B.C.: Bestselling books for the week of Nov. 21
B.C.: Bestselling books for the week of Nov. 21

Article content

1. Takaya: Lone Wolf —Cheryl Alexander (RMB | Rocky Mountain Books).

2. When We are Kind —Monique Gray Smith, illustrated by Nicole Neidhardt(Orca Book Publishers).

3. Vancouver Exposed: Searching for the City’s Hidden History —Eve Lazarus(Arsenal Pulp Press).

4. The E.J. Hughes Book of Boats —Robert Amos (TouchWood Editions).

5. Raven Squawk, Orca Squeak —Robert Budd, illustrated by Roy Henry Vickers (Harbour Publishing).

6. Crossing the Divide: Discovering a Wilderness Ethic in Canada’s Northern Rockies —Wayne Sawchuk (Creekstone Press).

7. Balancing Bountiful: What I Learned about Feminism from My Polygamist Grandmothers — Mary Jayne Blackmore (Caitlin Press).

8. Edible and Medicinal Flora of the West Coast: British Columbia and the Pacific Northwest —Collin Varner(Heritage House Publishing).

9. Hope Matters: Why Changing the Way We Think is Critical to Solving the Environmental Crisis —Elin Kelsey (Greystone Books).

Statement by Head of the Ahmadiyya Muslim Community in light of Recent Developments in France
Statement by Head of the Ahmadiyya Muslim Community in light of Recent Developments in France

Following today’s attack in Nice and following on from the murder of Samuel Paty on 16 October, the World Head of the Ahmadiyya Muslim Community, His Holiness, Hazrat Mirza Masroor Ahmad has condemned all forms of terrorism and extremism and called for mutual understanding and dialogue between all peoples and nations.

His Holiness, Hazrat Mirza Masroor Ahmad states:

“The murder and beheading of Samuel Paty and the attack in Nice earlier today must be condemned in the strongest possible terms. Such grievous attacks are completely against the teachings of Islam. Our religion does not permit terrorism or extremism under any circumstances and anyone who claims otherwise acts against the teachings of the Holy Quran and contrary to the noble character of the Holy Prophet of Islam (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him).

As the worldwide Head of the Ahmadiyya Muslim Community, I extend our deepest sympathies to the loved ones of the victims and to the French nation. Let it be clear that our condemnation and hatred of such attacks is not something new but has always been our position and stance. The Founder of the Ahmadiyya Muslim Community (peace be upon him) and his Successors have always categorically rejected all forms of violence or bloodshed in the name of religion.

The fallout from this heinous act has further exacerbated the tensions between the Islamic world and the West and between Muslims living in France and the rest of society. We consider this to be a source of deep regret and a means of further undermining the peace and stability of the world. We must all join together to root out all forms of extremism and to encourage mutual understanding and tolerance. From our perspective, the Ahmadiyya Muslim Community will spare no effort in our mission to foster a better understanding of the true and peaceful teachings of Islam in the world.”

Opinon: Science or religion
Opinon: Science or religion

All Hallow’s Eve has finally arrived. Legends and myths would have us believe the veil between our world and that of the spirit is the thinnest during the witching hour of Halloween.

Also remember daylight savings time ends, so fall back and observe the one-hour time change on Saturday night.

Seances and nighttime visits to cemeteries are popular, if illegal, adventures for Halloween night. It should be noted that graveyards are surrounded by fences to keep things in as well to keep them out.

I’m not sure if the COVID-19 will keep the children from trick-or-treating this year. I’ll be ready with candy, just in case!

When I was in high school, there were a few area AM radio stations that were our favorites. As the 1960s transitioned into the 1970s rock-and-roll eventually morphed into the era of the disco.
We listened to KYNO, KARM and Madera’s own K-HOT radio stations. My mom, QuoVada, enjoyed listening to K-HOT, too.

One day, while listening to disc jockey Ross Thornton, I heard him attempt to call a famous astrologist for an on-air interview.

When he was unsuccessful, my mom called him. In those days the station phone was 674-8888. They broadcast the number to be used for requests, dedications and on air games the channel hosted. She told him she was a local astrologer and if he would provide her with a few vital statistics she would give him a thumbnail sketch of his personality based on his sun sign.

He gave her his birthday and year. During the next segment she did some quick calculations and then presented him with an on-air personality profile.

