An objective news report on the issue of rising tuition in British Columbia, presenting multiple perspectives ranging from the SFU administration, alumni, and students.
Created by Julian Giordano and Joseph Morton
SFSS needs to be held Moe accountable
After a weak voter turn out and questionable comments made online, it’s time the student body started asking questions
A serious discussion about the SFSS is long overdue. I know it, you know it, the 77 per cent of students who didn’t vote this year know it. More importantly, the newly elected member services officer, Moe Kopahi, needs to hear it.
The cover of a recent issue of The Peak shows newly elected SFSS President Khan revelling in his victory. Khan seems to care about his win, but does anyone else? It’s unfortunate that this image provides such an ironic contradiction to the depressing reality of a 23 per cent voter turnout. But, rather than blame this on student apathy, we need to take a more critical stance of how the SFSS has been operating.
In the past 10 years the SFSS has taken a large conservative swing. What was once a union that celebrated activism and organized students to fight against conservative policies has become a society that rarely extends its critique beyond the need for more student space. From an outsider’s perspective, it is easy to see elections as little more than a popularity contest.
Voter turnout should be taken as an indication that the SFSS does not represent the student body. There’s no question of representation of SFU athletics however, with the SFSS potentially funding a new stadium. But where is the voice against increasing tuition coming from? Student fees? Budget cuts? Things are looking bad when all we see from the SFSS on these issues is an article and an email.
I bet you didn’t even know that Senate is debating the top-down integration of learning outcomes in curriculum, restructuring the very core of student experience at SFU. You would if the SFSS were doing their job.
According to the SFSS, the job of our Member Services Officer is to “act as a liaison between the Board, Forum, and other student groups at the University.” In other words, the MSO is our student union’s diplomatic representative, and carries a heavy burden.
Our newly elected MSO Moe Kopahi, with a whopping 1,962 votes out of 25,000, needs to be reminded of the seriousness of the position, as he recently took to Facebook to swing his whammy of a vote count around to back up some comments he made against feminism.
“If it was about equality, it wouldn’t be called feminism,” he stated, before emphasizing that he does indeed “love” the Women’s Centre, despite their lack of authority in his eyes: “I have seen absolutely nothing from you guys in regards to women issues, at SFU, stop claiming it.” Later, he wrote, “I got 1,962 votes, that speaks for students.” He might represent 1,962 students, but he doesn’t represent the other 23,000, and he certainly doesn’t represent me.
Feminism actually addresses many issues through its critique of patriarchy. The Women’s Centre not only offers alternative resources to individuals of all genders, but also organizes a variety of events on a regular basis that serve the interests of our diverse student body: from Halloween activities for student parents and their children, to campaigning for and raising awareness about student debt.
As the person communicating with groups like the Women’s Centre, it would be nice to see our future MSO doing some research before taking to Facebook. Something is wrong with our union when the MSO, voted in with 1,962 votes on a 23 per cent voter turnout, thinks that he has the authority to speak like this in a public forum.
Is it the role of the SFSS Board to claim authority and act without accountability in our name? Or is it their role to listen to students before claiming to represent them?
Our union was once a respectable institution, speaking up for students and against unfair administration and government policies. While there are a select few individuals who do seem to take their positions seriously, the community needs to engage in a broader discussion about what exactly it is that we expect from our union.
Oldest green lacewing fossils found in Okanagan
By Kristina Charania
Photos courtesy of PAMR
After extensive time spent amongst the rocky deposits of Driftwood Canyon Provincial Park, the Okanagan Highlands, and areas of Washington, SFU palaeontologist Dr. Bruce Archibald has unearthed the oldest assemblage of ancient green lacewing insects known to date.
“The insects were finely preserved in such exquisite detail. It really surprised us,” says Archibald. “Some of their soft bodied tissues are clear to see – internal organs at times, too.”
Belonging to the scientific family Chrysopidae, green lacewings is the second largest family of the order Neuroptera. The insects are common garden insects that have large wingspans, golden compound eyes, and bright green bodies.
“They’re regular insects that you’d see around a light at night,” says Archibald. “Organic gardeners really like them for pest control, too. They’re predators and eat plant pests like aphids.”
