Angry in the Great White North

a heat-seeking missile in the Conservative arsenal

If Elton John had his way, organized religion would be banned:

Organized religion fuels anti-gay discrimination and should be eliminated, pop star Elton John said in an interview published Saturday.

"I think religion has always tried to turn hatred toward gay people," the musician, who is openly gay, said in the Observer newspaper's Music Monthly magazine. "Religion promotes the hatred and spite against gays."

"From my point of view, I would ban religion completely. Organized religion doesn't seem to work. It turns people into really hateful lemmings and it's not really compassionate."

I suppose if Elton John ran the world, we would have some sort secret police checking on people, observing them for signs of metaphysical musings. If they are caught answering the questions posed by other people also wondering about what the nature of reality is, then they could yanked off the street and driven off to some sort of re-education camp.

Organized religions have evolved all over the planet, and new religions continue to spring up, suggesting that humans have evolved to seek out the Truth, whatever that is, in coordination with others. Elton John's ban would require a pretty brutal and pervasive counter-organization. Of course, it's not like there haven't been other organizations dedicated, at least in part, in making Elton John's paradise on earth a reality, a place where organized religions don't exist. I think of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union or the Khmer Rouge of Democratic Kampuchea:

Article 20 of the 1976 Constitution of Democratic Kampuchea guaranteed religious freedom, but it also declared that "all reactionary religions that are detrimental to Democratic Kampuchea and the Kampuchean People are strictly forbidden." About 85 percent of the population follows the Theravada school of Buddhism. The country's 40,000 to 60,000 Buddhist monks, regarded by the regime as social parasites, were defrocked and forced into labor brigades. Many monks were executed; temples and pagodas were destroyed or turned into storehouses or jails. Images of the Buddha were defaced and dumped into rivers and lakes. People who were discovered praying or expressing religious sentiments were often killed. The Christian and Muslim communities also were even more persecuted, as they were labelled as part of a pro-Western cosmopolitan sphere, hindering Cambodian culture and society. The Roman Catholic cathedral of Phnom Penh was completely razed. The Khmer Rouge forced Muslims to eat pork, which they regard as an abomination (haram). Many of those who refused were killed. Christian clergy and Muslim imams were executed.

I'm not saying Elton John wishes for this to happen. Well, maybe he does, or more likely, he just hasn't thought it through. His thought processes probably last for 3 minutes or less -- the time it takes to sing a song.

Elton John's thinking (such as it is) is part of the mainstream of homosexual thinking:

The Gay and Lesbian Humanist Association (GALHA) has backed comments from Sir Elton John after he claimed that religion promotes the hatred of gays.

Commenting on Sir Elton's remarks, GALHA's secretary George Broadhead said there is some truth behind them, "It should be quite clear to anyone that these days most hostility to gay relationships and gay rights comes from religious sources, notably Evangelical Anglicans, Christian pressure groups like the Christian Institute, the Vatican, and Islamic organisations.

“Hardly a day passes without some anti-gay proclamations, fatwa or edict being issued by one religious leader or another. Religionists are campaigning against our human rights, peddling their bigotry, telling us we're sick, diseased, perverted and destined for hell-fire, or promoting quack therapies to 'cure' us."

Broadhead's only criticism is that the ban would probably fail:

However, he said Sir Elton's suggestion that religion be banned is unworkable, “Any attempt to ban it would simply make it stronger and more determined.

"The right approach is to argue and debate and try to convince religious believers that they are wrong when it comes to gays. But while we believe that all of them - the pastors, the Pope and the imams - are entitled to express their views, they should not be permitted by law to impose them on others, which is what they are trying to do at present,” he said.

Nice of Broadhead not to argue for Elton John's "complete ban" with all that entails. On the other hand, he seems to think the problem is that it isn't very practical.

Not a student of history, this Broadhead.

Meanwhile, there are "lemmings" within the homosexual community too:

Elton John's bitter rant at how organised religion promotes hatred of homosexuals has upset a pro-gay church group.

But his outburst has saddened Reverend Giles Fraser from the Inclusive Church, a pro-gay group in the Church of England, who believes the singer's comments are a popular 'misconception' in the gay community.

"I'm sad because it deepens the perception that the church is intrinsically homophobic," said Fraser. "I don't believe it is homophobic, I believe that's a mistaken interpretation. And (Elton John's comments) don't help those struggling to change that perception."

At least these lemmings are halfway educated by Elton John's standards. Presumably Fraser and his kind would not have to spend too much time in Elton John's "love camps".

Strange that no one in the gay community has pointed out the obvious problems with enforcing Elton John's ban. It's not like it hasn't been tried before, always with the same results.