The CBC’s Neil Macdonald is an ignorant bigot

By Jonathon Van Maren

Neil Macdonald, one of those smug, elitist drones bestowed upon us by our government-funded state broadcaster to tell us what’s best for us, has just written a column that should win scores of awards in the categories of cluelessness and snottiness.

Macdonald, who happens to be the brother of the far more insightful comedian Norm MacDonald, has decided to hop on board with the Liberal Party’s official line that Andrew Scheer has the potential to be a dangerous fundamentalist, indicating simultaneously that he is aware of the Liberal Party’s ongoing support for the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation as well as why that is.

Macdonald starts off his column by congratulating himself on his open-mindedness, noting that he reads both the Weekly Standard and the National Review “regularly.” As a subscriber to the National Review myself, I can only assume this means that Macdonald has missed the vast majority of the essays the fine writers there publish, or that he is impervious to reasoning from those who are not members of his “own intellectual cohort,” as he puts it.

Macdonald then moves seamlessly from self-congratulation on his free-thinking and ability to be extraordinarily well-read into the main point of his column: “Religion…is by definition not fact-based. It is a pure belief system.”

Which is, in fact, one of the stupidest sentences I’ve read in a long time. Clearly, Macdonald is unaware of the intellectual traditions of Christianity—traditions, I might point out, that actually created the scientific method he worships and pioneered most of the scientific fields a man as well-read as he presumably grazes in—not to mention the intensive historiography that accompanies the Christian accounts of history.

But Macdonald makes that point to make a far more nefarious one: “To be clear here, I am all for a person’s right to believe in whatever he or she desires, to embrace foundational myths of aliens [a shot at Scientology], or miracles, or extreme positions of love or hatred, so long as it remains in a place of worship, with the door closed.”

Got that? Everyone else—be it the drag queens and nudists waving their genitals to the crowd at the Pride Parade, or the Black Lives Matter rioters shutting them down, or abortion activists screaming at families attending the March for Life—they have the right to express their views in public and to advocate for those views in the political sphere. But that’s because they’re not Christian. Macdonald thinks Christians should not have such rights. They can only speak to each other, in their churches.

And why? Because Macdonald doesn’t happen to believe what Christians believe, and because in spite of his alleged open-mindedness, he doesn’t have the faintest clue what Christians believe on any topic.

He objects to pro-life laws, for example, without mentioning the fact that it is legal to abort a baby at any time during pregnancy in Canada. I don’t know if Macdonald is a father and has felt a baby kick in the womb, but it is the abortion activists who have the weird religious belief that it is some sort of alien rather than a human being developing in the womb of his or her mother, not pro-lifers. Pro-lifers are merely requesting science-based human rights policy.

Macdonald is also mind-boggled that there are those who objected to gay marriage—a vast majority that included Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton until very recently, in fact—even though every nation on earth affirmed that marriage was between a man and a woman until the year 2000. But whatever—fortunately thousands of years of ignorant morons have culminated in the arrival of a luminary named Neil Macdonald, who is paid by the government to inform traditionalists that they are stupid. Tradition may be the democracy of the dead, as Chesterton once put it, but the dead are no match for a snarky CBC columnist.

Macdonald even takes a shot at those who do not believe that men can become women and women can become men, even though there is not a single shred of scientific evidence to support his snobbery. Screw the opinion of the psychiatrists at John Hopkins University and mental health professionals across the country. And silence anyone who might have questions to ask based on research that contradicts the baseless position of Macdonald and his cohort. They have no right to the public square, because they do not agree with Macdonald—and he promptly demonizes those who disagree with him as bigots, haters, and the possessors of various phobias.

How does Macdonald accomplish this? By lazy slander. “’Faith,’ apparently, confers licence to discriminate, bully, marginalize, and deprive someone of liberty (such as the liberty to end an unwanted pregnancy),” writes McDonald, as he discriminates against Christians, suggests they be marginalized and confined to their churches, and says they should be deprived of the liberty to have their voices heard in the public square. It’s ironic, isn’t it–Christians are always trying to legislate their values, says the guy who believes that his values should be reflected in legislation because he says so.

“And whenever someone calls them on what is often plain old hatred-laced bigotry,” he continues, “they smile and say, ‘No, no, you don’t understand. It’s a matter of ‘faith.’”

No. We don’t say that, although it’s a convenient straw man for Neil to be thrashing around with so as to avoid actually making an argument. When we make the case that late-term abortion is barbaric, we’re making a case that every other Western nation has already heeded and legislated. And when Macdonald says that we do things “inexplicably,” he doesn’t mean that we don’t have articulated reasons for our beliefs. He means he hasn’t read them, or doesn’t understand them, and very probably both.

While feigning humility, progressives like Macdonald don’t realize the astronomical arrogance of their core assertion: That those who disagree with them should be silenced and the debate swept away because they cannot fathom the possibility that perhaps they might be wrong. Macdonald’s column did not contain a single argument, only the assumption that he and his intellectual cohort are our enlightened superiors, content to let us air out our crazy as long as we are confined to places where no one can hear us. His opinion, of course, was funded by us—the maligned taxpayers.

