the long dark tunnel of my never-ending struggles living as a white heterosexual Christian man in Western society. Mark my words: One day, white Christian heterosexual men are going to throw off their chains and have the same kind of power and influence in Western Society as everyone else.

    • http://intensedebate.com/people/M_A_N M_A_N

      I can only dream of the day when I might have a chance to be a well-paid mid-level manager, or be able to find white bread and Cheez Whiz in my local grocery store.

      Keep fighting for me, Mark. Keep fighting for me.

  • Paul Monroe

    Best Steyn article so far. It summarizes his main message (and I think the future ones will be mostly versions of it).
    I totally agree: there's no common-sense anymore, the thought-police is a weapon of the government to suppress free thinking (and justify its actions and the salaries of you know who), people are getting afraid to speak their minds (most people are just to lazy to do it, yet those who would now think they'd better not).
    Wasn't the famous author of Guns , Germs and Steel, Jared Diamond, the one who called (correctly) modern governments a form of Kleptocracy?

  • Grahame Murray

    Once again an ugly Steyn corrupts Maclean's. The irrational hatred of Muslims, gays etc. is matched only by irrational support for Christianity. Steyn is filled with hate thus disqualifying him from Christiandom. He is again in breach of the hate literature section of the Criminal Code of Canada. He should be in the docket of magistrate's court rather than in front of a human rights commission. is the purpose of this vile lie? "…remorseless feasting of Islamic polygamy on the Eurowelfare gravy train is only one example of how feeble "rational" secular statism proves to be in the face of a minority that has its number." That is a lie. A hateful lie. A lie designed to cause hatred against an identifiable group.

  • http://www.decorativeshelfbrackets.net/ Decorative brackets

    I think they must have to fighting hard in the last match because it's really deciding them to pass to round of last 16. Godd luck for them.

From Macleans