Thornton enjoyed the experience so much, they worked it into a regular weekend radio show titled “Astro Analysis by Quo Vada!” This intro, with spooky background noises, is still remembered by fans of her show. I often hear it when I meet somebody who was a fan of the show.

Her show consisted of 12 segments where she gave a brief outline of the week ahead based on the monthly Sun signs. One more thing she added to her report, announced the name of a local “celebrity,” whose birth sign was the current month. By celebrity, I mean notable locals like former football coach and then Madera High School Principal Bob Warner.

Gathering the sign suns of notable people was the most difficult part of preparing the scripts for her show. During this time, asking a person “What’s your sign?” served as a classic pickup line. It still is for many cheesy, low rent Lotharios. As a conversation starter, that’s not too bad an opening line.
If the person you are trying to converse with is interested, they might answer with one of the 12 Sun Signs. Other answers might include, “Stop, Yield,” or my personal favorite, “Slippery When Wet!” This response will indicate the level of interest for getting to know the Enquirer.

My gang of girls and I spent a lot of time collecting birthdays and Sun Signs for almost everyone we met. Alluding that my mom might announce their name on the radio helped to increase weekend listenership.

I also got to hang around the K-HOT studios while my mom taped her show. Meeting local radio DJs such as Chuck B. Wesley, future judge Charles Wieland, and of course Ross Thornton was pretty heady stuff for a high school kid.

The down-side of my mom’s new notoriety was the way the local clergy reacted to her show. Raised in the Church of Christ on Central and North B streets, she found the pastor of her church less than pleased when a member of its congregation appeared to be trafficking in the paranormal.

“Things like astrology, numerology and even playing with a Ouija Board is a science to be studied, not a religion to be believed,” she said.

She and a group of like minded friends also had a Theosophy group that met once a week. This group explored various doctrines with a knowledge of God achieved through spiritual ecstasy, direct intuition or special individual relations, especially a movement founded in 1895 by Helen Blavatsky and Henry Steel Olcott 1832 -1907, according to Google.

She also received private requests for more detailed Star Charts from fans of the show. She would chart the position of the planets based on the date, year and the exact time a person was born. Using the ephemeris of position of the heavens at the moment a person was born, she gleaned precise personality traits and a possible glimpse of what life path that person should pursue.

I never knew what these personality profiles contained, as she maintained strict client anonymity.
One of my greatest regrets is that my mother passed from this life before the advent of the personal computer.

Between tracing family trees and her work with astrology, she would have loved the Internet.

Be safe this Halloween, and may you have long days and pleasant nights. Have a great weekend.

• • •

Readers may contact Tami Jo Nix by emailing tamijonix@gmail.com or following @TamiJoNix on Twitter.

Islamic leader says Lalmonirhat lynching goes against religion
Islamic leader says Lalmonirhat lynching goes against religion

The man, Abu Yunus Md Shahidunnabi Jewel, was beaten and burnt to death in public although everyone has the right to trial under the law of the land if he or she commits a crime, Matin said at a protest programme in Dhaka’s Shahbagh on Saturday.

“The burning of a man to death in Lalmonirhat was completely against Islam and humanity. I condemn such an incident,” he said at the programme organised by the Muktijuddho Mancha.     

The leader of the Islamist party believes there were ill-intentions behind the killing of Jewel.

“Islam is a religion of peace. No religion supports violence and killing. An extremist quarter is trying to create anarchy in Bangladesh in the name of religion. Their main target is to tarnish Bangladesh’s image globally,” Matin said. 

The speakers at the programme also demanded punishment to those who spread rumours over religion on social media and at religious gatherings.

A mob killed Jewel and injured another in Lalmonirhat on allegations that he showed disrespect to the Quran at a mosque last Thursday.

Jewel, a resident of Rangpur, is a former student of Dhaka University. Thet father of two lost his job as a school librarian last year. Relatives said he was undergoing treatment for “mental illness”.

FIVE ARRESTED

The police have arrested five people over the killing of Jewel.

“We are conducting an operation to arrest the others,” said Abida Sultana, superintendent of police in the district.

The police, the family of Jewel and Burimari Union Parishad filed three cases with Patgram Police Station over the incident.

The mob also torched Jewel’s motorcycle and the UP office, where the local UP member Hafizul Islam took Jewel and the injured, Sultan Zubayer Abbas, to save them from the angry locals.

Sumon Kumar Mohanta, the OC of Patgram Police Station, rescued Abbas and fled the Burimari Union Parishad office through the rooftop, locals said.

The mob stormed the office and dragged Jewel out before beating and burning him to death on the Lalmonirhat-Burimari Highway near Burimari Land Port.

UP Chairman Abu Sayeed Newaz Nishat said the union council decided to take action after watching videos of the incident.

Additional District Magistrate TMA Momin is leading a three-strong committee formed the district administration to investigate the incident. Md Rabiul Islam, additional superintendent of police in the district, and Patgram Upazila Executive Officer Kamrun Nahar are members of the committee.

Rabiul said the police did arrive at the scene but could not take control of the situation. As many as 10 policemen were injured, he said.

Macron gets a request from NGOs around the world to have his anti-separatism bill reviewed by Venice Commission
Macron gets a request from NGOs around the world to have his anti-separatism bill reviewed by Venice Commission

On October 28, a letter has been sent to Emmanuel Macron, President of the French Republic, asking for review of the future French “law on separatism” by the Venice Commission and the Office for Office for Democratic Institutions and Human Rights of the OSCE.

The letter was signed by several NGOs and individuals from all over the world, including the well-known Ligue des Droits de l’Homme, after it had been circulated by the Freedom of Religion or Belief Roundtable Brussels-EU, an informal group of individuals and organizations from civil society who gather regularly to discuss FoRB (Freedom of Religion or Belief ) issues. Writers raise several concerns about the law after the announcements made by Macron and members of his government.

See full letter here:

To:Mr Emmanuel Macron

President of the French Republic

Brussels, the 28th October 2020

Copies to:

  • Kishan Manocha, Head, Tolerance and Non-Discrimination Department, OSCE Office for Democratic Institutions and Human Rights
  • Ahmed Shaheed, UN Special Rapporteur on Freedom of Religion or Belief
  • Mr Gianni Buquicchio, President of the Venice Commission
  • Mr Eric Dupont-Moretti, French Minister of Justice

Re: The announcements on the “Law on separatism”

Dear Mr President,

We write as an informal group of organizations and individuals who are scholars, religious leaders and human rights advocates. We are from many faiths or acting in a secular capacity, representing a high degree of diversity. While there is very little we agree on theologically, or politically, we all agree on the importance of religious freedom for all faiths and none.

We write to you following the announcements that you and members of your government have made regarding the bill on “separatism” that you plan to approve in the Council of Ministers meeting on December 9. While no draft of the bill has yet been circulated, to our knowledge, we have some concerns which have been highlighted by the announcements that have been made.

We acknowledge the cautious approach that you have taken during your official speech. We have noted your insistence on the fact that you are targeting radical Islam, and not Muslims, as well as the fact that you intend to respect freedom of religion or belief. We agree that terrorism is a real issue that needs to be tackled and that a strong response needs to be taken with regards to the dangers that are posed to the French Republic, and we deeply share the traumatisms that result from the recent tragic terrorist events which hit France.

Nevertheless, we are concerned that some of the proposals may lead to the opposite of what you intend. Furthermore, taking into account the statements made by members of your government after your speech, those statements reinforce the conviction that the measures being proposed will violate France’s international commitments towards freedom of religion or belief.

For example, you announced that you plan to ban home-schooling in order to protect children from illegal schools “often administered by religious extremists”. While we understand that these schools pose a threat, a global ban on home-schooling will affect the majority of parents that for many different reasons are using this freedom with satisfying results, regardless of their faith, or none. There is certainly sufficient provision in French law to organize controls and make sure that the children are effectively educated according to established educational programmes.

The “general concept” of the law was unveiled by your Minister of Interior, Gérald Darmanin, on Twitter. It explained that places of worship will be placed under increasing surveillance and “preserved […] from the diffusion of ideas and statements hostile to the laws of the Republic.” However, how will that apply to a priest or pastor criticizing abortion or same-sex marriage, which are part of the laws of the French Republic. What action will be taken against others who may speak out against certain “laws of the Republic” that penalize the poor and the immigrants? Or even if they criticize a law against blasphemy, as it existed still recently for Alsace-Moselle in France? Is anyone now criticising the law an enemy of the state?

Another announced provision that poses a problem is your statement and that of the Minister of Interior, where it is said that the law will allow religious and other associations to be dissolved directly by the Council of Ministers in the case of  an “affront on personal dignity” and “use of psychological or physical pressures.” These concepts are vague enough to allow the arbitrary targeting of groups that are acting quite legally and without any violent intent but are in ‘disfavour’ by the administrating body. Furthermore there is no guarantee of judicial process or oversight. 

