Church and state
together again?

[Re: “Fear of a secular planet,” Letters, June 5] William Richardson misunderstands the authentic separation of church and state and falsely equates the Catholic Church with totalitarianism.

Philosopher Jacques Maritain wrote that democracy—what many consider the best form of government—emerged in human history as a temporal expression of evangelical inspiration and as such—in a historical rather than a dogmatic sense—is closely linked to Christianity, the foundation of which is Catholicism.

Today, however, democracy is incorrectly perceived by many, like Williamson, as an ethically neutral political regime that is able to embrace values that are not only different but actually in opposition. Of course, this “democratic relativism” is rightly aberrant to Christians because it is blind to the objective dimension of goodness and value.

Every political regime—and democracy is no exception—needs to be motivated by absolute values. As a proof—a democracy that formally aims to neutralize the conflictual values present in the social fabric in the conviction that it can give them the only possible legitimate foundation, cannot refer in its turn, on pain of contradiction, to prior founding values.

Religious motivation expresses a simple, profound principle: to provide a sound guarantee for the democratic search for the common good, which is at the root of every authentic political process.

A policy that reduces democracy to a mere convention could not do this, as is demonstrated by the nihilistic yet impeccably democratic result of so much contemporary legislation involving life itself: I am thinking here of legislation that legalizes homosexuality, same-sex marriage, abortion, euthanasia and genetic manipulation.

When decisions regarding life are put to the ballot, the binding character of laws is flawed: no conscience feels duty-bound to bow down to mere numbers, nor can a polling booth be exchanged for a chapel.

>>Paul Kokoski, Hamilton, On.

They’re both wrong

[Re: “The Iron Wall,” Letters, June 5] Both Ken Frankel and Jalal Hussain must be taken to task for their letters.

No, Mr. Frankel, no one has that right to brutalize and torture, while Mr. Hussain assumes that present Palestinian injustices are prompted by the U.S. and Western powers.

Frankel points to Concordia University’s refusal to allow that cowboy, Benjamin Netanyahu, to address his Mein Kampf to a Concordia audience. Predictably, outrage ensued after the invitation, paralyzing the entire campus. Concordia wisely suspended the invitation, and so it was good riddance for Netanyahu. Sober Israelis didn’t want him either. 

More importantly, his invitation was from Hillel, supposedly a benevolent provider of Jewish interests. Instead this tax-exempt bunch constantly toots its horn for Israeli expansionism.

Then, Mr. Hussain looks upon a “pernicious Palestinian problem” as being prompted by the U.S. and some Western nations. This is not correct. Instead he terms the nations of Egypt, Saudi Arabia and Jordan as only being negligent in supporting Palestinian rights. Instead of merely negligence, they soundly detest the Palestinians while they do a brisk trade with Israel. They must be indicted for their own style of brutality, along with the hypocrisy in their words of lies and platitudes. 

Mr. Hussain’s “pernicious Palestinian problem” has a ready, tenable solution. Simply halt Israeli occupation. Occupation has never succeeded in world history. To this end, Israel must cease to allow a minority of religious fanatics to hold its Knesset in hostage.

>>Edward Abramic

A shot to the genitals

[Re: “All about Uwe,” Film, May 29] My reasons for seeing Uwe Boll’s latest act of destruction, Postal, were rather common ones. A) I had never witnessed an act of destruction from the German horrorist and B) I was curious to see how his own post-Hitler shame and loathing would blend with a broader European disgust and obsession for all things post-September 11th. And perhaps C) I was in the mood for some downright trashy Euro-trash.

What I got, in the form of very, very bad, was a serving of Midwest manure soufflé, replete with cues from Team America, Michael Moore and those porno-reality cop shows like Bad Boyz which appear to have fallen out of the rotten bowels of Maury Povich.

The acting was predictably atrocious, including a self-debasing cameo by the director himself who, at the apex of the film’s Grecian climax, takes a round of machine gun fire directly in the genitals.

Dave Foley, who also exposes his genitals to the camera and thus me, was perfectly blasé in his portrayal of a post-God cynic who starts a cult of sex and depravity simply to prove the point that humans are gullible enough to believe that he is the Messiah. I’m not all that familiar with Dave Foley’s work, but this “performance” will surely garner some meaty conversation at the next Foley family dinner.

Otherwise, there were ample shots of blonde babes, bloodthirsty Jihadists, black-toothed hillbillies, and enough acts of senseless violence to warrant a warrant for Uwe Boll’s arrest. Add to that a throughline that left this viewer feeling both robbed and ridiculed and you’ve got the latest requiem for the dead from Germany’s bastard son of the C-movie.

>>Adrian Ebert

WE WELCOME LETTERS TO THE EDITOR!

Send your comments, compliments or criticisms to:

Letters to the Editor,
c/o Montreal Mirror,
465 McGill, 3rd Floor Montreal,
Quebec H2Y 4B4

You may also fax us at (514) 393-3173, or reach us by e-mail at letters@mtl-mirror.com:

Letters to the Editor

All letters should include your name, address and daytime phone number.

If you wish to reach someone in particular, here's a list of people involved with the production of the newspaper and this site.