Lawyers discuss freedom of religion

By JEFF GRAHAM

There probably aren't too many lawyers' boardrooms in downtown Vancouver where Jesus Christ and fidelity to His Church becomes the main topic of conversation, but about 30 lawyers from across the city were eager to learn about how they could apply their faith in more effective ways.

Jeff Graham / The B.C. Catholic Speaking to the Catholic Lawyers Guild about the place of faith in public life, Iain Benson (right) reminded the group that even atheism and non-belief should be considered belief systems too.

"Every community is a community of believers; it's just a matter of what that community chooses to believe," said Iain Benson, executive director of the Centre for Cultural Renewal. Beliefs, and how governments and societies deal with them, constituted the major part of Benson's talk for the Catholic Lawyer's Guild, which meets to discuss faith and its place in the professional life of a lawyer.

The group, which invited Benson to speak May 31 at Guild, Yule and Company, chose the topic of Dealing with Legitimate Disagreements in a Pluralistic Society: Is Freedom of Religion a Subordinate Right?

In his address, Benson pointed out that Canada is increasingly enforcing an ethic of non-belief and exclusion of religion from public life and politics. He stressed that non-belief, and the exclusion of religion from public discourse, are ideas which carry important implications.

"We need constantly to refer the courts toward inclusion of religious beliefs, because atheism and non-belief are beliefs in themselves," said Benson, exhorting the group to continually bring issues relating to the exclusion of religion from politics continually before the government.

"It's like water dripping on a stone; these arguments need to be brought forth continually until they catch on."

Benson also pointed out that Canada is increasingly leaning toward enforcing policies that work toward a homogenous belief system. He elaborated by saying there are two main streams of liberal thought, one which promotes a system which recognizes differences and finds a way to work within those differences, and another stream which proposes that members of society should work toward a set of agreed-upon beliefs.

Marriage issues not really about rights

Because there are many issues that Canadians are deeply divided on, Benson explained, it is problematic for government to take it upon itself to ask their citizens to come to universal agreement.

For instance, he said the laws and discourse surrounding so-called "same sex marriage" provide examples of how the Canadian government has tried to bring about consensus, but wrongly legitimized one belief system over another through legislation. He thinks that with such an issue it would be virtually impossible for everyone to come to a consensus, and therefore the government should not take it upon itself to choose one set of beliefs over another.

He said he also thinks that these issues related to marriage have more to do with social recognition than with rights and definitions.

"What would have been better would have been for the government to get out of the business of marriage all together," he said. "The government should not relegate spousal benefits to a category that is necessarily based on sexual conduct. Leave it for the associations to do the marriages, but the state to administer the benefits."

Benson pointed out that in the marriage discourse the public was often told that by not accepting the legitimacy of same-sex couples they disrespect the equality and dignity of people who wish to engage in a gay or lesbian lifestyle. Benson said that line of logic is flawed, and that citizens should have the right to disagree with issues like sexual conduct, and that sexual conduct should not be linked to civil rights or benefits administration.

"One can reject Catholicism as absurd but still accord a Catholic person respect. So why can't we be that way toward people who consider themselves gay or lesbian?"

"Some people have the idea that we'll all eventually agree on the `same-sex marriage' question and that the courts and politics will lead us that way," he continued. "That's not really a valid idea, and I think the only way we could ever agree is if we were forced to agree."

For more information about the Catholic Lawyer's Guild, or notices of meetings, contact Bruno de Vita at 604-484-1700, bdevita@ahbl.ca; or Lauri Ann Fenlon at 604-631-3118, lfenlon@van.fasken.com.