Dr. Archibald, alongside partner Vladimir Makarkin from the Russian Academy of Sciences, have collected a series of 24 green lacewing fossils from various fossil beds and museums. Although the green lacewings in southern BC and Washington were previously discussed by other palaeontologists, they had not named any particular species in their research — only the insects’ existence in these areas was noted.
Out of the 24 fossil series, at least six genera and 10 new species were present: six of the new species were named, and three of the six genera were newly discovered. The female reproductive spermatheca organ, spermathecal ducts, and trichosor-like structures — thickened wing margins with several hair growths – were observed for the first time in any Chrysopidae fossil. An article further detailing the newlydiscovered insect species has recently been published in the Journal of Palaeontology.
In total, there are currently over 1,200 species of green lacewings worldwide excluding the high latitudes that they cannot inhabit. When the green lacewing fossils formed during the Eocene Epoch, Western Canada was dominated by cooler temperatures year round — less than Vancouver’s average annual temperature at present. This encouraged high levels of insect biodiversity at the time.
Archibald spoke to The Peak and described that the fossils’ formation took place nearly 49–53 million years ago. “There was a lot of uplift in southern BC going into Washington at that time, so many highlands and volcanoes were being formed,” he said. “In this region, there was also a series of lakes that filled up with sediment — different insects and plants from the surrounding forests wound up being trapped in the bottom layer of the mud, and this sediment became the shale that these fossils were found in.”
The classification and examination of these fossilized insects play key roles in larger-scale studies like those conducted by Archibald and other scientists.
Alongside SFU Paleoecology professor Dr. Rolf Mathewes, Archibald is looking at the past diversity of his group of green lacewings and the reasons why a different group within the same family of insects has now become more diverse.
“Green lacewings usually fly in the evening or at night, and they’re vulnerable to predators like bats. Some of the green lacewings have bat ears that can detect bat cries,” Archibald stated. “We’re interested in looking at the relationship between the evolution of bats and the changes in groups of green lacewings relative to their ability to avoid predation.”
By understanding the evolutionary pattern of green lacewings through such studies, researchers can better understand broader aspects of general evolution.
Examining the green lacewings’ climatic preferences relative to large scale climate change over the last 50 million years, will also contribute to better comprehension of broad-scale evolution and patterns of biodiversity.
“In understanding how communities change relative to a transforming climate, we can understand the future better,” Archibald said. “We’re obviously going through a period of great climate change, so it’s best to know all that we can about these patterns.”
Build SFU selects architect
Firm Perkins+Will has been awarded the SUB project
By Alison Roach
Photos by Samantha Derochie
The Build SFU student union building project marked another milestone last week as it announced the selection of an architect firm for the project. Vancouver-based, 75-person strong firm Perkins+Will has been awarded the project, and will start site evaluations this summer.
The announcement was officially made in the SFSS Forum meeting last Wednesday by Build SFU general manager Marc Fontaine. “We’re really excited about this announcement,” said Fontaine. “I personally think that Perkins+Will is the best firm with the most experience and . . . students told us that Perkins+Will is the firm that could best represent students, understand best what students need in the building, and actually I feel it was an easy decision.
Perkins+Will was the first of three firms to present to students on Jan. 30, competing against HCMA/Endall Elliot and Dialog for the bid. After the presentations, students, faculty, and community members were invited by the Build SFU team to fill out an online survey with their reactions.
The Build SFU project team gathered 47 responses to the architect presentations that were compiled and presented to the building committee. There were 38 responses from undergraduate students, several from SFU staff and faculty, one from an alumnus, and a letter written by Lorne Davies, expressing his personal support for Perkins+Will.
“The important thing that we focused on was not receiving feedback that wasn’t useful,” said Fontaine. “We wanted to receive feedback that is qualitative and that was informed and really thought out. And we did receive that.”
From this, Perkins+Will was selected. The international firm’s Vancouver office has worked previously on UBC’s Earth Science buildings and SFU’s own Saywell and Blusson halls. One of their team members has personally worked on over 40 student union buildings.
