Wednesday, March 18, 2009

To: Those Fellow ProgBloggers It May Concern

Re: Our unqualified Minister of Science and Technology

Dear fellow ProgBloggers who have posted sorties against those of us who have been rightfully condemning the utter lack of qualifications of our current Minister of Science and Technology;

Your demonstrated use of "move the goalpost" (non)arguments and associated assorted characterizations of us demonstrate that you either A) utterly miss the point; B) are seeking to defend your own (religious/supernatural/paranormal) beliefs; C) all of the above.

You are obviously utterly unaware that those who reject the reality of evolution (usually known as "Creationists" or "Intelligent Designists" - or IDists for short) have been waging a constant war on science ... pretty much like those climate change denialists (whom, as coincidence would have it, also happen to be heavily religiously-inclined). Therefore, viligance on our part (all of us Canadian citizens) constitutes a sine qua non duty that is vital to not only ensure further progress in our society, but additionally to prevent our nation from slowly and gradually becoming a scientific/technological backwater society ruled by parochial religious beliefs.

Likewise, a Minister of Science and Technology who uses the "respect my religious convictions" defense to first refuse to answer whether he accepts the science of evolution or not, and then meekly stipulates some confused affirmation of "belief" in evolution (when scientific facts are about acceptance, not "beliefs") all the while demonstrating his utter lack of understanding of the process, constitutes a definite indicator that said same person is demonstrating a failure to A) understand science; B) understand the scientific method; C) understand what scientific research is all about; D) all of the above.

That he happens to be a chiropractician furthermore stresses this point.

Even his precious religious beliefs notwithstanding.

Hence, the obvious question (which was thus all along to us) is the following: is a person who knows little-to-nothing about science, the scientific method and scientific research, let alone understands any of it at all, actually qualified to be a Minister of Science and Technology?

The answer here is a big, fat, NO.

And with regards to your silly and inane rhetorical questions (such as "Is our Finance Minister Keynesian or a Smith-ite?" or "Is our Health Minister for private or public?") as a mean to move the goalposts in whatever misguided/uninformed counter-argumentation you have vainly attempted to make, here are samples of actual cogent questions you should have asked in order to remain fully in line with the current, deserving criticisms of our Minister of Science and Technology:
"Do we want someone who understands little of economics and the economy as Minister of Commerce"?

"Do we want someone who understands little about finances and economics to be our Minister of Finance?"

etc., etc., etc.
I humbly hope that you will have noticed here that such questions constitute bona fides analogous situations to the one currently in contention - and consequently, further dismantle your own attempts at counter-argumenting those of us that are rightly condemning Mr. Goodyear's utter lack of qualifications for the cabinet job Harper appointed him to.

So, here's my suggestion: stop being defensive about your own religious/supernatural/paranormal beliefs and do ponder seriously on the matter before you tell us to "calm the hell down", to "let's respect religious beliefs" and other such childish, intellectual sloth-driven, unthinking and reactionary nonsense.

Including calling us names (like "loser fascists") and of course making this about "secularists".

You shame yourselves in adopting the usual tactics employed by those belonging to the ignorant Mob of the far right - especially those ardent primitive minded-defenders of the Christian Right.

Perhaps next time you will know better - it is to be hoped.

See you around the progressive blogosphere;

Best regards;

- Mentarch


  1. Great post Mentarch. Let's respect other people's religious and non-religious beliefs, where one isn't valorized over the other, or lays claim to the "right way."

    I was reading your past references and was interested in a conversation you had with another commenter. There appears to be a belief that one lacks direction, lacks moral and ethical principles if one does not have some sort of higher belief in omniscient God like being. I have picked up on that before, and from a feminist perspective, I find it so dis-empowering.


Please feel free to comment on APOV. However, remember to keep in check your tone and respect for all here. Let rational, reasoning, enthousiastic and passionate conversations and discussions rule first and foremost in our participatory democracy, so as to facilitate the free exchange of reality-based facts and ideas. In between, do not forget to have fun and enjoy yourselves ... in other words: keep on rockin'! - Mentarch