The Minister of Citizenship, Marlène Schiappa, also stated in an interview that, “We will use the same measures against the cults and against radical Islam.” This shows that there is already a clear intent to deviate from the fight against terrorism and enter the realm of prohibiting religious associations on the basis that they do not please someone, simply because they are categorised as “cults” (sectes, in French). 

Legislation aimed at terrorism is not surprising. It is a challenge that many countries face. However, States that have chosen to draft laws with such vague concepts as those cited above are States that have totalitarian tendencies (or are in fact totalitarian). Russia, for example, has passed an anti-extremism law that is now used to prosecute and jail political dissidents as well as members of peaceful religious movements such as the Jehovah Witnesses or followers of Said Nursi on the basis of their definition of “extremism”. 

When the Venice Commission gave its opinion on law of the Russian Federation on Combatting Extremist Activity, adopted at its 91st Plenary Session, it stated: 

7.  The broad interpretation of the notion of ‘extremism’ by the enforcement authorities, the increasing application of the Law in recent years and the pressure it exerts on various circles within civil society, as well as alleged human rights violations reported in this connection have raised concerns and drawn criticism both in Russia and on the international level

(…)

28.  The only definition of ‘extremism’ contained in an international treaty binding on the Russian Federation is to be found in the Shanghai Convention [on Combating Terrorism, Separatism and Extremism of 15 June 2001, ratified by Russia on 10 January 2003]. In Article 1.1.1.3) of the Extremism Law, ‘extremism’ is defined as ‘an act aimed at seizing or keeping power through the use of violence or changing violently the constitutional regime of a State, as well as a violent encroachment upon public security, including organization, for the above purposes, of illegal armed formations and participation in them, criminally prosecuted in conformity with the national laws of the Parties’. The latter clause allows signatory states to prosecute such ‘extremist’ actions according to their national laws.

It made clear that the only definitions of ‘terrorism’ and ‘separatism’ that could be used to take action against individuals or organizations require that violence is an essential element (incitement to, or encouragement of, violence or actual violence). 

The European Court of Human Rights has already applied this approach to Russia, regarding a case that involved the prosecution of followers of Said Nursi accused of extremist activities, in IBRAGIM IBRAGIMOV AND OTHERS v. RUSSIA, which became a final judgment on April 2, 2019.

The UN Special Rapporteur on Freedom of Religion of Belief, in the unedited version of his last report on the Elimination of all Forms of Religious Intolerance (October 12, 2020), stated: 

17.    A concerning number of mandate communications highlight the use of inchoate terrorist offenses that are disproportionately applied to religious or belief minorities. Harassment measures broadly linked to countering terrorism and protecting national security illustrate that in almost every region of the world religious minorities appear to be at particular risk of being designated “terrorist groups” and of having members arrested under “extremism” or “illegal activity” charges. A number of communications addressed the use of national security imperatives as the stated objective by some governments in criminalizing membership in and/or activities of certain religious or belief groups.  Such an approach amounts to targeting, and ultimately criminalizing, the peaceful expression of a person’s identity. 

19.    Numerous State authorities have arrested, detained (sometimes incommunicado) and sentenced members of religious and belief minorities for undefined charges such as intent to ‘disturb political, economic or social structures’ , to ‘disrupt state sovereignty’   or to  ‘overthrow the Government’.  Such vague provisions fail to fulfil the principle of legality as enshrined in article 15 of ICCPR and give worrying leeway to States to arbitrarily limit the exercise of freedom of religion or belief of certain groups.

The OSCE Office for Democratic Institutions and Human Rights (ODIHR) recently released a new document called “Freedom of Religion or Belief and Security: Policy Guidance”. It states in its introduction: 

While OSCE participating States have adopted different strategies to ensure that their own security measures are fully compliant with their international obligations and commitments pertaining to freedom of religion or belief, certain laws, security policies and practices have placed freedom of religion or belief and other universal human rights under significant pressure. Such measures, especially those that are very broad or applied arbitrarily, are often enacted in the name of “national”, “state” or “public” security, or in the interests of preserving or maintaining “peaceful coexistence”, “social stability” or “social harmony”. Experience shows that such limitations can worsen rather than improve security.

There are many more international human rights documents that deal with this delicate issue, but for reasons of brevity we are unable to carry out a full review in this letter.