Current SFSS University Relations Officer and Build SFU founder Jeff McCann stated, “The Perkins+Will team excelled throughout all aspects of the architect selection process. Students told us that this firm best understood the goals and aspiration of the Build SFU project. We look forward to this partnership and are confident that Perkins+Will is the best team to help us redefine the student experience.”
Perkins+Will team leader Jana Foit visibly beamed in an inter view with The Peak on being awarded the project. “This is such an exciting project,” Foit said. “We’re just ecstatic to start work and to be able to bring something that’s so meaningful to students and to be able to deliver that here. It’s a great opportunity.”
Foit also recognized the challenges that face the student-led project, especially concerning the multitude of voices that will undoubtedly inundate the consultation process.
“There’s a lot of opinions and students will definitely have opinions, but I think it’s exciting because students also have a lot of vision,” said Foit. “They’re not as cynical or dissuaded as someone who’s been doing this for a long time. You’re looking at tomorrow, you guys are looking at innovation, and you’re interested in those things.”
The firm hasn’t defined a firm plan for student consultation, but it is certain that there will be six to eight weeks of intensive consultation at the beginning of the fall semester. Foit mentioned holding workshops with different user group representatives, a goal-setting workshop, and social media feedback as several facets of communication that may be implemented. The idea of even using the platform Instagram to allow students to send photos of how they see their university is also
being considered.
The architect selection has gone through the SFSS board of directors, with a tentative price tag of $326,500 approved for the first phase of work. The full cost of the firm for the project is unknown at this point. In the latest SFU Board of Governor’s meeting on March 14, the Finance and Administration Committee also noted that the process to select the architect for the Build SFU project has ended, and the award of contract was put before the board and approved. Perkins+Will has been approved for the entire SUB project, but as of now has only been hired for phase one, involving site selection and programming of the building.
The official price-tag for the architect for the SFSS is complicated by the fact that the university has agreed to finance additional renovations to the Lorne Davies building if it ends up becoming the site of the project.
In regards to the cost of the architect for the entire project, Fontaine explained: “The architect has been hired, but it includes that cost that the university would pay for, and it’s and up-to amount rather than a defined amount.” He went on to say that Perkins+Will was within the price range expected for the project.
“ We have confidence that the price for Perkins+Will is appropriate, and it’s a price that is not too low to deliver what we need from the project.”
Moving forward, Perkins+Will will spend the summer semester working on site selection studies to identify three possible sites for the building, which are currently unknown. Heavy student consultations will begin in the fall, culminating in a report with a site recommendation and review of the building programming to be put forward in November. The firm will then most likely be rehired to continue the project, and begin working full-time on it in 2014.
Build SFU also plans to hire two new staff members this summer, one working in administration and one dedicated to student consultation.
Fontaine concluded, “I’m thrilled with the architect selection. It is my choice absolutely . . . This firm stood out in terms of meeting [our] objectives, and I think Perkins+Will will have no trouble in determining in consultations with students what can make our building the best that it can be for this university.”
For a more personal look at Perkins+Will check out the interview with Jana Foit:
Conservatives introduce 2013 budget, Canada Job Grants
The budget raised concerns that student issues aren’t being addressed
OTTAWA (CUP) — Finance Minister Jim Flaherty announced Economic Action Plan 2013 on March 21, titled “Jobs, Growth, and Economic Prosperity.” The budget introduces market-oriented skills training, job creation measures and aims to balance the books by 2015. However, the opposition is not optimistic that the Tories can keep these promises.
“These predictions are wrong,” said Thomas Mulcair, leader of the New Democratic Party. “That’s what we’ve constantly seen.”
Bob Rae, interim-leader of the Liberal Party of Canada, also disliked the budget, calling it “the same old propaganda.”
“It has very unlikely targets as to where the revenue picture is going to go over the next couple of years,” said Rae. “It’s a rhetorical document, it’s an excursive of political relic.”
One of the main features of the budget is the Canada Jobs Grant. The program would provide job seekers with $5,000 for skills training, which the federal government hopes would be matched by an additional $10,000 from provincial governments and employers.
The grant would create opportunities for apprentices and provide support to underrepresented groups, such as youth and aboriginals, to help them find employment.