This airtight worldview is precisely the reason that the arrogance of the elites has left them so unprepared for what is happening across the Western world. When you silence your opponents with condescension and name-calling, you ensure that the only response can be political. And perhaps one day, Macdonald will be plucked from the government teat and forced to find a job where he isn’t paid with funds extracted from those he enjoys belittling.

________________________________________

For anyone interested, my book on The Culture War, which analyzes the journey our culture has taken from the way it was to the way it is and examines the Sexual Revolution, hook-up culture, the rise of the porn plague, abortion, commodity culture, euthanasia, and the gay rights movement, is available for sale here.

FacebooktwitterFacebooktwitter

22 thoughts on “The CBC’s Neil Macdonald is an ignorant bigot

  1. brad brown says:

    He states that transgender people are the most vulnerable in our society, yet the are for the most part grown adults or teens. I my opinion I have to believe an unborn child is the most vulnerable in our society especially when others get to decide if they live or die.

    • Sandy Plante says:

      Well said, sir. I had the same thoughts when reading the opinion columns.
      “How and why are trains people the most vulnerable?!?!?”

    • Terrence McCubbin says:

      Good article. It is galling that this viciously ignorant man has his CBC consecrated hand in our wallets.
      Ad hominem and straw man are Macdonald’s bywords.
      Time to flush our “national broadcaster” as the anti – Canadian cesspool it has become.

  2. Vanessa says:

    Thank you for this. I couldn’t even get through the article, it was so offensive. You nailed everything in this rebuttal.

  3. Deb says:

    Thank you Jonathon for your rebuttal. I was spitting nails as I read Macdonald’s article this morning and you articulated what I wasn’t able to.

  4. Sharon Deboer says:

    You said all the things I wanted to express after reading his vitriol, except with so much more eloquence than I could ever hope to muster 🙂 Thank you so much for this; I hope it reaches the right eyes.

  5. Sandy Plante says:

    Thank you, Jonathan! Neil’s opinion should be kept where they belong. “Behind closed doors.”
    You know what they say about opinions and a-holes.
    Everyone has one and they should not share them with everyone.

  6. Ivan says:

    Good job, exposing this fraud. I read MacDonand’s article and thought, what a fool this man is. He writes of that which he has not the slightest idea. And he is a coward. I say this because of what he leaves out in this line of his: “Religion most often involves a deep commitment to telling other people how to live their lives. In the U.S. — and to a lesser extent Canada — evangelical conservatives, both Roman Catholic and Protestant, are often a relentless and formidable political force.” What he leaves out of his list is “Islam.” Why did he not include that religion along with the Roman Catholics and Protestants? Everyone knows that Islam, more than any other religions tells its people how to live their lives. And as we’ve seen over the years and over the last few weeks with Motion 103, it is a formidable and relentless force in Canadian politics. So why leave out Islam? Because he is a coward and so only picks on the faith he knows will not fight back – at least not with physical violence.

  7. Luanne says:

    You’ve succinctly pointed out the reasons why I, for one, deeply # resent having to fund #CBCsalaries. Editors need to do better work.

  8. John Manutes says:

    More than that, Tradtional Christianity under attack by other Christians. Many so called Christians are themselves buying into this perverse thinking. We now have homosexual clergy and bishops. Marriage has been redefined and is now performed within the “church”. The attack comes from within as well as from without.

    • Rebecca Hogeterp says:

      Seriously John? You are the one that is perverse for wanted people to be denied their basic human rights. Shame on you

  9. jim says:

    “Macdonald is unaware of the intellectual traditions of Christianity—traditions, I might point out, that actually created the scientific method he worships and pioneered most of the scientific fields a man as well-read as he presumably grazes in”

    I can’t see how Christianity invented the “scientific method?” There is at least 10 000 years of scientific development before Christ was born. Science grew out of pagan traditions, beginning in pre-historic times, such as with the domestication of crops and the rise of agriculture, and continued to be present in every early civilisation.

  10. Mario Vallieres says:

    Thank you so much Jon,I was cringing when I tried to find out how to reply to this typical illogical liberal reporter, but your article made me realize that he would not have read my first sentence,but by you putting out to the public,to have any and all logical,sane,reasonable person to judge themselves what this moron is spewing has done so,so much more than I could ever have hoped for! Thank you again.

  11. Chris says:

    The left is looking more and more like the natzi party of days gone by. The liberals clearly see themselves as the elite and the rest of should just be marched off to interment camps for disposal. Your article is good, clear and to the point, although facts and good science baffle liberals, I find it intriguing and enlightening so please carry on and thanks again.

    • Sam says:

      Oh, come now.

      First, Nazi’s are far right and communists are far left, so it makes no sense to say that the left is so far left that it is far right.

      Second, controversially wishing that public discourse was based on fact not faith is a very far cry from internment camps and incinerators.

      The danger with this rhetoric is that if something approximating the Nazis ever comes around again, we will be immune to the label as we have seen it applied to everything from expressed opinions to expropriated land.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *