Office now open

I hereby announce that I will be opening the ELO (English Language Office). My first case will be a little mistranslation on the part of Lucien Bouchard's webmaster. When you visit http://www.premier.gouv.qc.ca/introa.htm, the title bar says: "The Prime Minister of Quebec." Not so fast, Boubou. You ain't there yet.

Also, on the very same page (and on the French-version page), we are subjected to Bouchard's gift for oxymoronisation: "Quebec is a modern, open society which is defined, in the first instance, by its common language and official language: French." An open society guilty of blatant linguicism.

This is just the beginning! I have many qualms with how Quebec destroys its français bien aimé, not to mention making it look like it's the anglos' fault.

Boris Anthony

My advice: get out

It's been almost seven months since I packed up my family and headed west on the 401--yet another young, educated anglo leaving Quebec for good. I've been back a few times, and every time my visit is completed, I'm happy to be leaving Quebec once again. Sure, I'll miss my friends and family, but the silliness of my ex-province outweighs any pangs I might feel, for it knows no bounds.

And although Quebec residents claim to be immune to the daily circus that is your crumbling society, the reality is you'll never know how much stress it adds to your life until you're out for good. Then come back for a visit, open up any paper and read how low your beloved government has sunk, how fundamentally brain-dead Quebec society has become.

I've long believed Quebec is a morally and intellectually bankrupt hole in the ground. My new perspective merely helps me confirm it. My only question is how long it will take everyone else to figure out there's more to life than language debates and systemic tolerance of the resulting damage to society. It's a lot easier to save yourself the trouble and just leave.

Carmi Levy London, Ontario

Apology & retort

In response to Frederick J. Tatlow, who checked my response to Sasha's column in his letter of two weeks ago ["Letter writer no theologian, either," (e)Mail, July 10]: it is with sincerity that I'm thanking him for being more polite with me than I was with others. Irritated, I hastily wrote a rude and disrespectful letter to express my displeasure. It is evident that God's existence, and lack thereof, can only be supported. Neither can be proven or disproven. Either is a belief based on a combination of faith and rational arguments.

I also feel it necessary to address François Laforge's letter in the same issue. No, since you asked, the Old and New Testaments are not just a collection of stories with metaphors. I made reference to only one.

As well, neither I, nor any of my fellow worshipers, have taken the Bible literally and persecuted (vexed/harassed) homosexuals, as you inaccurately stated. In fact, within my faith of Roman Catholicism, I have yet to find one clergyman who supports such actions. The reason is that Catholic catechism states quite accurately that the number of homosexuals is not negligible, that they are to be accepted with respect, compassion and sensitivity, that discrimination against them is to be avoided and that they can and should reach Christian human perfection.

The fact that one does not support a lifestyle (as opposed to its adherents) does not infer that one will or should persecute someone who participates in it. Any homophobe acts contradictory to Catholic doctrine and is a poor and inaccurate representation of the faith. Their persecution is based on personal ignorance. "A little reply" indeed.

Bradley MacDonald

Correction

In the July 17 (e)Mail, the Mirror incorrectly identified Fran Sendbuehler as an organizer of last month's march against poverty in Westmount. In fact, she was a participant in the march, but did not have a role in its organization.