However, Rae said the government could do more for the unemployed Canadians.
“ There’s no new money, it’s money that’s going to be delayed for several years, it’s money that now requires an equal amount from provinces and employers,” he said. “It’s actually a whole lot less when you consider the size and extent of employment.”
Businesses who can provide skills training — such as community and career colleges — will be eligible to receive up to $5,000 dollars per person of that grant. The businesses’ and provinces’ contributions will have to match the federal government. The program will be finalized after renewal negotiations of the Labour Market Development Agreements in 2014–15 with the provinces and territories.
Flaherty said he can’t guarantee all provinces will sign off on the grant, but remains optimistic about the plan.
“[ The Conservatives] listen to businesses and persons who are unemployed,” said Flaherty. “We have a problem and we have to fix it. I think the provincial governments will listen to… employers.”
Adam Awad, chairperson of the Canadian Federation of Students, said while the grant is a step in the right direction it’s not enough for students. He was disappointed with the budget and felt that the government could do more to address the student issues.
“It’s definitely disappointing; it doesn’t do much for students at all,” said Awad. “It doesn’t address the main issues of debt and access to education.”
“Canadian businesses are… failing to provide this training regardless; it’s not the government’s responsibility to pay businesses to do their own job. It would have been much better to provide that funding directly into the education system.”
In addition to the Canada Jobs Grant, the government announced promotion of education in science, technology, engineering, mathematics and skilled trades, all of which are considered high-demand.
As a part of the grant, $19 million over two years will be reallocated to informing youth about those fields of study and the career opportunities stemming from them. The budget does not provide details of where the funding will be reallocated from.
A total of $70 million over three years will be invested in
5,000 paid internships for recent post-secondary graduates. They will be added on to the 3,000 internships already created with Economic Action plan 2012.
The Canadian Youth Business foundation will receive
$18 million over two years if the foundation can raise $15 million to match the federal funding. The non-profit organization works with young entrepreneurs develop their business by providing mentorship, advice and other resources. The government hopes this will help the foundation become self-sustainable.
Awad said the funds to help youth gain employment are not “addressing the main concern.” The government has also
allocated money for research which will involve undergraduate students. Research funding will see $37 million per year to support partnerships with industr y through the granting councils, including an additional $12 million annually for the College and Community Innovation program (CCIP). The CCIP supports collaboration between colleges and industry on research projects.
The granting councils will expand eligibility for their undergraduate and industrial internships and scholarships to students who are enrolled in college bachelor programs.
Awad added that the primary issue is student debt, as student are “unable to take risks” once they graduate because of the money they owe.
“While the money for the apprenticeship programs and grants are better than nothing, its nowhere near what needs to happen,” said Awad.
MBA students pinch pennies for Science World
Science World’s latest exhibit celebrates the life of the Canadian copper
For the past few weeks, SFU Master of Business Administration (MBA) students have engaged youth and community members alike at their “Penny Tributes” exhibit, now on display at Science World, or Telus World of Science.
The exhibit, which focuses on the penny and its demise, was created after Beedie School of Business’s Management of Technology students were challenged to create a promotional campaign as part of a projectmanagement course. The team — made up of Patrick Altejos, Alex Popov, Scott Brundrett, and James Cameron — felt that the decision to work with Science World was a natural extension of their venture.
“It just clicked,” said Cameron. “The phaseout is an important time for the penny and the idea happened to be going through both our minds and the minds of the executive team at Science World. When we did speak, there was a good fit and it was easy for us to go forward with them.”
Canada’s phasing out of the penny began this year after the federal government announced its decision to remove the coin due to its excessive cost of its production relative to face value. It is estimated that taxpayers will save up to $11 million a year with the penny gone. The environmental implications of the continued production of the coin also prompted the government to make the decision.
Pennies are three per cent copper, 97 per cent zinc, and are primarily made from virgin ore. Because they are made from materials that can only be obtained through mining, penny minting results in heavy-metal and lead rich mining tailings, which pollute the environment.
Even after the metals are mined, the environmental impact does not stop. The process of refining zinc and copper can release toxins like sulfur dioxide, lead and zinc into the environment.