We are at your disposal to meet and discuss this issue further. In any case, we respectfully but strongly recommend that you submit to both the Venice Commission and ODIHR the draft of the law when it is ready, in order to get considered international legal expertise as to how the law meets established human rights principles. 

We feel that there is a real risk that contrary to your intention, the proposed measures that have been announced will lead to the targeting of Muslims in general as well as other minority faiths, and that it may well lead to a series of human rights violations.

Respectfully yours,

Organizations

Advocates International, Advocates France, All Faiths Network, CAP Freedom of Conscience, CESNUR – Center for Studies on New Religions, EIFRF – European Interreligious Forum for Religious Freedom, FOREF – Forum for Religious Freedom Europe, HRWF – Human Rights Without Frontiers, International Christian Concern, Law and Liberty International, LDH – Ligue des Droits de l’Homme, LIREC – Center for Studies on Freedom of Religion, Belief and Conscience, ORLIR – International Observatory of Religious Liberty of Refugees, United Sikhs, UPF The Netherlands

Individuals

  • Régis Dericquebourg, Président, Observatoire Européen des Religions et de la Laïcité
  • Michael P. Donnelly, J.D., LL.M., Senior Counsel, Global Outreach
  • The Most Reverend Joseph K. Grieboski, Senior Fellow, The Dietrich Bonhoeffer Institute
  • Rimon Kasher, Prof. Emeritus of Biblical Studies, Bar-Ilan University, Ramat-Gan, Israel
  • Nancy Lefèvre, Chairwoman, Advocates France
  • Brent McBurney, President & CEO, Advocate International
  • Kareem P.A. McDonald, Program Associate, Religious Freedom Institute
  • Greg Mitchell, Chair, International Religious Freedom Roundtable 
  • Scott Morgan, President, Red Eagle Enterprise
  • Matias Perttula, Director of Advocacy, International Christian Concern
  • Malik Salemkour, President, Ligue des droits de l’Homme (LDH)
  • Frans de Wolff, Secretary, Dutch Network for Interfaith Dialogue

[you can read more about the initiative at https://www.forbroundtable.org/post/letter-in-support-of-having-the-french-anti-separatism-bill-reviewed-by-the-venice-commission]

Bill Maher Pans Amy Coney Barrett’s Religion: ‘I Believe The Spanish Inquisition Had Fine People On Both Sides’
Bill Maher Pans Amy Coney Barrett’s Religion: ‘I Believe The Spanish Inquisition Had Fine People On Both Sides’

HBO host Bill Maher panned Justice Amy Coney Barrett’s religion during a Friday night segment on “Real Time with Bill Maher.”

Maher made the jokes about Barrett, who is Catholic, during a segment titled “24 Things You Don’t Know.”

“She is making it almost a completely Catholic court,” Maher told his guests before diving into the segment. “And she’s not just Catholic, she’s a Mel Gibson’s dad Catholic … This is a court that looks like ‘The Da Vinci Code’ now.”

WATCH:

Maher’s jokes included:

When my family plays Scrabble, we take out the letters l, g, b, t, and q.

I won’t eat Chinese food because fortune cookies look like vaginas.

When I’m stressed out I’ll eat a whole box of Eucharist.

I’m a classically trained liar.

My volleyball team was 10 and 3 against the other cults in our division.

I believe the Spanish Inquisition had fine people on both sides.

Barrett was confirmed Monday night by a 52-48 mostly partisan-line vote and immediately sworn in during a White House ceremony by Justice Clarence Thomas, who is also Catholic. (RELATED: Girl Scouts Delete Tweets Congratulating Amy Coney Barrett)

Currently, six of the nine Supreme Court justices are Roman Catholic. Stephen Breyer and Elena Kagan are Jewish, while Neil Gorsuch is Episcopalian.

How family and religion influence young adult political views
How family and religion influence young adult political views

Editor’s note: As the Nov. 3 election draws near, the Daily Universe is exploring different national and local issues impacting voters in a series of stories.

Students and faculty at BYU say that family and religion heavily influence their political opinions and how they vote. (Photo illustration by Whitney Bigelow)

Editor’s note: All BYU students interviewed for this story are members of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.

Many people have started talking about their political beliefs with the 2020 presidential election just around the corner, but where do their political beliefs come from? Religion and family are two things that BYU students and faculty say have an influence on their political beliefs.

The large majority of BYU students are members of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. According to Pew Research Center, in 2014 most members of the Church were Republican or leaned conservative, but there were some Democrats and some who didn’t have a political affiliation.

