Title: Maxim - (Where's The) Evidence? Credit: Craig Young Comment Sunday 26th December 2004 - 12:00pm1104015600 Article: 550 Rights
I spotted the latest issue of Evidence, the Maxim Institute's policy journal, and noticed that they've shifted focus to opposing the Relationships (Statutory Relationships) Bill, now that they've been defeated over the Civil Union Act. An unnamed Maxim author complains that the Relationship (Statutory References) Bill is an omnibus bill. He or she doesn't make any reference to the fact that Canada and British Columbia went through the same process when they amended spousal entitlement and responsibilities legislation to include same-sex couples. Amusingly, the Institute is still trying to pretend that its highly selective analysis of hospital visitation and next of kin policies is an effective substitute for the lack of comparative legislative scrutiny in their submission against the Civil Union Bill. This means that they missed out on the case for omnibus legislation that can be made - it is based on Canadian findings that incremental changes disadvantage certain sets of spousal relationships, which means that a holistic perspective warrants comprehensive relationship recognition measures and statutory amendments across the board. Why should we oppose the Relationships (Statutory References) Bill and liberal social reforms in general? Because these reforms are not 'traditional.' In the Maxim Institute's alternate universe, Christianity was never implicated in the establishment of anti-Semitic discriminatory civil and religious policies that culminated in the Nazi Holocaust. It didn't sanction slavery until the nineteenth century. Catholic institutional structures didn't ignore widespread clerical child sexual abuse during the mid-twentieth century. The Reformed Churches never provided support for South African apartheid for half a century. John McNeil attacks hate speech bans. I'm unsure about them too, but why is censorship suddenly okay when the Society for Promotion of Community Standards tries to prevent responsible adults from watching adult fare at Wellington film festivals? And why is it suddenly okay when their Compass guest Greg Koukl advocates censorship of gay-affirmative content within public libraries? I'd be far more impressed with the Maxim Institute's laboured attempts at intellectual discussion and political analysis if it wasn't so ideologically purist. What about acknowledging that Christianity led to atrocities, genocide and social disruption in the past and does so in the present, as can be noted in Bosnia, Kosovo and the collaboration of Serbian Orthodox hierarchy in religious persecution and ethnic cleansing during the nineties? Or will they keep looking at the world through cyan-coloured glasses for as long as their Derek Corporation backers pass the bucks to them? Recommended Reading: Stand to Reason (Greg Koukl's website) Maxim Institute Compass Seminar (January 2005: Lifeway Academy, Snells Beach, Auckland) "The Relationships (Statutory References) Bill: Evidence 12 (Summer 2004): 9-11. Craig Young - 26th December 2004    
This page displays a version of the article with all formatting and images removed. It was harvested automatically and some text content may not have been fully captured correctly. A copy of the full article is available (off-line) at the Lesbian and Gay Archives of New Zealand. This online version is provided for personal research and review and does not necessarily reflect the views or opinions of If you have queries or concerns about this article please email us