All of this information can be found at the Penny Tributes exhibit at Science World, placed just inside the entrance. The MBA students’ display takes the attendee on a journey that follows the penny’s life from creation, to circulation, to eventual phase-out.
“We have an open pit mine display, penny collections, penny games, and experiments and demonstrations designed by SFU science instructors and 4D Labs that are orchestrated by Science World,” said Cameron.
The exhibit is meant to engage and educate the visitors of Science World, while encouraging them to donate their nowobsolete pennies. Such a partnership was perfect for Science World, which as a non-profit organization needs the community’s support to continue its operations.
“When you donate to Science World, you invest in BC’s future,” reads the Science World website. “By making science fun, we spark curiosity and open the doors to the wonders and possibilities of science and technology.”
The vice president of development at Science World, Jennifer Ingham, has been working with the SFU students since the beginning of their project two months ago. Ingham spoke to the importance of this project for Science World.
“Not everyone knows that Science World is a charity,” said Ingham. “We need support from the public so that we can continue to educate the community and encourage students to pursue the sciences, a field which some students tend to avoid.”
Although the penny will soon be gone from circulation, the SFU MBA students are making sure that its history will not be forgotten. “We’re working on a model of Science World to be used as a legacy piece, where coins would activate the lights in the dome making it fun for people to donate,” said Cameron. “Our other coin depository will stay on the site for some time to come.”
When asked how she enjoyed working the SFU students, Ingham smiled and responded warmly. The SFU team is in discussion on Science World’s behalf about possible future projects with Greentech Exchange, CoinMart, and SFU’s own 4D LABS and Faculty of Science, so though this is the first collaboration with a university program, it may not be the last.
SFU’s Relay for Life raises over $32,000
The fifth annual event drew 200 plus participants
Simon Fraser University’s fifth annual Relay for Life fundraiser was held the weekend before last and raised over $32,000, beating last year’s total by an estimated $5,000. Relay for Life is one of the largest fundraising events held across Canada for the Canadian Cancer Society, and offers funds for cancer research, prevention, and support.
Beginning at 7:00 p.m. on March 22 at SFU’s West Gym, over 200 participants formed teams to relay together for the 12-hour long event. The Relay for Life event consists of relay teams taking turns to walk or run around a track for 12 to 24 hours (depending on the event), while raising funds for the Canadian Cancer Society.
In the past, Relay for Life has been the largest event held by SFU Residence, and this year marked the first time it was ran by an SFU club. With the assistance from LEAD students, a dedicated planning committee, and countless volunteers, the event was considered a huge success by all those involved.
The event also hosts a luminary ceremony in order to celebrate and remember those who have survived or been lost to cancer. During the ceremony, which is held during the relay, candles are lit and placed in special paper bags which each bear the name of a cancer survivor or victim.
“I actually was very touched by the luminary ceremony,” said Elina Avramova, SFU LEAD (Certificate in Innovation Leadership) student and Relay for Life participant.
Avramova described how a few laps around the track were made in complete silence during the ceremony; “It was very powerful.”
David Markus, another SFU LEAD student, agreed that the Luminary Ceremony demonstrated harmony. “It was clear during the Luminary Ceremony, and throughout the event, that everyone had a personal bond that motivated them to do such an outstanding job at fundraising.”
Markus and Avramova , along with other fellow LEAD
students, assisted the planning committee with this event by promoting Relay for Life to the SFU community. Promotions included the “Relay for Life Superhero Pub Night,” held last month at the Highland Pub. All proceeds from tickets that night were donated directly to the Canadian Cancer Society.
“I am really happy that for my LEAD project I had the opportunity to work with such a great organization,” Avramova stated.
In 2012, over $51 million was raised across Canada by Relay for Life events for the Canadian Cancer Society. Vancouver’s Relay for Life is still on the horizon, and will be held on June 22 at Killarney Park.
Putting the men in feminism
By Bryan Scott
Illustration By Ben Buckley
When I consider taking on a complex task, I try to find simple solutions that may lead to an ultimate answer to the problem. Feminism is a hot topic and I feel like more men are getting in line with equal rights. I am by no means an expert on feminism, nor do I know what it is like to be a woman, but that doesn’t mean I can’t help.
