More "gay" attacks on freedom of speech.
Readers will be aware that Catholic Insight has paid a great deal of attention to the increasing number of attacks on freedom of speech and religion in Canada. Articles such as the "Marc Hall" case (July/August 2002); "Courts threaten civic freedom" and "Gay priests and 'gay' 'marriage" (September 2002); "Homosexuality, marriage and truth" and "The loss of freedom in Canada" (November 2002); and "Halpern & Canada" (December 2002), indicate what the current propaganda for the sodomite lifestyle is doing to our society. New pressures appear almost weekly.
Langley, B.C.--Writing on behalf of the Citizen's Research Institute (CRI) of Langley, B.C., Kari Simpson addressed a long letter to Geoff Plant, Attorney-General of British Columbia, on October 18, 2002, concerning Svend Robinson's motion to include "sexual orientation" as a ground for prosecution under the Criminal Code. Simpson was maliciously prosecuted by the B.C. Human Rights Tribunal for purportedly promoting hate.
CRI, she said, has the distinction of being the only Canadian victor in a Human Rights Tribunal against the tyranny of homosexual political activists. One of these, James Chamberlain, declared that he was a "gay" man and that CRI was promoting hatred against him. After four days of cross-examination, Chamberlain had provided his opposition with information so harmful to the cause of the homosexuals that they withdrew from the proceedings. (Kari appended a list of examples of his use of manipulative language, and his inability to support assertions with facts). The case against CRI, she said, was a political show trial, designed to ignite fear and silence, opposition, and to create political compliance.
Questions for the attorney general
Simpson pointed out that a document produced by the B.C. Human Rights Commission entitled A Call to Action, and a round-table discussion on hate and bias by the federal government, contain attacks on free speech and democratic principles. The round-table report acknowledges that there are "scarce" data concerning the extent of hate crimes in Canada, yet it recommends that we educate judges in recognizing such crimes. The conference also acknowledged that there is no standard definition of "hate."
Kari had a list of pertinent questions for the Attorney-General. Here are some of them:
1. Is Robinson promoting hatred by suggesting that a number of religions are promoting hatred by publicly expressing their religious beliefs?
2. What religious beliefs would be considered "hate propaganda"?
3. What protection would there be for citizens to publish or express their objections to homosexuality based strictly on medical costs and health-related problems?
4. There is a growing number of agencies assisting individuals in reclaiming their emotional health by leaving the homosexual lifestyle. Would such therapy be considered a form of hatred?
5. Would "sexual orientation" include heterosexual, homosexual, bisexual, bestiality, pedophilia, incest, man-boy relationships?
6. Could a criminal charge be brought against a homosexual for promoting hatred of someone with a homosexual orientation?
Why Bill C-250 should be rejected
Kari Simpson concludes with a list of reasons for rejecting Robinson's bill. Some of them are:
* To protect the rights of Canadians to freely participate in our democracy.
* To protect the rights of Canadians to form and express opinions without fear of prosecution or harassment.
* To preserve our law from incorporating Alice-in-Wonderland terms of "sexual orientation" vaguely interpreted to identify sexual behaviour that is changeable.
* To prohibit the non-defined term "sexual orientation" from giving a legal status to pedophiles who claim protection on this ground.
* To protect the right of Canadians who hold religious beliefs and moral standards to participate freely in Canadian democracy.
* To protect the rights of Canadians to tell Robinson that his attempt to undermine Canadian values will not be tolerated.
More freedom restrictions
More parts seem to be falling into place in a pattern harassment of Canadians over the "gay rights" issue. In a country whose charter proclaims freedom of speech and religious belief, the following have been reported--and this even before Svend Robinson's egregious Bill C-250 passes into law!
* The local school board of Grey Bruce County in Ontario is proposing to ban "heterosexism," the belief that normal male/female relations are superior to homosexuality. Perhaps parent councils will have the courage to toss the proposal out before spring.
