Canada Day flop

As is the duty of your typical proud 20-something Canadian, I attended the Canada Day festivities alongside thousands of other people at the Old Port. I would have said alongside “peers” but clearly the irritating presence of FLQ goons limits my vocabulary in this case. But I digress.

Either way, those vexing party-poopers aside, I was generally disappointed by this year’s attempt at “revamping” the whole shindig, notably when it came to the highly anticipated and yet apparently non-existent fireworks show. I found myself confused, as did many others of all ages and creeds around me, as we had come together in that oh-so Canadian manner, to watch the traditional half-hour of riveting sky-bound gunpowder. Instead, we got Geneviève Borne and her giant ego-fest of a spectacle.

And while I will admit that DJ Geneviève certainly did unleash a few pyrotechnics from her bag of tricks, (“VJ, DJ, TV host AND SHE CAN PRODUCE FIREWORKS TOO??” we exclaimed, awe-stricken, before her sorcery), it definitely wasn’t enough to thrill me into being patriotic last night.

In fact, it kind of made me want to crawl back to those FLQ guys and crack open the first of many beers, after having asked them if they would kindly teach me some old country tunes, and tell me again how my language is evil.

Anyway, she ended on a high note by announcing it was over, and mentioning that this was the first edition of “Dansons sur les Quais,” a whole new Canada Day concept. Her threats delivered, her loyal fire dancers fell back and she disappeared into a hiss of smoke and flame. The befuddled audience nevertheless chimed in energetically with a final chorus of “That was it?” and that, indeed, was that.

Amidst the flurry of people running for their lives, nay, for their very souls, the only force stronger than the B.O. of thousands of disgruntled sun-crisped bodies was the zeal of those dialing Ottawa frantically from their cell phones, in hopes of getting a hotel for July 1, 2009. Because God knows that’s where I’ll be next year for Canada Day.

>>Elizabeth Lee

God’s rules

[Re: The ongoing discussion about God] While both L.S. Cattarini and John Dirlik make pertinent points in their pro and con views on God and religion, they seem to miss the main reason and purpose for the existence of all religions: ASSURANCE. Real and legitimate desire for assurance. 

In essence, religion is the mother of all insurance policies and basically plays the role of alleviating and diminishing fears by promising and guaranteeing restitution in case of loss. Religion is a form of spiritual insurance against the dread of death and the probability of a final and permanent termination of individual life.

However, like in all insurance policies, there are terms and conditions printed in very small type on the back, with each religion specifying the numerous strict conditions for eligibility for eternal life and a soft and comfortable place in heaven. 

In Judaism, for instance, among the many do’s and don’ts, is the commandment of never indulging in a satisfying bacon and eggs breakfast or a tasty Virginia ham sandwich for lunch. Period. The Christians on the other hand, are allowed to enjoy bacon and ham and still be admitted to heaven, but they must behave in a meek and humble fashion, and when hit on one cheek, must offer the other, a biblical requirement which shortens the wait for heaven. 

For Muslims, the rules are even harsher. Like the Hebrews, they must never touch pork, but they must also abstain from consuming alcohol in any form, or say goodbye to paradise. The Hindus are allowed to enjoy a bit of booze but they must stay away from juicy beefsteaks and St-Laurent-style smoked meat sandwiches or never achieve Nirvana.

So do religious insurance policies work? I believe they do. Small print notwithstanding, it makes us feel better, hopeful and more serene. And on occasion, it helps us behave a little kinder towards one another. The inhumanities performed in the name of religion are the result of people using religion as a means of doing evil things—not of religion itself. 

Abolish religion, and the same people would cheerfully continue their murderous activities in the name of nationalism, racism, social ideologies, science etc. Or perhaps they will do it for no particular reason at all—just for the hell of it.

Scapegoating religion as a justification for bestial human behaviour is a futile exercise and self-delusion.

>>Ed Binder

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.