As a man, its easy to forget that women have a rough go in many aspects of life that we might not think twice about. For instance, I do a lovely walk from Terminal to Main and Hastings at 3:00 a.m. regularly after work. It is a little sketchy, but I don’t feel at risk. For all of the women I work with, this isn’t a perceived option.
Feminism deals with the complex social issues that arise through the struggle for gender equality. To resolve these issues, we need not look past men, as some feminists do.
In my experience, the majority of feminists I’ve encountered acknowledge that I am a man who can be a friend in the fight and not a de facto foe. My issue lies with the feminists who claim to be open-minded and yet hold back progress by refusing to view men as equal players in the fight for equality.
Based on history as an ex-college lacrosse player, I can understand the skepticism over me as an ally. But making assumptions based on my gender and pass-time activities is no better than telling a girl in a short skirt she’s asking for it.
Recently, I went to a meeting that was discussing women’s issues at a student press conference. One young woman publically called me out, asking what I was doing at the meeting as if I were an enemy infiltrator — they didn’t need some stinkin’ man to help them nor could I benefit from the meeting, which was a real kick in the balls. I wanted to gain more knowledge of the problems that my female journopeers face, but found myself regretting going after her reaction.
There is no reason a man can’t be feminist. Everyone can be an asshole. Most men love and respect women and want what is the best for them, as defined by women.
We are a social species, and there tends to be a cascade of follow-the-leader when things are normalized. So why not accept the help of the “enemy” and find a solution together? Last time I checked, women’s issues were everyone’s issues so lets drop the fences a bit, and get rid of this archaic way of thinking.
If you are man, remember there are always things that we can never understand but if we take the time to listen, we can help make a difference. It is time to man up, speak up and show these ladies our support.
And ladies, if a man is making a genuine effort to lead our sometimes egotistical gender in the right direction, please do not steer us off that path with discouraging comments. If we’re going in the wrong direction, don’t slash our tires, give us directions (you know we won’t ask for them.)
Let’s get on the same team and even the playing field; I promise you won’t regret it.
Surrey more deserving of rapid transit than Tri Cities
Surrey and Langley have less transit options and more bodies to move
From a completely practical standpoint, I believe the Evergreen Line is an unnecessary use of its projected $1.4 billion price tag. It will not provide Tri City residents with a previously unavailable route, but moreover it will not actually achieve one of its goals
of uniting the Tri-Cities more strongly together.
The Evergreen Line will begin at the Lougheed Town Centre station and run along Clarke Road in the Burquitlam area, where a new Burquitlam Station will be built for the line. From there, the Evergreen Line will continue down North Road en route to Port Moody until reaching the Barnet Highway in Coquitlam, where it will pass along to the Coquitlam Central Station and turn onto Pinetree Way, terminating at the Coquitlam campus of Douglas College.
If these stops sound familiar, they should. The Evergreen Line mirrors that of the 97 B-line. The bus route runs late (until 2:45 a.m., which is later than the last SkyTrain) and with great frequency — roughly every 10 minutes during the daytime, and every 30 minutes after 11 p.m.
There are also other options for people in the TriCities to take transit out of Coquitlam. Coquitlam Central Station offers the West Coast Express that runs all the way downtown, and the 160 bus runs from Port Coquitlam to Coquitlam Central and out to Vancouver. Really, the TriCities (especially Coquitlam) is hardly starved for transit options.
Surrey should have had priority over the Evergreen Line
with their Light Rapid Transit. I’ve taken transit from Surrey Central to Langley, and there is zero efficient and reliable coverage. There are no express buses, and trips on routes that exist currently between the two areas take over an hour and run only once per hour after 9 p.m.
So much time is wasted on these trips because they cover indirect routes to service residential communities along the way, and thus take much more time than is necessary for people wanting a direct ride from Langley to Surrey.
With a population over 450,000 — more than the entire Tri Cities and Maple Ridge combined — Surrey is the obvious candidate for the next transit expansion, especially considering that Langley residents often live where they do because of cheaper housing costs not proximity to their job. Transit need in Coquitlam and Port Moody, with a combined population
of only 160,000 and with a fully functional express bus route, cannot compare to Langley and Surrey where a third of all vehicle registration growth in Metro Vancouver is happening.