Family influence

Jeremy Pope, a BYU political science professor, said family influence plays a big part in people’s political beliefs.

“The most obvious example is that people’s partisanship is clearly very much an inherited legacy from parents,” Pope said. “It is not the case that parental partisanship is perfectly determinative, but it is the case that parents matter a lot.”  

Political science professor Lisa Argyle said family influence has a huge role in political opinions. “Political science research shows that families are typically the ‘starting point’ for someone’s political views,” she said. “Then, friends, communities, political events and other life experiences can shift people from that starting point, especially in the young adult years.”

Argyle said people’s views are most likely to stay close to their parents’ views if their parents talked about politics in their home growing up.

BYU student Tayler Ventura said she believes her family has had an influence on her political beliefs, “probably in the sense that I have pretty politically active and aware parents.” Ventura and her mom consistently discuss politics, and she said her family has pretty similar views on issues and candidates.

Religious influence

Argyle said the relationship between religion and politics is a complicated one. “Some research shows that people actually choose their religious congregations based on their politics,” Argyle said. “Other research shows that it’s not necessarily the religious doctrine that matters for political views, but our social connection to other people in the congregation. If the congregation is overwhelmingly liberal or conservative, then regular association with those people can have an impact on someone’s political views.”

Olivia Neeley, a BYU student from Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, considers herself a liberal in the Democratic Party. She said her religion has taught her that love is one of the most important things in the world, along with free agency.

“I personally feel as though religion preaches these things but adds in ‘ifs’ and ‘buts,’ and I felt that some people in religion believed them,” she said. “Religion has played a part in forming my views and has played a larger part in me being more active in politics and sharing my views.”

BYU student Megan Jensen considers herself a part of the Republican party and leans libertarian. She said she thinks religion has greatly influenced her political views. “Freedom of religion is very important to me,” she said. “I also sometimes feel my religious values bleed into my political views. However, often it is more opinion-based than religious.” 

Hans Lehnardt, a BYU student who grew up in Salt Lake City, also said he believes his faith has played a role in his political opinion. Right now, Lehnardt doesn’t identify with a political party but plans to vote for Democratic candidates in this year’s election.

“I think there are things in both parties that the church lines up with, but I think there’s a lot more in the Democratic Party,” Lehnardt said. “Democrats are more about helping the poor and the needy and helping refugees and allowing immigrants to come in.”

Lehnardt said the Church has given statements saying we should welcome immigrants and refugees. “That’s something Donald Trump doesn’t love,” he said.

BYU student Nathan Hansen from Bartlesville, Oklahoma identifies as a political conservative and said he believes the Church’s teachings on personal accountability have influenced his political views.

Other impacts

Argyle and Pope agreed that sometimes when people leave their parents’ house they change their political beliefs, but it’s not very common.

“Education can have a liberalizing effect on people’s political attitudes,” Argyle said. “However, this impact is not enough for most people to completely change parties from what they grew up with.”

Pope said when it does happen, it occurs during the college years when people are exposed to new ideas and new ways of thinking. “After that point, partisan identity is relatively set, but can change in response to major life changes or massive public events.”

Neeley, a Democrat, grew up in a household where conservative views were pushed, but she never really agreed with her parents’ views. “I learned more and did more research and just listened to what I thought was right and am definitely a person with liberal views,” she said.

When she moved out of her parents’ house, Neely said she became even more liberal and more comfortable in her mindset and began really being active in politics.

On the flip side, Hansen said when he moved out of his parent’s conservative household his views became even more conservative as he’s had his own experiences. 

Political science professor Kelly Patterson agrees that it can happen but usually doesn’t. “You don’t change your partisanship while you’re in college, you simply bring your partisanship with you to college,” he said.

In Lombardy, Volunteer Ministers of the Church of Scientology Brescia Continue Their Community Outreach
In Lombardy, Volunteer Ministers of the Church of Scientology Brescia Continue Their Community Outreach

In Lombardy, Volunteer Ministers of the Church of Scientology Brescia Continue Their Community Outreach – Religion News Today – EIN Presswire

Trusted News Since 1995

A service for religion professionals
·
Friday, October 30, 2020

·
529,645,655
Articles


·
3+ Million Readers

News Monitoring and Press Release Distribution Tools

News Topics

Newsletters

Press Releases

Events & Conferences

RSS Feeds

Other Services

Questions?

