Barrie, Ontario, Canada
\n22 February, 2002<\/p>\n
Continuing attempts to\u00a0suppress the freedom of conscience of health care workers like Dr. Stephen Dawson (“Doctor\u2019s Faith Under Scrutiny,” The\u00a0Barrie Examiner<\/em> February 21, 2002) give the lie to the claim, oft\u00a0repeated by Canadian politicians, that protection of conscience\u00a0legislation is unnecessary. Perhaps their complacent attitude reflects\u00a0the influence of rigid party discipline that only rarely permits them\u00a0\u00a0the \u2018privilege\u2019 of voting according to conscience.<\/p>\n Professor J.R. Brown of the University of Toronto appears to covet the role of party whip, ready\u00a0to lash or to exile recalcitrant \u2018scum\u2019 like Dr. Dawson for daring\u00a0to let their beliefs affect their public behaviour.<\/p>\n Yet Professor Brown\u2019s\u00a0private beliefs affected his<\/em> public behaviour when he asserted\u00a0that people like Dr. Dawson should “find another job.” Will Professor Brown take his own advice? Or will he continue to speak, act\u00a0and live in accordance with his own beliefs, even as he denies the\u00a0same freedom to others who think differently – those whom he characterizes as \u2018scum\u2019?<\/p>\n Thoughtful readers will\u00a0recognize that their relationships and their political and social\u00a0activities are almost always governed, not by an analysis of empirical evidence, but by deeply held convictions about human dignity and\u00a0equality, about good and evil, and other equally fundamental concepts. Some of these beliefs may be religious, others not, but all are\u00a0beliefs. There is no reason, apart from anti-religious bigotry, to\u00a0allow only atheists and agnostics the freedom to act on their beliefs\u00a0in public life.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"