Living in the Tri-Cities, I have witnessed the development in Coquitlam and Port Moody over the past five years and the high rises that have come along with it. With this development in mind, proponents of the Evergreen Line look to the Tri-Cities’ increasing population and the line’s close proximity to high rise construction as its selling point. However, it will take years for the population
to increase to what Surrey’s is today, while Surrey population density continues to rise, leaving its residents trapped by its substandard transit infrastructure.
More to the point, the Evergreen Line’s goal of better connecting the Tri-Cities cannot be achieved based on the proposed route. Port Coquitlam and Port Moody do not factor into the line’s route. For this reason and for those listed above, I’m sad to think a more united Surrey and Langley transit system did not achieve precedence over the already well connected Coquitlam and Port Moody infrastructure.
Moral arguments against same sex marriage don’t have legs to stand on
Our legal system must acknowledge modern standards of moral behaviour
By Mohamed Sheriffdeen
Photos courtesy of Marcin Marklewicz / flickr
The ongoing hearings regarding the legal validity of California’s same-sex marriage ban have re-raised several questions regarding legality and gay equality — principally in statements made by Supreme Justice Antonin Scalia when confronted during a guest lecture at Princeton last December.
Duncan Hosie, an 18-year-old gay student, denounced Scalia’s rulings in previous court cases that reduced homosexuality to actions “immoral and unacceptable.” Hosie specifically cited Lawrence v. Texas from 2003, in which Scalia compared homosexual conduct to bestiality, bigamy, adultery and obscenity before his coup de grace: Scalia reasoned that even if state law did not protect gays as a class, the state need not justify denial to equal protection by “anything more than a rational basis.”
Secularism is arguably one of the most significant principles that forwarded construction and operation of modern governments. Ideally, separation of church and state aims to mitigate the influence of individuals’ perceptions of morality and eliminate inequality borne by legal consolidation of religious beliefs.
It has become chic to identify religious individuals as blind followers of arcane texts – inherently bigoted and inflexible. Pope Francis, recently sworn in, has espoused the necessity of interfaith dialogue to strengthen ties between all people. He included atheists in the discussion, considering them “precious allies in the effort to defend human dignity . . . and in carefully protecting creation.”
At the same time, he also espoused his antagonism to gay marriage in widely distributed quotes as a “destructive attack on God’s plan,” calling gay adoption a “deprivation of human development.” If atheists, who outright deny the existence of god are more “moral” people than potentially religious gay married couples, what religious-based morals are we left with?
It has also become chic to identify governments as a monolithic creation of decaying social systems, but they too are composed of people — people who are stubborn and are tied to preconceptions of morality. This highlights an interesting dichotomy in global politics: all governments operate under the principles of fundamentalism — religious or ideological — cloaked under the guise of morality. Scalia summarized the viewpoint to Hosie last December: “If we cannot have moral feelings against homosexuality, can we have it against murder? Can we have it against these other things?”
Morality and absolute freedom constitute the great lie at the heart of nations. There can be no system of governance based on “morality” because the definition of morality varies drastically between individuals of different faiths and upbringings.
How can someone like Scalia defend the right to inequality by such a vague definition? The right of the state to uphold inequality by a mythical and imagined “rational basis”? What rationale can be considered sufficient to prevent individuals from loving one another without being demoted to second-class citizenship?
Moral law, human law and divine law all have their place in governance given the flexibility and the understanding of individuals that morality takes a backseat to equality. We cannot ridicule the Bible, the Qura’an or the Torah as being cast-iron documents without shaking our heads in disbelief at constitutionalists like Scalia for treating a human document as a sacrosanct wording handcrafted and delivered from Mount Philadelphia.
Obama’s recent defense of gay marriage under his “evolving” worldview has set a precedent that we cannot ignore. We cannot deny this evolution of human understanding and cast those who fight for equality under derogatory terms like those Bill Whatcott did while hiding behind the very same rights we seek to deny others. What kind of nation would we be? What kind of humans would we be?