Local View: In pandemic, even religion, politics can be discussed — but not the Great Pumpkin
Local View: In pandemic, even religion, politics can be discussed — but not the Great Pumpkin

While such topic avoidance was common practice before the worldwide coronavirus pandemic, the recent corresponding massive social upheavals have now forced the subjects of religion and politics to fuse together in most of our public discussions. But we no longer discuss issues like racism, social inequality, crime, police policies, law and order, or protests in an open and frank manner. Instead we put an absolutist religious framework on our civil life. We have divided all of our politics into “good” and “evil,” “right” or “wrong,” “blessed” and “damned.”

There is no middle ground anymore.

The gloves are off, and the battle for righteousness has begun. If one of our family members or friends or neighbors shows the slightest disagreement with our political position, we are all over them. In social media, for example, many, many people have stated most clearly that support for a candidate or movement they disagree with will result in a blocking or banning of the offender: “I cannot believe you support that insane candidate. They want to destroy our country! You are no longer my friend or a member of my family.”

Elections are about leadership and direction, not absolute truth or destiny. But the pandemic has increased political and religious fanaticism amongst even the most rational of us. They take their favorite candidate and give them divine right while their opponent is impugned with the characteristics of Satan. The new norm among all pandemic politicians is: “If you are not with us, you are against us.”

If the pandemic has shown nothing else, it has shown how closely intertwined our destinies are with one another. Each of us is a traveler on the same small ship. What norms should we follow to make our collective journey manageable?

On Feb. 15, 1840, The Corsair: A Gazette of Literature, Art, Dramatic Criticism, Fashion, and Novelty in New York published a letter by John Stager, who suggested 18 maxims to follow when on a steamer voyage. Number 12 was: “Never discuss religion or politics with those who hold opinions opposite to yours; they are subjects that heat in handling until they burn your fingers.”

I believe John Stager had it right over 180 years ago. We know the folks who hold opposite opinions. Why purposely go out of our way to engage them and burn our fingers?

That being said, I do agree that we should discuss sensitive social justice issues — and we have not been discussing them. Given our divisions, we are screaming at each other instead, at the top of our lungs, talking way past one another.

We need to come back to the dinner table for polite and meaningful conversation, understanding social equality is possible, change is possible, and a more equitable world is possible. But these possibilities can only be realized if we can talk in a peaceful, respectful, and reasonable manner with our family, friends, and neighbors. Each conversation is an opportunity to improve ourselves and our society.

We must step back and try to recreate a norm of civility and even levity.

My fellow native Minnesotan, cartoonist Charles Schulz, was right to infuse humor into the old adage when he had Linus state in both a 1961 “Peanuts” comic strip and in the 1966 classic animated “It’s the Great Pumpkin, Charlie Brown,” that, “There are three things I have learned not to discuss with people: religion, politics, and the Great Pumpkin.”

Happy Halloween and happy Election Day, everyone!

Dave Berger of Plymouth, Minnesota, is a retired sociology professor who taught for nearly three decades at Inver Hills Community College. He wrote this for the News Tribune.

Michael Gove accuses the EU of trying to ‘tie our hands indefinitely’
Michael Gove accuses the EU of trying to ‘tie our hands indefinitely’

Michael Gove today told Michel Barnier ‘the ball is in your court’ if the European Union wants trade talks with the UK to resume as he said the bloc had given Britain ‘no choice’ but to step up its preparations for a no deal split. 

The Minister for the Cabinet Office said Brussels had shown in recent weeks it was ‘not serious’ about striking a deal because it had failed to compromise on key issues. 

He said he still hoped a deal could be done in the coming weeks but stressed that for the UK to consider going back to the negotiating table the EU will have to drastically overhaul its approach.

He borrowed a term from Star Trek as he said the EU was trying to ‘keep us in their tractor beam’ and suggested Brussels had broken its word by failing to agree to a Canada-style free trade agreement. 

His intervention came after Boris Johnson warned businesses to prepare for leaving the bloc without a trade deal when the standstill post-Brexit transition period ends in December after EU leaders refused to bow to his negotiating deadline.      

Michael Gove today said the UK had ‘no choice’ but to prepare for leaving the EU without a trade deal

Mr Gove said the ‘ball is in his court’ as he was asked whether formal trade talks with Michel Barnier could resume 

Mr Johnson had set a European Council meeting last Thursday as the deadline for agreeing the broad outline of a trade agreement. 

But the two sides remain deadlocked in a number of crunch areas, including on post-Brexit fishing rights with French President Emmanuel Macron adamant he will not drop his hardline stance on keeping current levels of access to British waters. 

The summit saw EU leaders agree to talks continuing but they gave no ground and said it was for the UK to make the next move, prompting a furious response from Mr Johnson who said Britain would now step up its preparations for a no deal divorce. 

The UK has made clear it is willing to restart trade discussions but only if the EU completely changes its negotiating stance, with the two sides now locked in a high stakes game of brinkmanship. 

Mr Barnier, the EU’s chief negotiator, had been due to come to London next week but those talks have now been cancelled. 

Mr Gove told Sky News: ‘Well, the ball is in his court. We have made clear that we need to see a change in approach from the European Union.

‘I know that he will be calling David Frost over the course of the next few days. Let’s see if the European Union appreciate the importance of reaching a deal and the importance of moving ground.’

Mr Gove had previously estimated there was a 66 per cent chance of a trade deal being agreed with the EU. 

Asked what his new estimation was, he replied: ‘Less. I think it is less but I can’t be precise. One of the reasons why it is less is the position that has been taken in the last couple of weeks by European Union leaders.

‘What we have seen and what our negotiators have found is the European Union side have not been willing to produce the detailed legal text, they have not been willing to intensify the talks in a way that would indicate that they were actually serious about reaching an agreement.

‘At the same time they have also insisted both that we accept a level of control over our autonomy that an independent country can’t really accept and at the same time they are saying they should continue to have exactly the same access to for example our fishing waters and our fishing stocks as before and so that seems to me to be the behaviour of an organisation and an institution that is not serious about making the compromises necessary to secure a deal. I still hope we will get a deal though.’  

Writing in The Sunday Times, Mr Gove had said: ‘Unless the EU makes a fundamental change, we’ll leave on Australian-style terms trading on WTO rules.

‘It is not my preferred destination, and there will be turbulence en route. 

‘I am not blasé about the challenges, but if the choice is between arrangements that tie our hands indefinitely, or where we can shape our own future, then that’s no choice at all.’ 

Australia has no comprehensive trade deal with the EU and it also does far less business with Brussels than the UK. 

A no deal split would see the EU impose tariffs on UK goods, with business groups warning this would damage British firms at a time when they can least afford it because of the coronavirus crisis.  

Mr Gove, who has long warned against a no deal split, said the UK will be ‘flexing every muscle to be match fit for January 1’ and that the Government will not be ‘squeezed or sandbagged into acquiescing to anyone else’s agenda’. 

He suggested the EU had broken its word by failing to offer the UK a Canada-style agreement. 

‘The terms on which Canada and the EU waive tariffs on each other’s goods is all we seek,’ he said. 

Emmanuel Macron has stuck to his hardline stance on post-Brexit fishing rights – one of the crunch areas where talks remain deadlocked

‘That’s what the EU said it would offer us but at the eleventh hour it seems the bloc won’t take yes for an answer.’

He added: ‘The EU wants to keep us in their tractor beam. It’s independent life, Jim, but not as we know it.’ 

Mr Gove’s intervention comes after Government sources claimed the EU had treated trade talks more like ‘performance art’ than serious negotiations. 

In a blistering attack, insiders accused EU negotiators led by Mr Barnier of using the meetings to ‘shore up their domestic position’ – with particular criticism levelled at French President Emmanuel Macron.

‘There are signs that EU leaders, worried about the prospect of populist politicians such as Marine Le Pen, have decided that they would put domestic politics ahead of agreeing a free-trade agreement with the UK,’ said one source close to the talks. 

The Government is today launching a public information campaign to encourage businesses to prepare for Britain’s departure on January 1. 

A TV advert with the slogan ‘Time is running out’ will air tonight on ITV.

Vatican Museums: everything is connected #3 – Vatican News
Vatican Museums: everything is connected #3 – Vatican News

Mermaid Fountain, Rose Garden, Vatican Gardens, photo by Nik Barlo jr © Musei Vaticani

 


©MuseiVaticani

“The Creator does not abandon us;

He never forsakes His loving plan or repents of having created us.

Humanity still has the ability to work together

in building our common home.”

(Pope Francis, Laudato si’, 13

Under the direction of Paolo Ondarza
#SeasonOfCreation
Instagram: @vaticanmuseums @VaticanNews
Facebook: @vaticannews