Vile Atheist
Loud and Obnoxious
As this forum is a little more "American" than "North", I'm going to make it a little more North American. Allow me to set the story.
It's the fall of 1992 in the small town of High Falls, Ontario. A plan was put in place to develop a hydroelectric dam nearby in order to generate electricity and develop the local economy. After several days of heavy rains, a skull and two bones showed up in the ground. The site now took on an entirely different meaning for the nearby Poplar Point Ojibwe First Nation. Some Ojibwe believe that the wind and rushing water are essential for communication between the living and the dead. This dam would, in their view, block the voices of their ancestors. The question becomes: "Do you allow this project to go through?"
In essence, this one incident is a microcosm of many others where cultural conflicts between Aboriginals and non-Aboriginals in Canada cause friction, racism, and hatred. Considering my background, I'm very conflicted here and I was wondering your opinion on how you would reconcile the cultural differences. Here are my thoughts:
1. I unequivocally believe in universal freedom of religion, thought, belief, opinion, and expression and I am unshakeably opposed to any attempts to stifle any of the above, no matter how much I may disagree with it, so long as it stays within the confines of the law and does not inflict harm on others.
2. The notion that winds and flowing water are essential to communication between the living and the dead is demonstrably false. This alone is no reason to stop a multimillion dollar hydroelectric dam from proceeding.
3. I am willing to accommodate other cultures up to a certain extent. That extent is where it does not cause society undue burden, be it social, financial, or environmental. Other cultures must be willing to compromise with elements that are incompatible with our society (for example, honour killings).
4. I can sympathize with those who find "sanctity" in something I do not. I am not Catholic and am opposed to Catholicism, but I wouldn't want St. Peter's Basilica to be destroyed. Not only is it important to many others, it is important from a historical and cultural perspective. Simply because I do not value something does not mean it should be destroyed at my whim.
5. It seems that halting a multimillion dollar project for the sake of an obviously false belief is a huge waste and burden. While I would like to accommodate the Ojibwe culture, doing so for such a flippant reason on such a large and costly project would set terrible precedent. It seems that there can be little done to compromise.
I therefore lean towards allowing the project to go through. What are your thoughts? How would you reconcile this and other cultural conflicts (it doesn't have to be Aboriginal vs. non-Aboriginal)?
It's the fall of 1992 in the small town of High Falls, Ontario. A plan was put in place to develop a hydroelectric dam nearby in order to generate electricity and develop the local economy. After several days of heavy rains, a skull and two bones showed up in the ground. The site now took on an entirely different meaning for the nearby Poplar Point Ojibwe First Nation. Some Ojibwe believe that the wind and rushing water are essential for communication between the living and the dead. This dam would, in their view, block the voices of their ancestors. The question becomes: "Do you allow this project to go through?"
In essence, this one incident is a microcosm of many others where cultural conflicts between Aboriginals and non-Aboriginals in Canada cause friction, racism, and hatred. Considering my background, I'm very conflicted here and I was wondering your opinion on how you would reconcile the cultural differences. Here are my thoughts:
1. I unequivocally believe in universal freedom of religion, thought, belief, opinion, and expression and I am unshakeably opposed to any attempts to stifle any of the above, no matter how much I may disagree with it, so long as it stays within the confines of the law and does not inflict harm on others.
2. The notion that winds and flowing water are essential to communication between the living and the dead is demonstrably false. This alone is no reason to stop a multimillion dollar hydroelectric dam from proceeding.
3. I am willing to accommodate other cultures up to a certain extent. That extent is where it does not cause society undue burden, be it social, financial, or environmental. Other cultures must be willing to compromise with elements that are incompatible with our society (for example, honour killings).
4. I can sympathize with those who find "sanctity" in something I do not. I am not Catholic and am opposed to Catholicism, but I wouldn't want St. Peter's Basilica to be destroyed. Not only is it important to many others, it is important from a historical and cultural perspective. Simply because I do not value something does not mean it should be destroyed at my whim.
5. It seems that halting a multimillion dollar project for the sake of an obviously false belief is a huge waste and burden. While I would like to accommodate the Ojibwe culture, doing so for such a flippant reason on such a large and costly project would set terrible precedent. It seems that there can be little done to compromise.
I therefore lean towards allowing the project to go through. What are your thoughts? How would you reconcile this and other cultural conflicts (it doesn't have to be Aboriginal vs. non-Aboriginal)?