The Globe panics! Wants Christians out of politics!

The Globe & Mail could take it no longer. On May 27, 2005, it launched a direct offensive against the Canadian "right" for meddling in politics. How dare these Christians! "Christian activists capturing Tory races," its front-page story by Gloria Galloway shouted in bold headlines. "Some in party worry new riding nominees will re-enforce notion of 'hidden agenda'," the subtitle asserted.

Gloria Galloway

What "hidden" agenda? Who among the Conservatives were worrying? Galloway and the Globe did not say. No names were given, except that of a Conservative candidate in Nova Scotia who was defeated in his riding's nomination meeting. Was it the Conservatives who were worried, or was it the Globe & Mail?

"Christian activists have secured Conservative nominations in clusters of ridings from Vancouver to Halifax," the opening paragraph read, "a political penetration that has occurred even as the party tries to distance itself from hard-line social conservatism." In between detailing the ridings where this was happening, Galloway sprinkled the ideological seeds: "unhappy" Conservatives; "hardline" social conservatives; a "large" number of candidates from the "religious right"; the Conservative party "harbouring" a "hidden agenda"; "single-issue voters who oppose same-sex "marriage"; the party a "harbour" for "religious zealots."

While readers would forget the details about the ridings, they would absorb what counted: "hardline" religious right; "hidden agenda"; single-issue "people;" "religious zealots," all implying a true threat to Canadian democracy.

Jeffrey Simpson 

Globe columnist Jeffrey Simpson also contributed in the same vein in the same edition with, "Why Stephen Harper is going to lose more sleep" (May 27, A19). Embroidering the front page story, he refined a few details about how some candidates were now less open about their Christian roots. Wrote Simpson, "Their candidates pose a difficult political challenge for Stephen Harper." Did Harper say this? No, it was Simpson who said so: "Little could be more politically lethal for the party's chances of forming a national government than the perception that religious conservatives have a disproportionate influence."

What did Simpson mean by disproportionate? Again, he did not say, but for the Globe & Mail, and writers Gloria Galloway and Jeffrey Simpson, any influence from "religious conservatives" seems too much. Still, in her article, Galloway did quote Conservative MP John Reynolds, who explained to her that Canada is a democracy, something she, Simpson, and the Globe seem not to have been aware of. Moreover, Reynolds said, if those who write about Christian zealots taking over the party were to "insert the word Jew everywhere you've put Christian, do you think they would let you print it? I doubt it."

Galloway was back three days later, on May 30, with an article entitled, "Single issue candidates on wrong track, Tories warn." In that piece, she picked out defeated Conservative Ontario party leadership candidate Tony Clement, now a candidate for the federal Tories, as a Tory spokesman, together with MP Gerald Keddy, a pro-same-sex "marriage" Conservative intolerant of any other views, and Hugh Segal. Clement emphasized that the Conservative policy convention "made it very clear as a party that we are not pursuing any restriction of the rights of women when it comes to abortion." According to Galloway, Clement claimed that Conservative candidates therefore have to "sign on to 100% of our platform issues, then they have the right to run."

Clement seemed to have forgotten that the March 2005 vote on abortion among the delegates at the Conservative meeting in Montreal was quite close (55 to 45%) and, in its majority, almost certainly not reflective of the rank and file. Moreover, individual MPs are free: (a) to introduce their own bills and (b) to convince the party to fight abortion. At any rate, he demurred in a letter to the editor of the Globe (May 31), stating categorically that he had not met one person who could be described as "a single issue" candidate. "We do not want to add to our list of problems an intolerance of political aspirants who also happen to wear the cross," he concluded.

Galloway also quoted Hugh Segal, a Jewish "eminence grise," a Red Tory, and a former leadership candidate for the defunct Progressive Conservative party. He was quoted as saying that people of faith will have "no negative effects, as long as the organization's policy remains balanced." Of course, one man's "balance" may be somebody else's imbalance.

Negative reaction

Reaction to the first Globe article from "people of faith" was swift. The May 28 edition of the paper carried a letter from Richard Scott of Mississauga, who observed that the Globe "is going out of its way to render Christianity or other religious systems in a very negative light." J. Gosnell, of East Gwillimbury, ON., questioned whether the Globe would "feel so free to report how many Muslims, Sikhs, and Hindus are 'infiltrating' politics," while Joan Forsey of Toronto sarcastically asked, "What's this world coming to? Imagine. Practising Christians running for public office!" Betty Douglas of Ladysmith, B.C., reminded the Globe that "Democracy is about giving people the freedom to choose," and Annette Hill of Charlie Lake, B.C., asked for "a little balance."

The Globe snidely accompanied the day's letters with a cartoon of Stephen Harper sporting a splinter, in the shape of a cross, impaled on his index finger.

By May 30, even the Globe realized it had opened a Pandora's box: it was being accused of discrimination, false insinuations, zealotry, and smear politics, the very same things it had so blithely attributed to the "religious right." The paper attempted to water down the wine a little, as it were, by publishing the editorial, "Candidates who wear religion on their sleeves." It now suggested "there's nothing sinister" about candidates who have links to Christian lobby groups securing Conservative nominations. But how much more decent, it went on, were the Catholic Jean Chretien and Paul Martin and their followers who had adjusted "the conflicting demands of Catholicism" with their roles as public servants of the people. The Globe added, "It would not be in the (Conservative) party's interest to be seen as an evangelical Christian party."

Needless to say, the Globe's articles had not gone unnoticed. Some, such as Jim Meek, a freelance journalist writing in the Halifax Herald, supported the Globe (28 May). He remarked that Christian "fundamentalists" are running a narrow, faith-based campaign "undermining Mr. Harper's attempt to portray the party as 'moderate.'" He called the "tolerant centre" of Canadian politics both "a moving target and the power hub."

The Toronto Star, which shares the Globe's secular intolerance, also took up the same cry on May 30 with the headline, "Tory image in peril, some fear. Moderates worry 'special interests are gaining clout.'" The article by Sean Gordon was also reprinted in Metro, the Toronto Star's freebie on the Toronto subway.

On the other hand, the National Post took umbrage at the assault by the Globe. On May 30, Charles Adler, a Jewish radio host in Winnipeg who acknowleges he does not favour restrictions on abortions, characterized Galloway's May 27 article as "A front-page smear on Christians." He noted that the Globe, and other media in Canada, get "a free throw" when it comes to castigating Christians. He accused the Globe of "secular fundamentalism," based on its unstinting support for abortion and gay "marriage." The Globe denounces as "extremists," he said, those who oppose these agendas. He concluded by pointing out there is not a sliver of evidence that Christians have secured any Conservative riding nominations by subverting either party rules or Canadian law. Comment

Evangelicals and Catholics have long lamented the over whelmingly left-liberal orientation of news media in this country. The Globe's recent articles, reflecting panic, show what happens when evangelicals and Catholics begin to flex some muscle by taking an interest in national politics. Let's keep it up.

NB: Readers are encouraged to write letters to the editor and to MPs when they see material as described above. Let them know you are not fooled. For those who have internet access, both editors and individual reporters/columnists can be written to by e-mail with the touch of a keyboard. (E-mail addresses for reporters and columnists are usually given at the bottom of their articles.)

Of course, when writing one is reminded to be concise, clear, factual, and polite for maximum effectiveness.

Tony Gosgnach is a freelance media person who also is assistant editor of the monthly newspaper The Interim.

Father Alphonse de Valk edits the national monthly magazine Catholic Insight from Toronto.