Christianity revisited

I was rather taken by surprise at the three-quarter point when I read Lord Black’s column. I say at the three-quarter point because Black’s analysis regarding in particular the House of Commons private member’s motion 103 contained many truths.

My area of expertise does not lie in the areas of demographics or statistical analysis. However, to state that “for all its historical failings, (Christianity) has a much less violent history” is categorically false. Christendom is filled with blood-curdling violence.

Has Black bypassed the Inquisition, Crusades, Wars of Religion, the subjugation of women, and the Holocaust?

There have been warrior popes, and just to highlight a little, justification for the slaughter of Jews and black slavery all rationalized in the name of Christianity.

Christian Europe had been responsible for a cataclysm of unbridled violence, ruin and devastation.

What the Jews suffered under Islamic sovereignty in the past and currently does not compare to the murderous onslaught they, the Jews, endured under the Greeks, Romans and Christian Europe. challenges and often graduate with an enormous debt load they will carry for years.

Prime Minister Trudeau often talks about attracting the “best and brightest” from elsewhere, but too often Canada’s best and brightest are left at the campus gates, looking in. Isn’t it odd that while diversity is a virtue in Canada, divergence is not, especially when divergence springs forth at a Conservative gathering?

It has long been recognized that Conservatives cannot be herded like cats, and that metaphor endures. Communism worked on the principle that people were all the same, and that general or universal rules could easily established as to how a people could and should behave.

Modern political parties of the left are more likely to argue for general principle that apply to all people — and all things for that matter. Such principles might be watered down for a postCommunist world, but “root causality” is still eulogized.

Conservatives are not only more individualistic, they are forced to recognize the complexity of the real world, and see political solutions as multi-faceted, rather than confined to a few alleged “universalistic” principles.

Though such principles might work for a time, they can fail to account for all needs, all contingencies, all change, all attitudes, all ambitions, and all possible worlds.

While the Conservatives may seem conflicted, they are probably more in tune with reality, than the bland, the bleached and the blended.