* The Canadian Broadcast Standards Council (CBSC) is surfacing again, this time to slam Toronto's Vision TV, which tries to be all things to all people religion-wise. U.S. Evangelist R.W. Schambach somehow got through to talk about delivering people from the "demon of homosexuality." Despite a Vision official's contention that the Reverend's words "did not suggest any harm be done to gay or lesbian people," the network was summarily subjected to a CBSC knuckle-rap (LifeSite News, Nov. 19/02).
* Camp Arnes on Lake Winnipeg, run by the Mennonite Brethren Church of Manitoba, is facing a charge under that province's Human Rights Act. The camp's crime: refusing access to the Winnipeg gay and lesbian choir who wished to hire the premises for a weekend retreat. Manitoba MP Vic Toews has urged the provincial government to "clarify the law" insofar as it interferes with freedom of religion and expression. The camp refuses to rent space to organizations that promote homosexuality (Globe, 11/22/02; Vic Toews, News release, 11/21/02).
* In Calgary, Reverend Stephen Boisson wrote a letter to the editor criticizing homosexual activism in schools. This led Darren Lund, a University of Calgary professor and a homosexual activist, to launch a complaint with the Alberta Human Rights Commission, blaming the letter to the editor for the beating of a teenager by hooligans, allegedly because he was "gay."
Pastor Boisson has operated an outreach centre caring for troubled youth for nine years. The centre has now been closed due to loss of funding in the wake of the HRC action. Boisson now has to pay for a lawyer.
* A Quesnel, B.C., teacher, Chris Kempling, waits on tenterhooks for January when he will find out if the B.C. College of Teachers will suspend his licence (for three months). Why? Because he has been condemned, not for any professional misdemeanour, but for writing letters to his local paper objecting to homosexual propaganda in the schools. (For details, see Note at conclusion of "Marc Hall case," July/August 2002, p. 16).
* The Council of the Ontario College of Teachers approved a Professional Advisory for sexual abuse and misconduct on September 27, 2002. Aside from sexual abuse of a student, the terms for "misconduct" are sweeping and include "conduct that would amount to sexual discrimination under the Ontario Human Rights Code. These need not be overtly sexual but may nonetheless demean or cause personal embarrassment to a student based upon a student's gender, race, or sexual orientation."
* An Ontario Human Rights Commission investigation has found the provincial government's 1998 de-listing of sex-changes from the Ontario Health Insurance Program coverage "discriminatory" against transsexuals. The average cost of such an operation is $120,000 per case. The case will appear before a tribunal in 2003 to settle the nature of the discrimination. Transsexuals now go to Thailand where the operation is done for $6,000. (Star, Dec. 7/02).
* In Montreal the "gay" couple, Roger Thibault and Theo Wouters, who were the first to enter the Quebec government's new "civil-union" arrangement, sued their neighbour for alleged criminal harassment. The testimony about the supposed "homophobia" was so contradictory that Judge Jean Falardeau threw the case out. (Trials in criminal courts require far stricter standards of evidence than those before HRC tribunals.)
* Also, in Montreal, the great champion for eliminating Canadians' freedom of speech and expression through his Bill C-250, Mr. Svend Robinson, complained bitterly about the lack of freedom of speech when Concordia University's temporary ban on Middle Eastern speeches prevented him from holding forth there in November.
A note from Great Britain: according to The Telegraph, Britain's Crown Prosecution Service (CPS), has suddenly decided that it, too, must regard "homophobic and transphobic crimes "as particularly serious." Transphobic refers to "transsexuals, transgender, and transvestite people." What constitutes "homophobic" is left to the "victim" to decide, or to "any other person." +
|Printer friendly Cite/link Email Feedback|
|Title Annotation:||freedom of religion versus freedom of speech|
|Date:||Jan 1, 2003|
|Previous Article:||Canadian catholic radio. (News in Brief: Canada).|
|Next Article:||When sects put us to shame: the enfeeblement of the Church.|